It's Just a Girl Responding to a Past President Punk Thing

Dear America,

thank you, Daily Mail:

'So much of what is trotted out as leadership 

is old-style beating your chest, 

being louder, being noisier, 

being more self-centered, 

being greedier and being more aggressive,' 

he said. 

'That can work for a short period of time, 

but it tends not to get the job done – 

not the complex modern society problems seen today.

'John McCain's decision 

to nominate Sarah Palin as his running mate 

will be seen as an important point 

in American politics,' 

he said.

That, he said, was the moment 

'mainstream Republicans lost control 

of their party... Sarah Palin's 

nomination suddenly brought

 that populist energy to the fore 

in the Republican Party

 and helped pave the way 

for President Trump's presidency.'

obama also said something like, he was proud he left office without a scandal.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

that is the funniest thing I have heard all day, and the day is just getting started.  yay me.

The only reason Obama escaped his eight years, apparently, according to his own great mind, without a trace of scandal was because the media protected him; acting more like Obama's drooling media entourage, the left-leaning, kool-aid sippin', partisan hacks, ignored the scandals! 

My gosh, he must have a huge pair. 

I mean, like, where do we begin? 

Moving On dot Org, just know that these are neither in chronological order, or in order of importance...it's just my own beautiful mind trippin' down memory lane:

1.  Fast and Furious gun running across southern border...thank you Eric Holder
2.  IRS discrimination against conservative groups....Lois Lerner et al
3.  BENGHAZI....right, like it was because of a video.  OH okay.   And what were you doing the night of the attack?  um, let me remind you...you were sleeping...getting your beauty rest before a big campaign stump in LA the next day.
4.  the passing of OBAMACARE -- a mandate, a tax, upending one-sixth of our economy and destroying the health care industry as we know it (used to know it) under the cover of darkness, without a single republican vote...."if you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. period" 
5.  HILLARY's  illegal server ...and the transference of confidential information via email...
6.  Shovel ready jobs.........not, you just paid off your liberal friends/associates
7.  DOJ Spying on journalists...can you say James Rosen?
8. Solyndra
9. PRISM.   And NSA surveillance programs
10. The treasonous nuclear deal made with IRAN; Iran cash payments and the well timed release of political prisoners...
11.  VA Hospital Administration, long list of crimes and misdemeanors and veterans dying.
12.  Clinton Foundation, not to mention the Clinton connection with Uranium sales, Russian collusion, dossiers, etc.
13.  Voter intimidation by New Black Panther Party
14.  General Services Administration fraud.... going to Vegas, baby
15.  Pontificating about how UNPATRIOTIC it is to run a deficit, and be in debt to the tune of trillions, while campaigning circa 2008 -- and then, get in office, and double our national debt over eight years!  DOUBLED it!  It was nearly at ten trillion when you took over, and nearly at twenty when you finally left. HOW UNPATRIOTIC, you arrogant son of a bullshitter.

oh my, I gotta stop.   my heart is starting to race a wee bit.

and can you believe this --  the Daily Mail post also noted, "in contrast to showboating and hostility, Obama said listening to the advice of others and surrounding himself with people of integrity were the foundation of his leadership style." 

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

a little throw up in the mouth here is totally acceptable, and understandable, having witnessed the eight years of "I, I, I, I, and me, and my, and I, I, I, I".  What a punk he is.  I just wanna slap him and wake him up to the whole world, not just the one he finds himself center of the entire universe.

And if bringing up hostility, Barack, can we have an honest conversation of your hostility towards America, in general, and start with the great apology tour in the Middle East during the first year of office?  And from there, maybe, go to the return of the Winston Churchill bust?   And from there, discuss  your leadership style by way of divide and conquer --  creating cultural factions, manufacturing identity politics, and forming political alliances that undermine America's foundation and overall unity?

gosh I have missed talking about the things you say.

Guess what, Barack -- your pompous post-president ass was also created by way of John McCain nominating the honorable Sarah Palin as Vice President on the republican ticket, the one that would also set the stage for  new leadership under President Trump, enter stage right.

Wait.
Wait a minute.
Like what happened between Palin and during the eight years before Trump? 
hmmmmm, what was it?

Oh right, It was YOU! 
You happened! 

And you expect us to accept your latest hypothesis that Sarah did this, and that you had nothing to do with it?   Are you for real? 

America suffered through EIGHT years under your leadership; everything got worse....unemployment, people on food stamps, race relations, military preparedness, cost of living, loss of wages, cost of college, national debt, budget deficits, growth of bureaucracy and regulations....I mean, we the people got pretty depressed, like, we were in a recession.  A big one.  A vewy vewy big one.  You know what I mean?

But who knew; with the way you're carrying on, Barack   -- might I be so bold to point out that perhaps Palin deserves to be QUEEN for the day, given it's International Women's Day, and all!  I mean, c'mon, it's mind boggling, this power to effect change, such as she has....I mean, if it weren't for Sarah Palin...yeah, yeah.   She opened the door for this rash and raw run of populism, making way for this president. 

Are you serious?  Pick a side.

Forgive me, but this notion of Palin's so-called proprietary privilege of origin of this populist rise doesn't even make any sense --  you know, given how you, and every other leftists, along with the left-leaning media, incessantly poked fun at her.  How in the world could she be so influential, and pull off something so earth shattering as changing the course of politics in America, of all things, especially considering she is so intellectually lacking, uneducated, all talkin' in that certain way, doncha know?  If you recall, she didn't even read, like anything,  according to the press way back when.

Oh this is rich, this Barack commentary.

Now HE is still so relevant, isn't he?  Sitting there so smug.

He knows so much; he's so smart; he's so articulate, and bright, and nice looking  -- and clean, right Joe?

gosh it must be good to be Barack.  Oh, and dare I also observe that somebody -- somebody with the initials BHO -- continues to beat his own chest, right on cue; he just does it like the smarmy, intellectual, global -elitist that he is, that's all.  And he gets away with it, because he is just so loved by all the world, especially that press of ours.    Nothing's changed -- everyone just sits back and fawns. 

[yawn]

well, not exactly everyone....what ever.

It's crazy really; even after all the scandals nobody in the media seemed to care about....

Earth to Barack -- you may be under the influence of your own greatness and majesty, leaving the office of the president without so much as a trace of scandal, but that would also make you wholly delusional (which just so happens to be an attribute fully supported by the sycophants who adore you in every way).  Sorry to break it to you, Barack, but just being ignorant to the facts doesn't make them any less true, k?  Are we clear? are we clear?  But just to be clear -- one of your favorite phrases -- me thinks you are not thinking clearly...suggest you get that head checked.


Making a sharp turn in my own mind, and returning to an idea for a book:  The Audacity of Dope. It is gonna be the greatest book ever.   It's about a guy, with narcissistic tendencies, raised by a sea of Marxist mentors, family, confidantes, and community activists.... being representative of a life ripe with contradictions and fluctuating realities, depending upon the audience, and surely justifying how the end justifies the means, yadi yadi yada.  The guy somehow or other makes it to the highest office in all the land and just when we think he has gone away --  golfing and body surfing in Hawaii for the rest of his life -- he comes back.  Like a bad dream.  It's gonna be a page turner, mark my highfalutin' words as I beat my chest. teehee... I am woman, hear me roar....

yup on this International Women's Day, I revel in me! G!  just a girl and this blog....#986...and Barack; it's just like the olden days.

and here's to hope... and more change...for ALL women, by the way...not just the ones who gravitate to the left.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's a Culture at War with Itself Thing

Dear America,

old t-shirt proverb says: 

 BE CAREFUL 

WHEN YOU BLINDLY

FOLLOW THE MASSES

SOMETIMES THE M IS SILENT

and we're back to... wrong is wrong, even when it would seem everybody is doing it...

as another one falls to sexual misconduct allegation(s), America is a walking, talking, gawking, mocking -- socking of the solar plexus' times 300  million souls --  social experiment gone totally awry, wrong,  all wrong, gone terribly terribly wrong,  just to put it mildly. 

Just breathe, G...

Just breathe.

This morning, as I opened one of my favorite little red books, A Guide for the Advanced Soul by Susan Hayward, a page quoting J.Allen Boone reads --  "We are members of a vast cosmic orchestra. in which each living instrument is essential to the complementary and harmonious playing of the whole." 

Naturally, having this magnificent metaphysical observation come in the wake of the breaking news on Matt Lauer, my first inclination was to barf.  (And my sincere apologies for being so crude....really.)

What in Sam Hill is going on?  (wait, perhaps I should check the history books, maybe Mr. Hill is guilty of sexual harassment, too...and how inappropriate would that be, right...)

Is all this really about one vast conspiracy masterminding the taking of Trump out?

Are they all in on it -- from Weinstein to Lauer, from Conyers to Spacey, from Halperin to Thrush, and lest we forget Charlie Rose?   And my apologies, again, if you are one of the ones left unnamed; this post has only so much room, you know.

Are they all willing to let the leaks fall where they may just to get to Trump.... eventually....no matter how long it takes or how many have to go down in the process?

OR

Is this just who we are?  

And mind you, this question specifically goes out to Barack Obama to answer.  

I want Barack Obama to explain this, if only to have the opportunity to poke a little fun at him, given how many times the man opined the words "that's not who we are..."  Clearly, he must know who we are, right; he claimed to know who we are and who we are not with a certain flair rather often.

On second thought, never mind. 

Indeed, I mock myself.

President Obama is a man of constant contradictions -- in speeches to the whole, he would aim to go broad and deep and long and wide while making grand overtures to American ideals and principles; however, in action, in policy, he turned on these very ideals and principles with glee.  The true character and trajectory of his presidency was more aligned with the radical, the progressive, the community organizer deep inside his soul, hellbent to transform America and usurp the very ideals laying the foundation of America since our birth.

Although America is not perfect ---

Foundations matter.

Ideals matter.

Principles matter.

Values matter.

The problem America has right now, is that the integrity of the whole is at risk.

And we must have the courage to ask why,while being receptive to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth -- as the answer is far more complicated, Megyn Kelly, than a "sea change" of the masculine and feminine forces.

I , for one, do not applaud or glorify the women staying silent until now. That isn't a display of courage; that is putting up with the injustice, the nonsense, while playing along with it, while doing the whole a total disservice.  To be afraid to go to the geek in Human Resources?  Really?

An easy answer may just be, that maybe we all need to go back to the olden days, when the boys were guided to grow up to be big, strong men -- real men --  the kind that live to honor women, open the door for them, and in no uncertain terms, treat women with respect; while the girls were taught to be ladies...strong, educated, inspired to be anything we wanted to be, all the while aligned with certain and definite standards that actually commanded respect ...anyone?  Oh, yes, I guess some might say that is so Victorian....to which I say, whatever, with attitude.  

A simple observation should reveal to all of us by now ----- America has a problem; we have a definite problem with the simple things... all things associated with the embodiment of good character, keeping the integrity of the whole, alongside the individual, downright duty, to assimilate with the founding principles and values as we go about our day.

ALL OF THIS MUST BE TAUGHT!

America needs to emphasize the good -- through role models and teachers and preachers and leaders -- and double down on the the individual mandate and duty to uphold these things, leaving no boy or girl left behind.

This is a cultural war; and the war on women has got nothing on this -- for that narrative war is derived purely through the media, the same media which is bias-ly and un-piously in bed with the leftist agenda; the end game, the Left controlling the masses, like asses, and destroying all opposition.

And only you and I and the generation of the little ones before us (who are presently observing every step we take) can make this level of sea change, in order to see the change.

This is a day of reckoning.  

The day has arrived for the American culture to take a stand, because THIS IS about who we are; and you're right, Megyn Kelly, it will not be easy.  

But make no mistake; this isn't a man problem.  [As there are many, many good men around America...with a nod to my papa... and to Mike Pence --- just an example of a boy who won't even have dinner, alone, with a woman who is not his wife. yay you.

Strangely enough, it would seem the American culture is pointedly at war with itself.

What are the chances of survival?  What will success, in the end, look like?

Continuing on a thread -- at the end of Chapter Five, Sun Tzu says:  

"23. Thus the energy developed by good fighting men [and women] is as the momentum of a round stone rolled down a mountain thousands of feet in height.  So much on the subject of energy."

 

Which, I believe, if I calculate things correctly, that would depend on the caliber of the energy itself...

This is a problem of, and about, the whole -- be it how we interact and communicate with each other; be it what or who we elevate to stardom and fame; be it how we have drifted from being a people of faith, a life "under God"; be it how we have allowed sex and sexuality become less than sacred; be it the generations of family dysfunction; be it the unconscionable loss of the sanctity of all life, beginning in the womb and ending badly in the inner cities of nearly every metropolitan area from sea to shining sea.

R E S P E C T 

...It's really what we all need a little more of... besides love sweet love.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's Just Where is the Awe in Good Law Thing

Dear America,

"We cannot fight the Universe.  It refuses to be budged from Its course.  We can only go with It...Let us restate our Principle.  We are surrounded by an Infinite Possibility.  It is Goodness, Life, Law and Reason.  In expressing Itself through us, It becomes more fully conscious of Its own being.  Therefore, It wishes to express through us.  As It passes into our being, It automatically becomes the law of our lives."  Science of Mind, pg. 46

and thus what we think about, expands.

It not only expands, it is highly contagious; it is subject to group think; and is perilously wrought with human error, miscommunication, and even blatant fraud.  

And good, bad or indifferent, It acts, responds and lives in and around each and every one of us every single day.

so DACA....to the Dreamers who came across our borders, often times unbeknownst to them, illegally -- coming to America with parents seeking a new life, refuge, the American dream....enough.  

If you are of the law-abiding, one love, united we stand/separated we fall, mindset -- as in wanting the best for your adopted country -- then have enough respect for the rule of law in America to secure our border in care of our sovereignty,  and in turn, immediately remedy the absence of following any rule of law when it comes to immigration.  At this point, it is a Constitutional imperative to do so, or welcome the consequences.

Let law be the law.  Otherwise, we have no law, we have no borders, we have no sovereignty, whatsoever.  And then, all we have is chaos, anarchy -- and characteristically looking a lot like the actions of antifa, right about now, if anyone needs an example.

With all due respect, Mr. Past President Barack Obama -- you can't abide by the rule of law and break the rule of law at the same time.  there is no intersection; there is no common law; there is no meeting of even half the minds.   (Of course, this girl ain't telling you something you didn't already know, right.)

here's a good quote that takes us back to a Univision Open Forum, from March 2011:

"With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that’s just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed -- and I know that everybody here at Bell is studying hard so you know that we’ve got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch’s job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws."  Obama

Signing an Executive Order to grace "Dreamers" with a free pass in not following the law, it is breaking the law, usurping the law -- circumventing immigration law and congress congruently --  in order to please your base;  now that's political!     The act of doing away with your lawlessness at the power of the pen, as the Trump Administration has just accomplished, simply corrects the record --  no matter how highfalutin and eloquent your smack down may sound, your position is on shaky ground given precedence and this nation's concrete foundation.   [If interested, take a read of the full text, here.]

[and if you haven't done so already, you must read the link "usurping the law" above; it is written by Gregg Jarrett of Fox News, 2014, and is titled, Three things that are illegal about Obama's Immigration plan.]

Jarrett points out:

"President Obama’s favorite justification for his executive action is that “Congress failed to act.” No, Mr. President, Congress did not fail to act, it chose not to act in granting amnesty.  

There is a difference. A determination not to act is, by itself, a deliberate act. This is how the framers constructed our system of government. Congress considers and debates a great many bills. Not all of them pass. This is not “failure” in the conventional sense, but decision by declination. It constitutes a prudent and calculated process."

exactly

America was designed to move slowly when it comes to both the writing of new law or the amending of old.

Not only that, let's go to Jeff Sessions:

 “We are people of compassion and we are people of law, but there is nothing compassionate about the failure to enforce immigration laws. … The compassionate thing to do is end the lawlessness, enforce our laws, and, if Congress chooses to make changes to those laws, to do so through the process set forth by our Founders, in a way that advances the interests of the American people.”

Unless you take your cue's from a leftist like Danny Zuker, producer of Modern Family (which I love, btw) ---  Ben Shapiro, The Daily Wire, captures it all right here:   'Modern Family' Producer To Christians Who Support Trump Ending DACA: 'Your Christianity Is Bulls***...F*** You'

ew that's a lot of hate, no?

Um, think it's best if we all settle a wee bit down...

Putting 'Christianity and BS and f*$% you'  all in the same thought is just wrong six ways to Sunday and back again.  [And, I will not watch Modern Family ever again.]

Why are people so threatened by following the Law, and in America's Law in particular?

If you really think about it, its acting totally counter-intuitive in being of right action, of right cause, and leading to right results of a vibrant, civil, compassionate society.

Law is not only Mind in Action, it is good, virtuous, moral, ethical, completely sound and upright, when it begins with good, virtuous, moral, ethical, completely sound and upright, thought.

If you have read all the links, and have allowed the logic to seep into every part of your being -- just who sounds more upright, Sessions or Zuker?  Obama or Trump?

Aw, it doesn't matter really; for it's a funny thing --  for according to the laws of law and how it works,  The Law knows exactly what lies ahead, indiscriminate and impersonal as It is. 

Just where is the awe in good Law?  

Without the awe, we will fall.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's a Deflated Thing

Dear America,

BLESSED ARE THE MEEK

Trust in God and have faith. If you know you have been rebellious, ask humbly for forgiveness, and then be kind and loving.  Remember that this is man's only freewill choice --  not whether he shall go this way or that way, but whether he shall on the one hand accept his experiences with true love and humility, or whether he will be rebellious and angry, and full of torturous emotion.  Seek to grow to Christ-manhood.

The Quiet Mind, the sayings of  White Eagle

good day and happy Thursday.

it's a day knee-deep in being unsure of which way to go...

considering I have been MIA since the end of October,
um, me thinks little old gthang has either much to say or nothing.

... from Ferguson to the Mid-term Elections, from ISIL's grip upon the world to Charlie Hebdo...while just this week, we had to endure another State of the Union [6.0]...ugh.

But for levity, if nothing else -- Deflate Gate continues to capture our attention as if nothing else going on around us is amiss.  typical, right?

But seriously.
C'mon, Bill, really?
You are really going with the Barack Obama method of sketchy responses --

 'uh, duh, I didn't know...I'm shocked!..I found out at the same time you all found out... in all my forty years of football... well, I''ll be...I had no knowledge... I had no idea about any of this...' ?????  

Yes, paraphrased and possibly insinuating a daffy Belichick unfairly.

But where, oh where, is somebody shouting out from the chamber,  "LIAR!"  ?

How absurd.

It's almost as good -- and absurd -- as Josh Earnest's response to Mara Liasson during a recent press pool free-for-all.  Just go to Townhall's Conn Carroll, here., for more on that. Or, allow me to save you some time ---

And I guess I am doing my best to try to explain to you what that is," Earnest responded. "The first is, accuracy. We want to describe exactly what happened. These are individuals who carried out an act of terrorism. And they later tried to justify that act terrorism by invoking the religion of Islam and their own deviant view of it."

but wait -- there's more!

The second," Earnest continued, "is this is an act that was roundly condemned by muslim leaders. I'm describing to you the reasons why we have not chosen to use that label because it doesn't seem to accurately describe what had happened. We also don't want to be in a situation where we are legitimizing what we consider to be a completely illegitimate justification for this violence. I am not going to criticize anybody who chooses to use that label. I'm talking about the way we are trying to talk about this and we are trying to be as specific and accurate as possible in describing what exactly occurred."

oh the games people play.
oh my, oh my, oh my.

But let's not dwell, shall we?

Speaking of titillating responses ----- I found a great piece to read by Josh Rogin, of Bloomberg View, titled, Obama's State of the World, Translated.  It is really well done and I think you will enjoy it...so I'm not even going to give you a teaser quote.  Just click it and dig it; you can be assured of getting in a few laughs to counter attack the ocean of tears for fears we gained from listening to our Commander-In-Chief's Mission-Accomplished-On-Every-Thang-Take-That-Jack  moment.

Clearly, he is living in another America -- perhaps one on another plane --  somewhere between the purple haze mountain majesty and the white hot fury I'll be your pusher-man plains.

Needless to say, the president's radical rebel within has decided to go all in and come out to play. Right on cue.

Yay.

It just makes all the more to say ....um, uh, more enjoyable???
yeah, yeah, that's the ticket to the daily drills we dabble.    let's run with that.

But as far as this day is concerned,  I believe I have given you plenty to peruse;  think of this as just my pinkie toe tapping the well-spring.  nothing more, nothing less. who really knows...

For the truth is, I simply feel deflated in every way.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's a Day to Fear Not the Result Thing

Dear America,

"ambassadors of providence, 

sent to reveal to us our unknown selves"

Calvin Coolidge, 

describing great statesmen...

one day in the life

of America

so let me get this straight...America is resting it's economic future (among other things) upon two people?  John Boehner and President Obama have been carved out of the whole to decide our fate?  Two guys?   Is that like some kind of twisted perversion of two men will move you?   Welcome to fundamental transformation, the movers and shakers of the twenty-first century; we can take you anywhere you wanna go from coast to coast, from sea to shining sea [and FDIC insured, to boot].

Little old G Thing has been wanting to get to this thought for days, possibly weeks now; needless to say, we've had a few and far more important contemplations to cover.

But just two guys?  Come on...you guys can't be serious?

Here's another two guys for you:

Hugh Hewitt interviewing the president of Hillsdale College, Larry P. Arnn, the day after the re-election of  Barack Hussein Obama --  same as, Barry Soetoro, by the way  [When we put it like that, it sort of shifts one's entire image of the guy, no?].   The interview, "Time to Give Up or Time to Fight On?" is highlighted in the latest issue of Imprimis, here.

That quote of Coolidge, above, was plucked out of something Larry Arnn said.  He was making the point that our "conservative statesmen" must articulate conservative ideas -- the positions and ambitions -- better; and to that end, stop trying to go about solving our problems, and speaking of our problems, from the mindset of a bureaucrat (like the Left), but rather from a Constitutional government, operating from the law.

But just before these two guys got into this -- Larry explained something worthy of repeating word for word:

"The experts who run the modern bureaucratic state think they are architects of a perfectly rational society. They think of themselves as scientists, and of the running of government as something more like science—the science of administration—than politics. They think they can coordinate society comprehensively so that no one is left out. That’s why they think of their work as something good and as something high. The problem is that what they are trying to do defies human nature—the human nature that led James Madison to write famously that men are not angels, and that led the Framers of the Constitution to divide government in order to limit government—and so what these experts are doing will ultimately lead to despotism.

But to speak directly to your question, Hugh, there are many indications that there’s a deep and even intensifying opposition to bureaucratic government today. People don’t like it, and they don’t trust it. They want less of it. And I don’t believe that yesterday’s election signified any change in that. Now, how to harness that opinion politically is the challenge. No one yet has been able to capitalize upon it."

Now let's take a moment to see how the bureaucrats -- and not the Law -- have changed things since November 7th.

Oh     my       goodness.  

Oh     my       goodness.

Aw no   he   di  nint... 

That probably wasn't enough time.

Just breathe, people.  

C'mon now, stay with me.

Before we all pass out, here's the entire paragraph surrounding the idea, 'men are not angels'....

"But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The provision for defense must in this, as in all other cases, be made commensurate to the danger of attack. Ambition must be made to counteract ambition. The interest of the man must be connected with the constitutional rights of the place. It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions."

The Federalist No. 51

"But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature?"

Whether we like it or not, whether we agree with it or not, this government is a reflection of us, in all of our glory or not.

And right now, with regards to this government -- 

"They think they can coordinate society comprehensively so that no one is left out. That’s why they think of their work as something good and as something high."

And surprise! it comes down to this -- just two guys will move you, too.

Let's go back to a little something Madison said:

"In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself."

Boehner is a pretender.

Obama is not only a pretender, he's an outsider.

Say what, G?  where's that coming from?

And you will simply have to go back up and read the full interview from Imprimis to pick up what this girl just laid down.

sure, it requires a little work on your part -- but get used to it people.  we have to re-load the entire household....beginning with re-wrapping every facet, dimension, ideal presented to us by our dear wonder boys of days of yore.   The House -- oh it's divided; in more ways than one.

But before we sign off this bill of lading for one more day, let me recycle another thought passed on to us like a priceless heirloom.  Larry Arnn closes with a story from another era, a time of Winston Churchill, saying:

"That same year, Churchill asked one of his assistants, John Colville, to find him the precise text of a prayer he remembered from the siege of Gibraltar. It reads:

'Fear not the result, for either thy end shall be an enviable and a majestic one, or God will preserve our reign upon the waters.'

We might follow Churchill in saying that prayer in hard times. We might cultivate the strength that it can give. 

While venturing out to find some back up of this moment in time, what do you know, I stumbled upon this:

"Prayers Before Battle:The Spiritual Utterances of Three Great Commanders"

Which is funny; this isn't at all how I pictured my day to end.  [Check this guy out...really good stuff.]

But it all fits now, doesn't it.   We started out with just two guys making a mockery of our rule of law, battling it out both behind closed doors and in front of the cameras...then we added an element of what is a conservative statesman anyway...and threw in a reflection of angels to men, just intention no. 51 in a series of  one through eight-five...and settled in upon a house divided, only leaving room for a prayer.

And after all that's been said and done today, all I really know is this -- I need to do better job at understanding my own government and my responsibility to it and pray one simple prayer:  "fear not the result, for either thy end shall be an enviable and a majestic one, or God will preserve our reign upon the waters."   

it's hard to believe the people's power has been usurped by a couple of blow-ks to decide our fate [say that with a limey accent, will ya].

thankfully, there are only two ways for this to go.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's from Belly Laughs to a NewsBusters Thing

Dear America,

"oh and by the way, 

in the spirit of tonight 

we are brought to you by 

the letter O and the number 16 Trillion"

Romney

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."

what?

"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."

Seriously?

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."

Continue Reading

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.

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

It's A Falling Camel Attracts Many Knives Thing

Dear America,

so, are we clear with THE FACT that Obama chose Biden for the vice president's job because BIDEN came with foreign policy credentials?

think back now...

Obama came with literally no foreign policy experience.  None. Zilch.  NaDa.

So now close your eyes....and picture the world today and yesterday.  Roam through the early days -- foreign policy wise -- when it was the president, right out of the box, apologizing and appeasing to the Islamic world; picture the brush up with Poland and the take away of missile defense; picture Cairo -- the "rise of democracy" beginning with peaceful protests here to a day when "history takes place;"  picture deals made with a handshake until after the election; picture deals with longtime allies brazenly broken;  picture the rushed meeting on the tarmac - only out of embarrassment - only after the world found out the president never met the guy running the war - with Gen. McCrystal (quick synopsis, here); picture Pakistan, Afghanistan, bin Laden; flash forward and picture his sophomoric speech to the United Nations, still laser-beamed focused on the video that was NOT to blame for the murder of the ambassador and three others lives...the day in the life being SEPTEMBER 25th no-less, when he says, 'There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents. There is no video that justifies an attack on an embassy..."

It has been Obama, not Biden, who has led America in its foreign policy agenda.

It has been Obama, not Biden, who called for the Osama bin Laden raid -- the death being the cornerstone of the National Democratic Convention, and just imagine it, only days before the protests in the Middle East took place;  it was Biden who said “Mr. President, my suggestion is: don’t go.”  See here for details, by Marc Thiessen.

It has been Obama, not Biden, deciding the proper response time, the desired narrative, the intended message all through the days.

Ironic, isn't it -- looking back.

Americans got bamboozled.

It was nearly a month ago, almost to the day, when Romney was blasted by the president for "shooting first, taking aim later."   All just a part of the narrative unfolding...let's deflect and cry foul.

Romney's comments were made immediately after formal remarks coming out of the administration were heard worldwide.  So let's take them in order:

The administration, by way of the State Department, by way of the Embassy in Cairo, declared this:

"The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of others."

This message came from somewhere first; you don't just send this out to the Arab world without approval.*

For back up:  Here is a link to a new hot spot I found for opinion via DiploPundit; this day, dates back to September 14th; just love how he starts out...

"Anyway here’s the thing — Foreign Service officers are really, really excellent at following the chalked lines. You don’t see a lot of rogue and old diplomats for very good reasons. And they, certainly, do not suddenly forget their clearance procedures because they were confronted with a badly made, badly written and badly acted movie clip in YouTube; much less, defy a direct order from the State Department when it comes to an official statement for public consumption. Unless, of course, the officer is looking to commit a career suicide. And I’m not convinced that is the case with man of the hour, Larry Schwartz."

Romney's immediate response to Cairo's condemnation statement, was simply this:

"I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks."

* Now remember:   the Administration chose to distance itself from the statement made in Cairo nearly at the same time!

We are also well aware, now, that the statement which came out of Cairo came before the protests as a means to avert disaster; basically, calling out to all Arabs not to shoot, begging for reason; pleading to the Egyptian public not to overreact to the video, having heard rumblings of discontent in the area.

Here is a great interactive report with a time-line to walk you through the details; and who-knew, it's even from the NY Times...

BUT HERE'S an even better time-line...from The Heritage Foundation (unfortunately, being a post from October 8th, it comes without the added incriminating details from just yesterday's congressional hearing).

WITHIN 24 HOURS: everybody who is anybody in the administration knew LIBYA was attacked by terrorists. WITHIN 24 HOURS:  the video was not only beside the point -- it was never the point in Libya.  But WITHIN 24 HOURS: the story was crafted.  Now, talk about who's shooting first and taking aim later...

Let's bring this all together now.

And let's get one thing straight:  Biden is really nowhere to be found -- whether it be foreign or domestic, really.

And about the president's biggest mistake -- being unable to tell the story better -- every thing, as it turns out,  is about the narrative; every thing is about the way it looks, how it's perceived; it's always, and only, about the story -- whether it be true or false. [Go back and read Rules for Radicals, that should be your first clue]

But in the end, what we saw happening in Libya is really called -- now looking back -- a miscalculation.

Make no mistake.  It was Obama, as president, who elected to tell a story out of Egypt and Libya -- one that would make the most sense, and one that would align with the principles and policy of this administration and not make him look bad in the process.

• It had to be something that denied any September 11th connection;
• It had to be something that brought a little daylight  between the clear and present danger of having just spiked the football, of bin Laden's death, at convention, and really driving it home; 
• It had to reinforce the false belief that Al Queda is no longer a threat, that he did it -- he killed 'it'; 
• It had to be able to fit into a re-election campaign.
• And some might even say, it had to point to an extremist being at fault -- someone like a Coptic-Christian extremist...yeah, yeah, that might be just the ticket...
• IT certainly couldn't point to a security weakness, requests for reinforcements turned down, or anything having to do with a position of a general, albeit prevalent, perception of weakness all the way around. 

Let's remember the first pictures coming out of Egypt -- posters declaring "we're all Osama's now" and the people chanting "Obama, Obama, there's a billion Osama's".  Oh yes, the rise of democracy, indeed.

But let's be clear.  Biden has been a no show throughout.

Matter of fact, the administration works awfully hard at keeping Joe nip/tucked now.

Matter of fact, all things "Joe" haven't exactly worked out -- being the lead on the President's Jobs Council, being the lead at overseeing stimulus money.... These things are not exactly real winners, now are they? And how can we forget mr. big f*&%ing mouth and this is  a "big f*&*ing deal day"?

...now that was a good day in America, am I right?  am I right?


Libya is a mess; and it isn't for anything Romney said, suggested, or did.

Libya is a mess; and it isn't for anything Biden said, suggested, or did.

Libya is a mess; but as far as the ever-changing story, masterminded out of this administration, it begins as a serious miscalculation and ends badly.  [Lying is neither a good thing or a family value]

Libya -- along with the entire Middle East -- is a hot mess for America because of many things; and just like every other administration, only one man leads the way.  That man happens to be Barack Hussein Obama.

Ancient Arab Proverb says, 

“A falling camel attracts many knives.”

...basically meaning, weakness is provocative.  GO HERE for the super good back story on that.


Once upon a time... a real leader accepts all responsibility from the get go, through thick and thin, foreign and domestic, and slays the evil dragon(s)..

Make it a Good Day, G

It's Run Big Bird Run Thing

Dear America,

"If you don't have a record to run on, 

then you paint your opponent 

as someone people should run from. 

You make a big election about small things."  

Senator Obama running for office, 2008

THIS is how the answer began:

ROMNEY:  Good. I'm glad you raised that, and it's a -- it's a critical issue. I think it's not just an economic issue, I think it's a moral issue. I think it's, frankly, not moral for my generation to keep spending massively more than we take in, knowing those burdens are going to be passed on to the next generation and they're going to be paying the interest and the principal all their lives.

And the amount of debt we're adding, at a trillion a year, is simply not moral.

STRONG OPENING, indeed, but then, this is just G interrupting what he said. Please, continue:

ROMNEY: So how do we deal with it? Well, mathematically, there are three ways that you can cut a deficit. One, of course, is to raise taxes. Number two is to cut spending. And number is to grow the economy, because if more people work in a growing economy, they're paying taxes, and you can get the job done that way.

The presidents would -- president would prefer raising taxes. I understand. The problem with raising taxes is that it slows down the rate of growth. And you could never quite get the job done. I want to lower spending and encourage economic growth at the same time.

What things would I cut from spending? Well, first of all, I will eliminate all programs by this test, if they don't pass it: Is the program so critical it's worth borrowing money from China to pay for it? And if not, I'll get rid of it. Obamacare's on my list.

I apologize, Mr. President. I use that term with all respect, by the way.

OBAMA:  I like it.

ROMNEY:  Good. OK, good. So I'll get rid of that.

I'm sorry, Jim, I'm going to stop the subsidy to PBS. I'm going to stop other things. I like PBS, I love Big Bird. Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to -- I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for. That's number one.

OH yeah...he was starting out small...so please, mr. next-president-of-the-united-states, continue:

ROMNEY:  Number two, I'll take programs that are currently good programs but I think could be run more efficiently at the state level and send them to the state.

Number three, I'll make government more efficient and to cut back the number of employees, combine some agencies and departments. My cutbacks will be done through attrition, by the way.

This is the approach we have to take to get America to a balanced budget.

The president said he'd cut the deficit in half. Unfortunately, he doubled it. Trillion-dollar deficits for the last four years. The president's put it in place as much public debt -- almost as much debt held by the public as al prior presidents combined.

All this led into a two-minute answer from the president where he totally, unmistakably, fell apart.

So without further adieu, this is what happened --

21:28:35: LEHRER: Mr. President, two minutes.

21:28:37: OBAMA: When I walked into the Oval Office, I had more than a trillion-dollar deficit greeting me. And we know where it came from: two wars that were paid for on a credit card; two tax cuts that were not paid for; and a whole bunch of programs that were not paid for; and then a massive economic crisis.

And despite that, what we've said is, yes, we had to take some initial emergency measures to make sure we didn't slip into a Great Depression, but what we've also said is, let's make sure that we are cutting out those things that are not helping us grow.

So 77 government programs, everything from aircrafts that the Air Force had ordered but weren't working very well, 18 government -- 18 government programs for education that were well-intentioned, not weren't helping kids learn, we went after medical fraud in Medicare and Medicaid very aggressively, more aggressively than ever before, and have saved tens of billions of dollars, $50 billion of waste taken out of the system.

And I worked with Democrats and Republicans to cut a trillion dollars out of our discretionary domestic budget. That's the largest cut in the discretionary domestic budget since Dwight Eisenhower.

Now, we all know that we've got to do more. And so I've put forward a specific $4 trillion deficit reduction plan. It's on a website. You can look at all the numbers, what cuts we make and what revenue we raise.

And the way we do it is $2.50 for every cut, we ask for $1 of additional revenue, paid for, as I indicated earlier, by asking those of us who have done very well in this country to contribute a little bit more to reduce the deficit. Governor Romney earlier mentioned the Bowles-Simpson commission. Well, that's how the commission -- bipartisan commission that talked about how we should move forward suggested we have to do it, in a balanced way with some revenue and some spending cuts. And this is a major difference that Governor Romney and I have.

Let -- let me just finish their point, because you're looking for contrast. You know, when Governor Romney stood on a stage with other Republican candidates for the nomination and he was asked, would you take $10 of spending cuts for just $1 of revenue? And he said no.

Now, if you take such an unbalanced approach, then that means you are going to be gutting our investments in schools and education. It means that Governor Romney...

(CROSSTALK)

21:31:15: OBAMA: ... talked about Medicaid and how we could send it back to the states, but effectively this means a 30 percent cut in the primary program we help for seniors who are in nursing homes, for kids who are with disabilities.

21:31:22: LEHRER: Mr. President, I'm sorry.

21:31:26: OBAMA: And -- and that is not a right strategy for us to move forward.

21:31:28: LEHRER: Way over the two minutes.

THE THING IS -- from this exchange, the democrats thought it be wise to run on this "attack" on Big Bird ever since.  Spending quality time during campaign speeches turning Big Bird into the poster child for a campaign gone wrong; spending millions of dollars on commercials equating Bernie Madoff to the big, yellow, lovable favorite of Sesame Street...when in fact, when placed into proper context, what were ROMNEY'S exact words?

"I LOVE BIG BIRD.  Actually like you, too. But I'm not going to -- I'm not going to keep on spending money on things to borrow money from China to pay for [it]."

Especially when those things are well supported by community, merchandising, a billion dollar broadcasting company -- and oh yeah, a $314, 000 base salary for the BIG YELLOW BIRD's creator and keeper and person under all those fine, fluffy feathers. [and read this from Mark Steyn]

[ But allow me to digress a moment:  READ the transcript on the night.  It gets even worse for the president when reading his answers.]

SO there you go -- BIG BIRD, part of the 1% -- along with a whole cast of characters large and small from PBS and NPR....

And sure, the measly stipend received by the federal government is just peanuts in the great scheme of life....

BUT THAT'S THE POINT!

It's the small stuff, added together, that contribute to the HUGE deficits.  ALL small things must go.  And like ROMNEY said, that's just the start.  Just before he said he would cut funding to PBS -- even though he also said he LOVES Big Bird in the same breath -- he mentioned Obamacare.  And what did he say?  He said he would "get rid of it."

What does the Left choose to focus on?  Big Bird.

Romney had just said he would TERMINATE, ELIMINATE, BURY Obamacare -- and they concentrate on Big Bird?  Obamacare was the president's trophy of his first term -- and they let Romney's comment slide?  They spend millions making a commercial on Big Bird?

How old are you now, Mr. President?

Moseying along now, Sesame Street is small pickings.  You're right.  But as we have just reviewed, the small stuff isn't really his point.

AND so getting around to the BIG STUFF -- Romney insists that it needs to be reformed; it needs to be repealed and/or replaced with a more efficient system, eliminating and punishing for fraud along the way, and fixed, solvently, in order to survive for future generations.

 Isn't that what we all want?

Now Charles Krauthammer didn't hold back last night when asked about this Big Bird Bruhaha.

"I hope they run it til the end of time," classic Krauthammer said.  GO here for full story.

It trivializes the office of the presidency, he said.  Indeed.

But wait, there's more:  Obama approved this message.

What else can we expect from a thin-skinned president, after making a stunning, embarrassment of himself in front of 67 million viewers last week?

Here's context for you -- Romney comes off the debate gate and goes right into making one of his finest speeches on foreign policy.  What did Obama do?  He ran messages to save Big Bird. [Libya is still on fire, Jobs report is still not swallowed, and Obamacare is still not liked...but keep talking Big Bird]

ummm which reminds me of a game... which one is not like the other?

It's called shooting yourself in your big, yellow foot.  And I'm with Krauthammer -- I hope they run with it.

Make it a Good Day, G

oh and PBS to White House -- knock it off.