It's a Stunning Turnabout Thing

Dear America,

"I think he's stunning..."

in a total turnabout, Mary Matalin makes perfectly clear of her stunning approval of The Donald  in an exclusive interview for PJMedia, @ CPAC.

I just find it amusing, at this point, it could probably be said that half the country shares in the sentiment Mary also declared, that she could "die happy now;" while the other half has completely lost its mind, ready to gouge their eyes out, like yesterday -- better still, like January 20, 2017.

Matalin, responding to her move to register Libertarian --

“'So I don't know why it made any difference to anybody, but I want to re-express to myself, to my kids and my community, to remind them of what Reagan said about the balance between liberty, that tension and that part of preserving our freedom has to do with conservative policies. I think libertarianism precedes conservatism or it's certainly iatrical to it. So I didn't think it was that big of a deal; I didn’t leave the party and I can’t leave the party because it’s Hotel California,' she added, referring to the Eagles song in which you can check out but never leave."

 [love that Eagles song]

So in full context, Matalin says this about Trump:

“'I think he's stunning; he's a paradigmatic shift because, for him, I think, it's an isolated paradigm shift. I don't think anybody else can do it because everybody else who thinks they know about politics impedes their own forward motion by saying it can't be done. He doesn’t have that gene --everything can be done,' she said.

'Everything is possible, and guess what? He has proved that it is. Do you know how many years, decades, I worked on tax reform? He did it like that, changing people's lives. Do you know how long we all ran against Obamacare? …The less reported is the most significant for the economy … regulatory relief,' she added."

exactly
it is isolated....

...only Trump can get away with doing Trump-like things.

PJMedia's Nicholas Ballasy weaves a worthy interview, so I highly recommend clicking the link for the real deal.  And at the same time, for the purpose of discovery of further background, might I suggest another quick read as a prerequisite  -- The Art of The Donald ;  Christopher Bedford, does a fairly thorough job explaining the current law in effect, both on the fly and calculated in equal portion.  [This girl received the book as a Christmas present, and only just now getting around to flipping its pages;  finding such a loss a stunning turnabout...]

Whether approving, or not, the entire nation is acting and reacting to nothing less than an environmental, cultural, free market phenomenon, namely through what I call Trump Law -- a vortex of stunning force, flashing every bit of his masculinity with pride, and barreling through his presidential promises and TO-Do list like none other, with no regrets. Hold onto those MAGA hats!

TRUMP is killing it.

Achieving STUNNING Tax Reform,
and extinguishing harmful Obamacare regulations, in one fell swoop...like a man.

(Although well defined decades ago) It was Trump to declare Jerusalem the capital of Israel and make immediate plans to move the US Embassy there, like a man.

It was Trump that brought North Korea to its knees, like a man....

It was Trump that put California on notice -- on multiple levels, from sanctuary cities to sanctuary state; and come tomorrow, visiting my San Diego, fully prepared to face the backlash of building the wall, like a man...

The thing is --  and perhaps this sentiment floats in stark and stunning contrast with half the population swimming in the girl gene pool -- I happen to like men being men.

I like it a lot.

I might even go so far to say, we need more men being men.

And of course, all this could be more a reflection of what's going on more closer to home for the old G thing; given the recent reigniting of a personal life, this girl is so ready to stop thinking about changing the oil, taking out the trash, fixing a toilet flapper, and so on and so on.  Men not only lend a certain portion of security and peace of mind at the end of the day, they happen to be pretty handy to have around.  I am ready for that turnabout to turn about, like yesterday.

Of course, call me old fashioned,  for the art of this deal to really work.... the girl -- which in this case, is me -- must be fully prepared to do the girly things.  AND I AM.  Seems like I have been waiting all my life to chaotically clean cook kiss and things, for the love of a good man.

But like Bedford says in the book...on The Donald....what this really amounts to --for me and for you -- is being "true to our brand."

I know who I am and more important, know what I am looking for in a partnership; when combining with an opposite force -- especially one looking for what I have to offer --- it becomes a whirling vortex of yin and yang, swirling together in sweet nirvana, to and fro, entertaining intervals from the frantic to the sublime.  The potential of reaching ecstasy runs high when the machine is calibrated, in alignment, and grounded with the idea that everything and anything is possible.  Working together, the actual possibility of making love great again actually has a fighting chance. Stunning results can ultimately carry the day.

Just as The Donald doesn't hold the can-NOT-do-gene -- I believe that half the battle is being in agreement with the goal, the end result, the opportunity of gain!  (Dare I add, making it a win-win.)

How can it be bad for America, and more specifically, Americans -- if we got a guy, in the highest office of the land, who isn't satisfied with the American machine staying at simply okay, but actually in the making of making it HUMMMMMMMMMMM, like, loudly, bigly.... boldly going where America has never gone before!

Who doesn't want a piece of that?

Trump negotiates deals according to Trump Law.  It may seem scary -- at the start -- at a point where he just mouths off and begins with something sounding more like a one-sided demand; but just look at how things evolve during the process -- things shift and ease with every push and pull.  It's brilliant, really.

And something else about Mary, and not being fully on board the Trump train in the beginning -- I, too, find the man and his workmanship absolutely "stunning."  Who knew?

Okay.
That's my day, and I'm sticking to it.

Make it a Good Day, G

And with much appreciation to my muses.... 

PJMedia, Mary Matalin, The Donald, and my own mr. big

,....in the making of this day.

It's a Bombardment of Blurry Political Lines Thing

Dear America,

gun control on G:  

pass out a pistol to everyone.

What --  are you bonkers?

Yes,

yes I am.

But wouldn't the natural deterrent change perceptions when  illicit intentions are brewing?  When we know that every single one of us has one -- wouldn't this be the kind of  protective underpinnings of personal security to the masses every responsible, self-reliant, responsible, liberated, responsible, freedom-loving, responsible, soul must carry?

RESPONSIBLE

: having the job or duty of dealing with or taking care of something or someone

: able to be trusted to do what is right or to do the things that are expected or required

: involving important duties, decisions, etc., that you are trusted to do

yes indeed.

In a perfect world -- the thing is -- we want everyone to take responsibility for their own life and the lives of others very seriously.

Now, switching fronts on the fly, we have talked obsessively about this idea of deterrence in g-land -- for on the world stage, a country that screams major threat within without uttering a single syllable usually stands.   And stands strong ..secure...untouchable...on a rock...fully capable of protecting its citizens without firing a single bullet.  Nobody wants to touch that.

Campaigning for president, a Senator Obama had many grandiose ideas; unbeknownst to many, however, his notions packed with magic potions to change everything came with a lifetime of contempt for this kind of strength, this kind of exceptionalism, this kind of capitalism, this kind of religious liberty, this kind of history, this kind of tradition...you name it, he pretty much hated it.

It was all destined to be fundamentally changed -- and in what would turn out to be two terms and five days when all said and done.

This is serious stuff, folks.

If we actually take it all in with an objective eye, we not only haven't moved forward anywhere in America, but if we have the courage to look beyond our borders....

Interesting is a post from Real Clear Politics...covering a "foreign policy showdown" on CNBC, with Home Depot founder Kenneth Langone and NBC's chief foreign policy correspondent Richard Engel.  In the conversation, Langone pressed Engel on answering a simple question: name me one country where relations have improved under Obama [you know, having made it perfectly clear during his campaign, he had all the fixes to correct  America's reputation of being an imperialistic, militaristic, capitalistic, materialistic, going ballistic brute].

Finally, Engel mutters this: "yeah, I think you would be hard pressed to find that."   And he gets a chance to expand on that; and if you care to read it, go here.

Let's see -- you wanna be the country of  "Peace through Weakness" or "Peace through Strength?"

hmmmmmm what did he tell the cadets?

Let's have Charles Krauthammer complete the circle for us, shall we? -- from Fox News with Bret Baier:

“It was an answer to the chorus of criticism, even from his side of the aisle, that it's been a weak, leaderless, rudderless foreign policy, which it has been," he said. "I spoke to a member of Congress who was in the armed forces and he said there was a real pettiness and a personalization of this."

“This is a graduation speech for West Point," he said. "It was not a place where you -- you know, you want to be inspiring the future officers of America, it isn't a place to answer your critics or to go point by point against all the attacks on him. And he set out this ridiculous contrast between extreme isolationism on the one hand, and extreme, almost a caricature of intervention, on the other hand

yes indeed.

The president graced the cadets with his presence --
as the Commander in Chief who's sole purpose in that moment is to honor

the audience chock full of pure grit, determination, courage, and strength ....

an audience of the smartest, sharpest tools in the American shed....

an audience having consciously chosen to honor America and all 300 million of us, to serve, risking life and limb, and do whatever is asked of them in the coming years ahead (and dare we note, walking into a very mixed up, wacky world, to boot)  --

and what does this president do?  Make it about him?

It might as well have been written on pleading paper and turned into the court of public opinion with copies filed at the Department of Defense.

Way to go, Mr. President; way to emasculate the bunch (including the girls, BTW) --   "just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail."

Inspiring, isn't it.

He seems so confused; taking in the entire speech -- faced with such a foreign policy conundrum -- he made a convincing argument sounding guilty of completely wanting it both ways; and to top it off, having really no idea how to really pull that off.

Looking forward --  and spinning this great responsibility to protect and to serve to the next president of the United States -- a window has opened.

Much like this West Point speech fiasco, Hillary's Benghazi defense takes an entire chapter in her new book hellbent on simply explaining herself, responding to her critics with what seems to be an answer to the world.

Making a direct hit against the "what difference at this point does it make" comment on the Hill, well it would seem, Hill. aligning to be the 2016-superpower-candidate-you-wanna-be full stop, to make a big, fat, self-serving, bloody difference for you now, doesn't it.

[And she has the gall to continue to cling to the video story line, at least, in part, in a 'we really have no idea' kind of way when in fact we do!]

RESPONSIBILITY

: able to be trusted to do what is right or to do the things that are expected or required

AND THEN...

Take full responsibility for whatever happens when things don't go as expected or required.

From POLITICO --

There has been, she writes, a “regrettable amount of misinformation, speculation, and flat-out deceit by some in politics and the media,” but new information from “a number of reputable sources continues to expand our understanding of these events.”

You said it.

"a regrettable amount 

of misinformation, 

speculation, 

and flat-out deceit 

by some in politics 

and the media" 

 indeed.

We're waiting.....

Dude, that was like two years ago, let it go already, right?

You have got to be kidding me?  Did you click into that link because it's a juicy morsel of how the progressive propaganda machine works.   It's right on cue.  It's a regrettable  amount of misinformation in formation, so look sharp and be on the alert.

Now to the taking of responsibility in a new subject: The Veteran's Administration.

Way back when, in 2007, the Senator Obama knew exactly what the VA needed.

READ THIS.

OR no -- read this from 2012....."for the first time ever"...military families and returning vets are a priority.   Oh really?

[credit to PJ Media, Bridget Johnson]

Indeed.

To the crib notes version documenting the dodging of responsibility, and of course, the bullets left and right...

Flash backward to May 21st 2014  -- Obama is finally saying something to address the scandal:

"If these allegations 

prove to be true, 

it is dishonorable, 

it is disgraceful 

and I will not tolerate it 

-- period."

Um 
Why did you wait so long to say something?  
Oh whatever.
More important, what do you mean, if these allegations prove to be true?  The deplorable treatment of our veterans, wait lists and all, have been a problem for decades.  And you, Mr. President, have not only known about this, but you have for the first time made it a priority ...at least since 2012.... having made this kind of commitment as early as 2007.

oh,
I get it.

All you have to do, Mr. President, is ask for Shinseki's resignation and the scandal instantly becomes a distant memory.
Boom!
[Truth be told, more like a poof]
Done.
Check that one off your list of things to do today....
Next.

Judge not the common man 

by the color of his skin 

but by his character 

uncommon.

Deep.

indeed.

oh what difference at this point does it make.

Make it a Good Day, G

Ooooh and Jay Carney leaves, too.  Aw so sad.  
Formally covering for the 'regrettable amount of misinformation, speculation, and flat-out deceit by some in politics' has surely taken a toll.
indeed.
 

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.