It's Another Visit From the Screw Up Fairy Thing

Dear America,

"Ahhh...I see the screw up fairy 

has visited us again"

anonymous

i was waiting for a sign.

something

anything

and then....

In the words of our president, swiped off the pages of POLITICO -- we see, "no apologies;"  boom.

"We saw an opportunity

and we seized it.

And I make no apologies for that."

“I’m never surprised 

by controversies that are whipped up in Washington...

that's par for the course."

" 'We have a basic principle: 

we do not leave anybody 

wearing the American uniform 

 behind,' 

Obama said, 

repeating the defense 

he offered earlier in the week."

"I make absolutely 

no apologies for making sure that 

we get back a young man 

to his parents 

and that the American people 

understand

 that this is somebody’s child. 

And that we don’t condition 

whether or not 

we make the effort 

to try to get them back,"

For the whole read, go here.

YOU, sir, have got to be kidding me.

No, better still and under par for the course, maybe the American people should order you this tee shirt to wear on your next round of golf:

"I've learned so much 

from my mistakes.  

I think I'll make 

a few more."

anonymous

indeed.

How in bloody hell do you double down on this?

Have you read the headlines?

Have you not spoken with any of your advisors?

Have you no shame?

Intelligence reports tell us (apparently, all at the same time) that at least six troops died looking for Bergdahl -- a soldier and quite possibly a traitor -- who walked off his post (apparently, more than once).

Your own congress denied the approval of the release of these Gitmo detainees for his exchange (apparently, more than once) dating back to 2012; but more important, were NEVER consulted on this done deal, at the costly ratio of five to one.

What do you have to say to the parents of the those who actually died?  If you had a son,  could you relate -- would any of these guys appear to matter to you?

Here's an account to lose your daily MR for -- from a few days ago on The Daily Beast.  Feeling any pangs in the pit of your stomach yet?

The thing is, Mr. President -- this "soldier" was never placed on the POW list, was he; and you knew that.  I mean, come on, you are the president after all; this kind of inside intelligence is routine and just par for the course on any given day, right?

As president -- you knew the details were sketchy, at best; and you did it anyway?

And the five detainees, now in Qatar?

Scott free; skipping through the dusty daisies with nothing left to do but sit out a year?  Really?  

Who's the traitor now?

What about our soldier in Mexico?  Or is he the exchange -- paying the ultimate sacrifice sitting in a Mexican jail for the rest of his life -- for the hundreds, no hundreds of thousands, of children being allowed to not only cross the border into the United States, but now get room and board on the tax payer dime?  Costing...what?

Next thing you know, we will come to find out an entire transit system -- probably a high speed rail fueled entirely by solar energy and windmills -- has been set up south of the border just to transport the children from every nook and cranny of Mexico and South America, in order to flood the system, create the chaos, to force feed immigration reform under duress, under the boot, under the direction of an administration ripe with corruption and deceit.

...to which Obama will respond something like, "well golly, gosh, gosh, I found out about it when you all did."  Or no -- he'll say -- "yes.  yes we did. and I make no apologies for it...every child deserves to be raised by their loving parents, and every loving parent deserves to have their child by their side...it's just the right thing to do."

"Since Oct. 1, U.S. customs agents caught 47,017 children along the southwest border, an eye-popping 92% increase in the last fiscal year."

PORT HUENEME, CALIF. — Hundreds of migrant children will be sheltered at a naval facility in California amid a spike in the number of minors caught crossing the border alone, authorities said Tuesday...

Children will be flown to the Port Hueneme site from other shelters while being cleared for transfer to sponsors, said Laura Goulding, a spokeswoman for the Administration for Children and Families, a division of the Health and Human Services Department. They will receive English language instruction, arts and crafts activities, and recreation at the shelter, she said.

Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2014/06/03/3094084/california-shelter-readied-for.html#storylink=cpy

Read more here: http://www.sanluisobispo.com/2014/06/03/3094084/california-shelter-readied-for.html#storylink=cpy

Since when does our Health and Human Services Department do all this?  And such a twisted turn of Department of Defense resources, no? Port Hueneme was refurbished in 2007 to house Navy reservists before heading off to Afghanistan...

Curious -- did congress approve of this re-allocation of government property?  Or was this just covered under the cover of darkness within the pages of the Affordable Care Act (just a little something something nobody bothered to read)   -- at the discretion of Kathleen Sebelius, under the direction of Obama, before making the unfortunate human sacrifice of the administration.  Oh the end justifies the means, doesn't it, Kathleen.

wonderful use of no child left behind.

"I've learned so much 

from my mistakes.  

I think I'll make 

a few more."

yup.
double downed on that one.

Why?

This -- from TIME:

Asked whether the Taliban would be inspired by the exchange to kidnap others, he laughed. “Definitely,” he says. “It’s better to kidnap one person like Bergdahl than kidnapping hundreds of useless people. It has encouraged our people. Now everybody will work hard to capture such an important bird.”

Did the president happen to think about all those left behind -- like behind behind --  like behind enemy lines behind?  The parents of all those left behind deserve their children to come home safe and sound, too.  In spite of the apparent draw down of troops with every intention to end the endless war come the end of the year -- today, we are still a nation at war, for gitmo jiminy sakes.

And what is wrong with you, Lindsay Graham?  Impeachment if he tries to do it again?  Are you for real?  How about beginning impeachment proceedings right now?  But wait a minute, don't look now, Lindsay, for you may just get that chance right quick...next up for consideration for good conduct well served, Fouzi Khalid Abdullah al-Awda.   Let the games begin.

Hope and Change...not...here's another angle:

One of the deadliest and most violent Islamic terrorist organizations is growing exponentially in Syria and Iraq, taking over large swaths of territory and turning the region into a de facto state controlled by extremists whose ultimate goal is a pro-emirate Middle East, U.S. officials told TheBlaze...

As Syria enters its fourth year of civil war with more than 162,000 casualties, there is growing concern that failure to properly address the issue has given ISIL time to establish itself, including capabilities to recruit Americans and Europeans far from its home base in the Middle East. President Barack Obama announced last month that the administration will be sending more trainers and equipment to members of the Free Syrian Army that have disavowed extremist groups.

Obama’s former ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, has been highly critical of the policy. In an interview with PBS on Tuesday, Ford said Obama’s hesitancy to aid moderate rebel fighters in the beginning of the conflict has resulted in increased threats to the United States and a loss of allies, so much so that he can “no longer defend the policy.”


If only the situation remained remotely serious, right?

Let's go back to the beginning -- another kind of beginning, shall we?  Picture 2009.

For a recap worthy of your time, let me direct you to The Heritage Foundation.  By Nile Gardiner, Ph.D. and Morgan Lorraine Roach

Barack Obama's Top 10 Apologies: How the President Has Humiliated a Superpower

I know.  I hear you...what difference, at this point, does it make?  Besides, it's a lot to read.

Well,  let me tell you --
it means, we should have seen the screw up fairy coming a long, long time ago, albeit far, far away in the mind of the common man.

we are a trusting lot. aren't we now...  like sheep to the slaughter house.

Make it a Good Day, G

And you know --  some say the Bergdahl exchange occurred when it did -- and so suddenly, there was no time to get the obligatory approval from Congress -- just to distract the commoners from the VA Scandal; and that may very well be.  BUT, it also just so happens to coincide with a taking of a major holiday, by a major political/cultural commentator....Rush Limbaugh.  hmmmmm 

It's Being Deranged Like This Young Man Thing

Dear America,

"I am fairly certain 

that 

given a cape 

and a nice tiara, 

I could 

save the world."

can't take any credit for that.

and even still, it didn't come with an author so I am stuck -- here -- in this place of having no idea who to give the credit to...

sure would like to, though, in this moment -- 

you know -- give credit where credit is due.

It's cool to get credit for something that is deemed worthy or good or constructive or positive -- and today, something just plain freakin' witty.

Sure, it's just a little blip of quip -- but in an instant, it characterizes the rush of judgement each one of us manages to muster in an anonymous comment, a soapbox moment, all the live long day while traveling -- masquerading really -- around the worldwide web,

We each have an answer to everything under the sun, and justifiably willing and able to add our two cents anytime, anywhere, to our hearts content -- and that goes double if in the end there is a possibility to save the world, right.  

It's called freedom of speech, baby.  It's more or less, a  yay me and fxxx you feedback, for those that do it under the cover of darkness; while in the public arena, it takes on a more conventional, appropriate, civilized mode of operandi, making way for the public servant to stand atop the box for the benefit of the whole.

And this girl has no problem with any of it.  Debate is a fine way to start the day.

And the loudest guestion today seems to be -- how do we save the world from the mentally ill?  How do we determine who, in fact, is mentally ill...and then, how do we keep those people far, far away from guns?  

From The Blaze, after the weekend's horrific rampage in Santa Barbara, we see the players seeking gun control amass an artillery capable of extinguishing a small island and begin their assault before most of us on the left coast have even opened our eyes.  And if you have the time, go here.

"[Senator Richard] Blumenthal said Congress must act to 'keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people who are severely troubled or deranged like this young man was, and provide resources'.”

Looking at this now -- all of a sudden it doesn't look so black and white, does it.

What defines "dangerous"  -- "severely troubled"  -- and  "deranged like this young man" ?

I think people are deranged for a whole host of reasons -- how do we know someone is too deranged to own a gun?  And besides, the police met with this "deranged like this young man" only a week or so ago and they came away with perfectly polite in every way.  No more than a spoonful of sugar needed to keep this kid on the straight and narrow.  No sirree Bob.    [BTW:  newsflash, the family knew something was wrong.  And I mean seriously, perfectly, wrongfully wrong.]

But wait.

Hold up.

Wait a minute.  Wait a minute.

Didn't this Elliot Rodger stab and kill three people -- his roommates -- before he set out to pull the trigger?  -- and this might just be a fine time to duly note, every single sick and twisted action being totally premeditated and documented on video and with a written manifesto [and to his credit -- it's a 141 pages worth].

Is Senator Blumenthal prepared to regulate the ownership of everything from everyday cutlery to chef knives, too?  And just because curiosity kills, too -- any thoughts, Blumey, on rat poison, by chance?

But what is up with ignoring half of the victims by steal blade?  It's almost as if that part of the rampage didn't even happen.

Now, if I had a choice, I would much rather go by sudden death with a bullet than a vicious attack piercing my skin over and over and over again by knife.  Can you just imagine that?  But surely, I digress.

Here's more from The Blaze post, from my very own Sen. Dianne Feinstein:

“We must ask ourselves if an individual whose family called police with concerns about mental health, who is receiving therapy and who has had several run-ins with police should be allowed to own multiple firearms and hundreds of rounds of ammunition,” she said. “When anyone, no matter their mental health or history, can so easily obtain any gun they want and as many as they want — we must recognize there is a problem.

She didn't mention the knife attack either.

Strange.

Wonder how that could be?

Because apparently, no one has ever been turned down to get a gun before.  

Yeah, everyone and anyone  -- "no matter their mental health or history, can so easily obtain any gun..."
Because  surely, there is no Black Market available whatsoever.
And taking a gun from a family member -- unheard of -- and next to impossible.
Oh, hell, we might as well outlaw all guns full stop.
Only the government should have them.


Oh that reminds me of this...

Yeah, it's just a book review; but let's first give credit where credit is due.

The book:   Police State USA by Cheryl K. Chumley, journalist for The Washington Times.  Let's just say...can't wait to get my hands on one of these babies.  You too?  Go here.

And now to the review, by Scott Greer, Associate Editor of The Daily Caller --  Is America Starting to Target Thought Crime?  [By the looks of Santa Barbara, not even close; but then, Elliot was the son of a progressive, Hollywood elitist...]

Which makes me suddenly wonder -- for at what point does a cape and a tiara become behavior deemed out of bounds, unsound, dangerous, deranged, and  even unruly -- perhaps calling for the fascist, police state to correct?  

For I consider myself to be one of the good guys, be it a doll, here in America -- even as others consider me "fxxxxg bonkers" at times.  Go figure.

And to each his own.

But seriously.   Greer reminds us right at the get-go how the First Lady of the United States recently requested to a bunch of high schoolers to "monitor their families for politically incorrect thoughts and behaviors."  oh really, Michelle?


Greer quotes Chumley about half way in, noting --

Harry Reid attacking the Koch brothers for the crime of giving money to conservative causes is just as bad. President Obama, Joe Biden and the entire cast of the White House, for slamming lawful gun owners for exercising their Second Amendment rights, and for trying to drum up emotional-fueled support to ram through gun control,” Chumley listed off. “The IRS targeting of tea party and patriotic non-profits and our nation’s highest law enforcement official, Eric Holder stonewalling on a special prosecutor appointment — does it get any more police state than that?

Based upon the crime in Santa Barbara -- more gun control laws have no merit unless we also include the handy dandy chef's knife with a free set of steak knives, butter knives not included.   And even still -- we KNEW this Elliot Rodger was mentally ill and yet we -- and when I say we, I mean to say, the authorities, his family, his dad -- did next to nothing to prevent the onslaught of terror at the fingertips of this  "deranged like this young man."  

This morning, I just find myself wishing I did have all the answers to save the world.  If I could snap my fingers and make it so -- with a tiara upon my head, of course (the cape, not being a must-have this season) -- I would.

There are no easy answers.  Only answers that will test our grit and intent.

But for kicks and giggles and a couple of pirouettes, allow me to take a stab at it just this once (he he)...  

Somewhere along the way, I believe we have lost our attention to detail.  While we have ruthlessly talked about this before...over and over and over again it would seem; what's one more time?

We assume the generations can make do and find their way and stay grounded and build character and the respect of knowing right from wrong almost on their own -- perhaps having been taken over with a little influence via the complete book of  youtube, facebook and twitter.

Over time, we have taken away the individual responsibility to understand and assimilate to the common good, for the common good, and more importantly,  the reasons why our founders made it so; recognizing that to have such freedoms abound in this country that it comes with a great price -- that being a duty to act, fully aligned with all that is virtuous and decent and civil, for ourselves and each other.   For our rights and privileges are not a given without such a duty to God and country going hand in hand.  End of story and put it in the can already, right Mr. Rodger's, assistant director to The Hunger Games?

We have to fight for this kind of country -- for the assumption that its a given these days is all but a fairy tale.  And yet the thing is  --  it's beginning to feel abundantly clear -- it is precisely those who are presently fighting for just this kind of country who are being viewed more and more as the opposition.

Interesting.


So there; it's a wrap.
Toot-a-loo until we meet again.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's About Bold Character Derived from Stubbord Patience Thing

Dear America,

continuing on a theme for a nano-second, wonder how many trans-genders occupy the Putin Administration's military?  Wonder, too, how many rubles and rubies each one gets for a sex change? 

ah, no bother, that was yesterday's news -- just one day in the life living in America.

Today might just be about a certain Bold Character derived from Stubborn Patience.  This could be describing many things -- America, Putin...me -- but it's origins came from a side of a bottle of wine.  A Paso Creek, Cabernet Sauvignon,  from Paso Robles, California, to be exact.  Can you say,очень вкусный, yummy good?

“Comrade @BarackObama,” so tweeted  Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, “what should do those who have neither accounts nor property abroad? Or U didn’t think about it?”

I'm sorry.
Creepy is seeing the address Comrade boldly inserted before our American president's name.

While in today's headlines, we get Putin, himself, chiming in with a reality check mate to you, comrade...  Highlighted @The Blaze.com:   "He said Western attempts to intimidate Russia with sanctions 'would be viewed as an act of aggression, and that Moscow would retaliate'."

An act of aggression, you say?

Cause for retaliation, you add?

Say it isn't so.

What do you mean Putin is hardly intimidated, not even a smidgen?

What do you mean Putin feels emboldened to hold his own red line, tie it around America's feet, attach a brick off the Kremlin, throw us into the drink, and then toss back a shot of vodka with glee?   Who's your daddy, I mean prankster, I mean fearless leader, now?   #comrade-stupid-americans....

And if, by chance, Russia can control it's own destiny and make up happy endings on the fly, would not the "settled science" of "global warming" counter the measly freezing of a few Russian assets?  Where's the threat? 

Economic sanctions seems to be the go-to diplomatic means for peaceful ends; it's just too bad it doesn't seem to work. 

[Gotta love the addition of various bios of the Russian elites with assets, courtesy of ABC News...in case you missed it, just a quick page up to the Dimitry Rogozin link]

Oi vay.  
It's Obama's war now --  I mean, grim Lenin's fairy tale with puppy dog tails between the legs, is it not?  Bold character with stubborn patience, not.

The good news.
In theory, Obama has just as much power as Putin to make it up as he goes along, no? 

ah, you laugh in the face of danger. 
But in reality,
isn't that what being a leader and having a real plan -- one fortified with military and diplomatic strateeeguries and everything -- is all about?  All the world makes it up as it goes along.

• Having a plan, boom. 
• Understanding the enemy, boom. 
• Recognizing the weaknesses, boom. 
• Contemplating the unintended consequences, boom.
• Follow through with all threats, boom.  
• Seeing a multitude of scenarios play out BEFORE anything happens, boom. 
• Going for the win, boom.
• Being a Commander in Chief, boom.

Obama is truly exceptional at making things up as he goes along.  History proves it:

He made things up in Benghazi.

He made things up in the IRS scandal.

He made things up in Libya.

He made things up in Egypt and the "Arab Spring".

He has made things up throughout every ugly facet of Obamacare -- and even then, if at first you don't succeed, try, try, again.[aaaah, scratch that, didn't mean it ...so says the father of the failing, freaking, fiasco that is responsible for breaking the American health care industry, constituting one-sixth of this nation's economy, to infinity and beyond].

I mean, economic sanctions are powerful things. 
Talk about economic sanctions...

Domestically --  we are in the midst of sanctions so great -- the low information voter and all those otherwise tied emotionally to this current regime are fundamentally immune to recognizing the total economic collapse laying in wait. 

Now to the cut and paste elements of today's news -- and it's plucked out of an email from a trusted source -- my papa xoxo:

 

How to create a social state by Saul Alinsky:

 

There are eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to create a social state. The first is the most important.

 

1) Healthcare– Control healthcare and you control the people

 

2) Poverty – Increase the Poverty level as high as possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.

 

3) Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That way you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.

 

4) Gun Control– Remove the ability to defend themselves from the Government. That way you are able to create a police state.

 

5) Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (Food, Housing, and Income)

 

6) Education – Take control of what people read and listen to – take control of what children learn in school.

 

7)Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the Government and schools

 

8) Class Warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier to take (Tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.

What is so different?
Seriously.

What is so different from the actions of a President Putin, in the specific, and a Russia, in general,  and a fellow world leader and comrade, President Barack Obama?


Welcome to America --  a nation whittled down to nothing more than a project of progressives and elitists,  undermining the natural state of everything under the sun, where the ends justify the means, a place where pranksters lead and a police state -- with origins of the State --  lives outrageously.

And finally, call in the big guns (if we have any left)  -- for America also happens to be the nation leading from behind as the international laughing stock.

Is this a great country, or what?

Hail to the bold character derived from stubborn patience not lost.

Make it a Good Day, G


 

It's a Demi-Dhimmi Dumb Day Thing

Dear America,

this girl might be going heavy today, being weighted down by something virtually intangible; the hidden conflict between its very existence and its peculiar evanescence expanding by the minute.

but just today I believe I caught a glimpse of what we might call it.

It's called demi-Dhimmi.........

and it's a form of Dhimmi much uncommon and unrecognizable and unimaginable, really, given that its origin comes from within the boundaries and statutes of a nation made by revolutionaries for religious freedom, not to mention, in a land built upon the rights of the individual.

and yet, here we are. 

and it's totally uncharted territory [or so we are led to believe, anyway].

Recently, Jon Stewart spent part of his opening monologue poking fun at this very thing, as he chained together snippets from the Fox News Channel headlining "the war against religion" -- mainly, Christianity -- complete with his sophomoric ripping and mocking narrative by the nanosecond.  [the whole thing becomes even more annoying realizing how much I LOVE this guy...and thoroughly enjoying the enigma that I am, just  now]

I wonder what Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz,  I mean,  Jon Stewart, would have to say about this study?  [read more here]

 We won't dwell.

Back to the demi- Dhimmitude we got going on...

After this week -- after keeping a watchful eye upon Arizona --  after having already seen what happened in New Mexico -- and while keeping tabs on the assault against our religious freedom through such reprehensible legislation like Obamacare and the mainstream acceptance of conservative targeting by the IRS  -- let me tell you, America, we are not that much of a far cry from Syria.

What G?

oh you laugh.

oh okay.

This is Dhimmi in Syria --

"Reuters reported that the Islamist militants said that Christians would no longer be allowed to renovate churches, display religious symbols outside churches, pray in public, ring church bells, sell wine to Muslims or drink wine in public. Christians would now also be prohibited from owning weapons."

[and]

given three options: to convert to Islam; to remain Christian but pledge submission to Islam; or to ‘face the sword. They opted for the second of those choices, known as dhimmitude.

[and] 

Every Christian man was now to “pay a tax of up to 17 grams of gold, a levy that was common in Muslim states centuries ago,” Reuters reported, adding, “The concept of dhimma, governing non-Muslims living under Islamic rule, dates back to the early Islamic era in the seventh century, but was largely abolished during the Ottoman reforms of the mid-19th century.”

You see, people, within the Islamic community there is no co-existence with non-Muslims -- not now, not then, not ever.

That is their law.

and wait, there's more:

Other restrictions reported by the Times of Israel included the prohibition on reading scripture “indoors loud enough for Muslims standing outside to hear,” allowing any Christian who wants to convert to Islam to do so, and to not say anything offensive about Muslims.

do you get it now?

The thing is, what actually happened in Arizona should never have happened, on a number of fronts.

But allow me to offer you a wonderful explanation for what did happen, along with  answering some of the deeper questions stifling us from having a real, open, community discussion about the whole entire thing.  It's found at The Foundry, from The Heritage Foundation...Questions You're Asking About Cakes, Gays and Religious Freedom by Amy Payne.

Quoting the bottom line now:

"When it comes to this particular issue, all Americans should remain free to believe and act in the public square based on their beliefs about marriage without fear of government penalty."

thank you.

As a matter of fact, our Constitution is enough to guarantee it.  And we shouldn't need no stinkin' new law.

And for added reinforcement, let's swing over to another gthing favorite hang-out, at The Patriot Post:

In truth, the bill was written in large part because the homosexual agenda seeks to discriminate against Christians. Witness the numerous lawsuits around the country against bakers, florists and photographers who wish not to condone same-sex weddings by providing services for them. Would these same thought police force a Jew to cater a Nazi event? Or a black person to dry clean KKK robes? Yet when it comes to the homosexual agenda, where leftists can’t win affirmation they want coercion; intolerance in the name of tolerance. Religious liberty is sacrificed at the altar of that agenda, which aims to radically redefine civilization’s centuries-old building block

And here's a good one to add:  should  a Muslim baker be expected -- no threatened --  to bake a cake for say a homosexual couple, or dare I say, a Christian wedding?

[For more thoughts from The Patriot Post, go here.]

Now I believe it is quite possible to create a pretty hefty batch of bad juju over turning away clientele with good money.   How can that be good?  How does that support the circulation of money and capital gains and put food on the table?  But be that as it may.   Everyone, as individuals, should have every right to decide that for themselves and their own personal welfare.   

We MUST figure out how to co-exist within the framework of "the free exercise thereof" of our religious liberties and nothing else.

Otherwise, we are no better off than the Christian community in the province of Raqqa, Syria.

Demi-Dhimmi is dumb and is a state of terrorization that has no place in America.

And Jon Stewart can joke around all he wants -- but believe you me --  look around, read the news, see the highlights, follow the threats, unveil the underlying nature of  the war against people of faith, and notice that we are there already.

 Make it a Good Day, G

 

It's About a Loss of Credibility All the Way Around Thing

Dear America,

and wait, there's more!

PRISM:   It's like Google Glass, but even bigger, better, bad'r...so feast your eyes through the looking glass, here.

Invasion of privacy,

Government Body Snatchers,

welcome to the other side of midnight.

And just when we thought even the NY Times turned against the machine, we get edits sometime during zero dark thirty hour.

First, the editors bring us the piece du jour, boldly calling it, "President Obama's Dragnet."  Here it is, in it's original form, from Before It's News.

Now, let me take you to the new version...My guess it took a few edits back and forth, as the situation is still fluid awaiting for all the facts to come in, of course; but with what we know now, we believe this will be the final talking points...for the administration has us by the neck on this one, bear with us, if you will, for we are just groveling, begging for a second chance to prove our loyalty and unwavering admiration...so now without further adieu, here you go.

First version --  we get this:

"Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability. The administration has now lost all credibility. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the 9/11 attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers."

In the what difference does it make second version, we get this:

"Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability.

The administration has now lost all credibility on this issue. Mr. Obama is proving the truism that the executive branch will use any power it is given and very likely abuse it. That is one reason we have long argued that the Patriot Act, enacted in the heat of fear after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks by members of Congress who mostly had not even read it, was reckless in its assignment of unnecessary and overbroad surveillance powers."

Needless to say, somebody from the big White House got  to them.  They were asked to clean it up, or else...or else it may just be the last time THIS administration decides to use the NY Times as an extension of their administration, planting talking points and leaking information as it supports and elevates the brilliance of the Obama regime.    For nobody gets away with talking smack back, right Michelle?  

Simply love how they kept intact the comments made by the author of The Patriot Act --

"On Thursday, Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, Republican of Wisconsin, who introduced the Patriot Act in 2001, said that the National Security Agency overstepped its bounds by issuing a secret order to collect phone log records from millions of Americans. “As the author of the Patriot Act, I am extremely troubled by the F.B.I.’s interpretation of this legislation,” he said in a statement. “While I believe the Patriot Act appropriately balanced national security concerns and civil rights, I have always worried about potential abuses.” He added: “Seizing phone records of millions of innocent people is excessive and un-American.”

exactly.

Oh but rest assured -- per the president -- "nobody is listening on your phone calls..." this is simply "modest encroachments on privacy"..."they help us prevent terrorist attacks"...like, you know, "It’s important to recognize that you can’t have 100 percent security and also then have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience"...."we have to make choices as a society"... Comments plucked from a Washington Post update, just moments ago. 

But if you ask me, this is kind of sounding more like that commercial...you know the one ---  it's just better with "bed AND breakfast" (versus, bed OR breakfast)...it's just better with "sweet AND sour chicken" (instead of sweet OR sour)...Way to go, Ford....brilliant!

Since when did it become vogue --  IN AMERICA -- to force people to choose between a Police State OR our Freedom AND Liberty?  

And Karl Rove, entertaining Greta Van Susteren last night -- seriously?  Your elitism is showing, along with that pesky annoyance of making it sound like you speak for all of us (on the right).  Once again, the government (aka the establishment, both left and right, in equal portion it doth seem)  thinks it knows best  -- in a creepy, trust me, kind of way.  But more than that, something he said really raised my freshly waxed brow...

He said:

“Imagine what would happen if we were able to identify that he had called somebody in Chechnya,” Rove explained. “He was under review for a period of time. What if he had called somebody in Chechnya who was known to be a terrorist? That would have allowed us to then understand that he was a problem and to map his contacts back in the United States.”

“If we had a program like this in effect at the time that might have been helpful to us in stopping the 9.11 plot,” he said, adding that the program appears to be a “legitimate” tool for intelligence and law enforcement “in the environment and the world in which we live.”

First of all, KARL!

WE DID HAVE THIS PROGRAM IN PLACE -- according to just about who.... oh everybody.  This program and intelligence gathering doctrine has been in place for  SEVEN YEARS already; this is nothing new [although to the extent of The Patriot Act's usage and abuses IS a first, there is that].

But second of all -- what the hell are you talking about?  RUSSIA TOLD US TSARNAEV WAS TROUBLE with a capital T!    We didn't follow up, or we didn't believe them, or we didn't do a damn thing about it.  Notice the OR could be replaced with an AND indiscriminately. 

I'm sorry, Karl, but are you saying a Verizon phone call to Chechnya would have been the tipping point, and would have made all the difference?   Are you kidding me?    Oh my, you are either a pompous ass or a bonehead -- so hard to choose; oh, no bother, everything's better with AND.

Make it a Good Day, G

Oh wait!
There's more!

Falling into the same category as -- being against it (Patriot Act) before I was for it ( and President); we have yet another campaign promise -- the one that favored an energy policy embracing an "all of the above" framework -- broken:

Adversely affecting San Diego's local economy, it  has just been announced that the San Onofre Nuclear Plant will be shutdown permanently; Edison citing that the "lengthy regulatory review, rising costs, uncertainty" to be the root cause of such a dramatic close.  We lost 1100 jobs today.

The fastest way to true wealth is through our natural resources and energy production; as the dollar means jack these days, and on the verge of losing it's privileged designation as the world's reserve currency.  It's only a matter of time -- borrowed time --  before we permanently marginalize the dollars value and/or collapse --  and what do we do?  We choose to micromanage and stifle real economic growth by allowing the environmentalists and bureaucrats to control real gains from oil, natural gas, and gobs of nuclear power.

uncertainty.
otherwise known as a nudge...an itzy bitzy little nudge...can you feel me now?

It's Holy Toledo, Fire Them All Thing

Dear America,

"Nearly all men

can stand adversity,

but if you want to test

a man's character,

  give him power." 

 

Abraham Lincoln 

you know what seems to be a common denominator -- besides the obvious abuses of power and corruption?   Every time something goes wrong within this administration, we can't seem to get a straight up answer.

Was it a resignation or was it something that was forthcoming anyway?

Steven Miller, the ousted IRS Temporary Acting Chief, said in an email to the employees:
 
'It is with regret that I will be departing from the IRS as my acting assignment ends in early June,' Miller wrote. 'This has been an incredibly difficult time for the IRS given the events of the past few days, and there is a strong and immediate need to restore public trust in the nation’s tax agency.
While the Treasury Secretary said in a letter to Steve:

"The Inspector General's report issued yesterday has created an urgent need to restore the public trust and confidence in the IRS by installing new leadership for the Service.  While I very much appreciate your many years of loyal service to the IRS, I find it necessary at this time to request your resignation.  We will work with you to make sure we accomplish an orderly transition.  Sincerely, Jacob J. Lew

So was his "acting assignment" ending just two weeks away relevant, or not?

While I can't help but notice Mr. Miller is leaving with appreciation for his "loyal service" to the Service, making no mention of any "intolerable" or "outrageous" allegations of poor management while at his post.  What gives?  Is this the way heads roll at the IRS -- with sweetness and light?

I thought "Americans have a right to be angry about it and I am angry about it" right, Mr. President...

And if we were to take Lew's letter seriously --  let's nit pick, shall we?    It was simply the release of the Inspector General's report that "has created the urgent need to restore the public trust..." and not the illegal activity under Miller's command.

While I can't help but wonder what in Sam Hill is going on there at the White House?  It's like the president doesn't know anything until it hits the AP.   Are you kidding me?  

What's with the '“[um ]I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday"  approach?   doink y doink y do do duh

And how about that Jay [Carney]:

"We cannot and should not prejudge the outcome of a situation before we know what the facts are," Carney said. "We don't want to appropriate consequences [before we know all of the facts]."  [yeah, like we never do that....Benghazi]

Even though Lois Lerner already said it was all true!

Oh okay, Jay.  So is that the new thing... speculating that a bona fide confession to breaking the law is hardly a confession to a fact at all?  Is a review board required to review the facts and give a full review before the breaking news is acceptable for your immediate review and comment?

While I can't help but notice that it puts a whole new twist on what is, in fact, "wholly inappropriate" to talk about and when and even where...considering this news buster from The Blaze, here.

And SO WHAT if it's an "active investigation."  IF the IRS is indeed independent, isn't breaking the law, breaking the law, breaking the law?    Doesn't the moment, itself, call for a diplomatic response from the highest office of the land as to how unlawful the actions -- fully disclosed and admitted to -- in fact are?   Doesn't it immediately become a teachable moment for what not to do?  Doesn't this become the moment to open the floodgates and spill it -- making way for the president to do what he does best:  bring his high-eloquence and gift-of-gab to the podium and name names (even if subjecting his own democratic congressional insiders a perp-walk of their very own...like Carl Levin)?


So anywho -- moving on.org -- is Lois getting fired next?

Oh, okay.

Just go here for a mad, mad world update on her.  [Update: Oh never mind....guess they couldn't live with themselves if they allowed that to go on as planned.]

But in the "is this a joke" category -- this just in.

And what about this exclusive local news coming out of Fox 19 in Ohio...go here.   Sounding eerily all too familiar these days, just who gave the order?

And get a load of this:  we -- the people -- pay Lois' salary of about $175,000/year for this kind of partisan leadership AND over the last three years, has received about 42k in bonuses!  Amen and hallelujah, it must be great to be a bureaucrat.  I wonder how many middle managers within the IRS get paid that?

Speaking of being in service -- can we just regroup for one minute?

We seem to have the arrogance of power really running amuck these days, no?  

Who serves who?

While no one is even talking about how this on-going illegal activity, wholly permissible under this administration, interfered with the 2012 election.  It's called tampering, harassment, intimidation to sway public opinion and demonize opposition and it's supporters.

Holy Toledo, IF this doesn't just scream flat tax, I'm not sure what will. Fire them all.


Make it a Good Day, G

Epi-Blog

Read

Mark Alexander

The Patriot Post

It's a 'Tongue double, brings Trouble' Thing

Dear America,

"The greatest nation on Earth cannot keep conducting its business by drifting from one manufactured crisis to the next. Let’s agree, right here, right now, to keep the people’s government open, pay our bills on time, and always uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America. The American people have worked too hard, for too long, rebuilding from one crisis to see their elected officials cause another."  Obama, State of the Union 2013

A couple days ago -- Peter Foster, U.S. Editor writing for the Daily Telegraph, brought a teeny tiny detail to the head of a pin.  Recounting a declaration of our own President Obama only months ago in his State of the Union address, Foster fosters an open wound, saying:

"In his State of the Union address to the American people earlier this year, Barack Obama declared that he was 'confident' of achieving 'our objective of defeating the core of al-Qaeda'.

Although he acknowledged the need to pursue the 'remnants' of the terrorist group and its affiliates, the overall message was clear – al-Qaeda was badly degraded, the tides of war were receding and the US was winning this fight that was no longer even officially a war.

The Boston bombings would appear to present a fundamental challenge to that assessment and once again bring the nagging uncertainty of terrorism back on to the American main street"

 

Indeed.

The president was pretty clear:

"Today, the organization that attacked us on 9/11 is a shadow of its former self. Different al Qaeda affiliates and extremist groups have emerged – from the Arabian Peninsula to Africa. The threat these groups pose is evolving.. Instead, we will need to help countries like Yemen, Libya, and Somalia provide for their own security, and help allies who take the fight to terrorists, as we have in Mali. And, where necessary, through a range of capabilities, we will continue to take direct action against those terrorists who pose the gravest threat to Americans."

Today feels more like our government is a shadow of its former self; is this some kind of perverted twist of diplomatic fate, surely brought on by global warming, shape-shifting a cold war for the new age, allowing our very own intelligence agencies turn us into mush?


Foster brings in a perspective from Aaron Zelin, "a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy who has written extensively about the decentralisation of al-Qaeda" for an added bonus.  And quoting Foster, quoting Zelin, characterizing the organic, homegrown element of terrorism as simply this:

"It's a hybrid thing, that's the problem...It's a unique threat, there's nothing like it and that's why people have a hard time grasping what it is."

Because whether it two brothers, a cell of twelve working in and around a neighborhood of Boston, or full-blown war in another part of the world --  it all acts with the same will, and that is to kill the infidels with whatever means possible, large or small.  It's called a caliphate.  Look it up.

Bit let's get back to more from the president, pulled from the rubble of his State of the Union address:

"As we do, we must enlist our values in the fight. That is why my Administration has worked tirelessly to forge a durable legal and policy framework to guide our counterterrorism operations. Throughout, we have kept Congress fully informed of our efforts. I recognize that in our democracy, no one should just take my word that we’re doing things the right way. So, in the months ahead, I will continue to engage with Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention, and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world"

Um hold up.

What about Abdul....?  Go to the source at The Blaze.

and go here to Alex Jones' take on board Infowars.


Um and what about the possibility of the boys working as double agents?    Go here, takes you to a place called DEBKAfile.



 So what are we to do with all this?  Who are we to believe? 


And now fully disturbed with the president's very own context when he said,  "I recognize that in our democracy, no one should just take my word that we’re doing things the right way."

Just why would he plant that seed

in the back of our minds?

Nonetheless, does this look like.....  

"I will continue to engage with Congress to ensure not only that our targeting, detention, and prosecution of terrorists remains consistent with our laws and system of checks and balances, but that our efforts are even more transparent to the American people and to the world."

Here's a mad, mad world update:   this is a freaking mess.  The more information we get, the creepier our government -- acting by virtue of a shadow government -- appears.

"Tongue double, brings Trouble."

courtesy of Ben Franklin

Make it a Good Day, G





 

It's If You Tell a Lie Big Enough and Keep Repeating It Thing

Dear America,

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State."  Joseph Goebbels

it's gonna get messy.

so welcome to the next 100 days of text, lies and videotape -- an art-form virtually suspended into the air for as long as the audience bites through the unconscionable widespread loss of the unbiased journalist.

and it looks like we're surrounded.

The effect is compounded exponentially when the Rules-for-Radicals-in-Chief lays the groundwork.

Oh, and he ain't apologizing for it either.

"No, we won't be apologizing...Sometimes these games are played during political campaigns. Understand what the issues are here: Mr Romney claims he's Mr. Fix-it for the economy because of his business experience, so I think voters entirely legitimately want to know what is exactly his business experience*."

Now, bear in mind, the Obama campaign threw out the possibility of Romney having committed a felony.  A felony!

"Either Mitt Romney, through his own word and his own signature was misrepresenting his own position at Bain to the SEC, which is a felony, or he was misrepresenting his position at Bain to the American people to avoid responsibility for some of the consequences of his investments. If that is the case, if he was lying to the American people, than that is a real character and trust issue.”  Stephanie Cutter (for more of this BS go here)

The strange thing is -- this president is quite alright hanging it all out there as the truth, even when it's not.  Whatever gets it done.  And the bigger the better.

Wow.  Now this is a new low for even you, Mr. President.

And I'm searching... wildly, madly, everywhere for how this makes you look even a scosh presidential...a little help?

Oh but never mind, this just in -- it's only been since, like, yesterday, that the press believes the president's ads have gone like, negative in all of this.   ooooh burn.  now that's handing it to him.  But in other news, let the press help you, help us, Mr. President.

And speaking of some bad press, let us be so bold and review Obama's very own "JOBS Council" --  through the pages of one of his own, the HUFF POST:

 "26 business leaders assembled by the president for job-spurring ideas, includes representatives of several companies that have used outsourcing, fueling job creation abroad and job losses in the U.S. Shipping work to low-cost overseas labor markets has been a trend in American manufacturing for decades"

fascinating.  maybe hope springs in the media yet...

what's even more fascinating -- reading the comments underneath the HUFF POST; as always, the comments by we, the people, prove evermore on the ball than the elite wish to believe.  (ooooh is there perhaps a conspiracy to make ourselves dumber-than-we-appear in the political reflective mirror?)

And what about all the oil and gas jobs that have gone belly up after the BP disaster -- you know, like the number of oil rigs that had to pull out altogether and the Obama Administration clamping down on all off-shore drilling both east and west -- put two and two together plus the billions thrown into Brazil's oil industry over our own and you get Mr.Oil-Outsourcer-In-Chief; or how about the green energy jobs subsidized by stimulus money that went abroad...for back up found more recently, read this -- now we get Mr. Green-Energy-Outsourcer-In-Chief.  Ta Dah

The problem with running a campaign in and around today's media frenzy is that the other side to every story can easily be reached within about two clicks on the keyboard.

And did you know that even campaign funds can come from fund-raisers outsourced abroad?
oh yes they can...and yes they did... and certainly not apologizing for it (cuz "they need the money" -- yeah, just another false narrative only fueled by the media to stoke the "underdog's" incumbent coffers)

But here ya go...."Obama taps overseas donor pool..."

It's not like it's a felony or anything -- I mean, the donors are all Americans (at least, according to their passports) and there is nothing illegal going on whatsoever.
And besides, both sides do it.

One world, y'all.

This is what confuses me: at what point did outsourcing become evil?   Surely, we have had Americans working abroad for ages;  we have had foreigners fill positions overseas within U.S. companies; while we also have foreign companies outsourcing manufacturing and investments upon American soil here.  Doesn't it all even out in the end?  Or is it just wrong when the right does it?

IF restructuring -- and ultimately outsourcing some jobs -- saves an American company from going bankrupt, wouldn't that be a good thing?

The truth is, these days, nearly everything we touch has the possibility of  coming from somewhere else -- the olive oil on our bruschetta could be from Italy, the clothes on our back from Indonesia or Vietnam, the wine in our glass from Chile, that funny looking light bulb coming on a slow boat from China (thanks GE) but about that Toyota we drive, it just might have been made in Mississippi.  go figure.

It's a small small world.  Free trade within a big giant free market should be our end game...no?

And as I seem to recall, our president even campaigned to a foreign audience last time around; remember that speech in Germany? [July 24, 2008]   ..."people of Berlin - people of the world - this is our moment - this is our time"  -- guess having a total brain-freeze on where he was or which country he was campaigning for.

Okay, but now going full circle and back to all about Bain.  A big time bundler for the Obama campaign is Jonathan Lavine.    So what G...

so go here for the icing on the hypocrite cake fest.  yummy, isn't it?

Ahhh heavy sigh -- what the media doesn't want to talk about might say a whole lot more than what they do...

And just maybe, it's more about the story and not about the truth at all.

From Obama's lips --  to our ears -- to the media page:

"the mistake of my first term - couple of years - was thinking that this job was just about getting the policy right. And that's important. But the nature of this office is also to tell a story to the American people that gives them a sense of unity and purpose and optimism, especially during tough times."  Obama  [for more go to: The Weekly Standard here]

um no.  wrong again.

we don't need a story teller; in the real world we need a leader.

Honestly, this is such a weird thing for him to say -- for it reveals how much of his own life has revolved around a narrative -- a narrative providing the perfect back story for an up and coming candidate; one that fills in the blanks and supplements his weaknesses with dreams from his father, all with the help of a ghost writer; one that creates the evolution of a president as he goes along; one that rewrites it all in a more favorable light. 

He doesn't think he needs to be anything more than a good story teller to get by [while for so many, he doesn't].

Now there is nothing wrong with 'unity and purpose and optimism'; nothing at all.  But in a twisted version of his own story telling, he thinks that all we need to hear is a good lie and everything will be fine.

* and about that 'business experience' -- According to Obama, Obama knows more about business than the business man in the particular (a Romney), and in general.  Get a load of this commentary from one of my favorite things -- The Heritage Foundation.

so hear ye, hear ye -- here we are about a hundred days out; it gives us plenty of time to investigate and contemplate where we go next as a country.  Don't believe everything you hear, even if it's from your own sister or brother; think for yourself.

It's up to every single one of us to get this right.

Make it a Good Day, G

Epi-Blogue

I am not going to apologize 

for being all over the place today.

I am not going to apologize 

for making you read a bunch of things.

I am certainly not going to apologize

for the games political blogs play --

sometimes, 

"I think voters entirely 

legitimately 

want to know what is exactly 

his business experience--"

you know -- Obama's**. 

oh g, that is good.

real good.

and it's a print.

** but seriously, if I were Romney,

I would be hammering this point into the ground...

can you say, shovel ready?

k, gonna shut up now.

It's Lady Liberation vs. Lady Liberty Thing

Dear America,

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

this clip dates back just a couple of days, to the president's first news conference of the year.

before that, on March 2 -- the president made a direct call to Sandra Fluke.  It came immediately after Rush Limbaugh's twisted right wing response to Sandra's testimony before congress, reinforcing the administration's stance to pay for contraceptives  (and essentially, subsidizing a personal activity -- a woman's sex life of all things -- and mandating that the American people pay for women to have protected sex).  Rush was not gentle or kind -- but the argument is basically spot on whether you want to look at it that way, or not.

awwwwww...

"He encouraged me 

and supported me 

and thanked me 

for speaking out about 

the concerns of American women.  

And what was really personal 

for me 

was that he said to tell my parents 

that they should be proud. 

And that meant a lot 

because Rush Limbaugh questioned whether 

or not my family would be proud of me."  

Sandra, 

explaining a president's intent, 

reporting to Politico.com

but let's get back to the press room:

"One of the things I want them to do [Sasha and Malia] as they get older is engage in issues they care about, even ones I may not agree with them on [cough, choke]. I want them to be able to speak their mind in a civil and thoughtful way. And I don't want them attacked or called horrible names because they're being good citizens," 

"I wanted Sandra to know that I thought her parents should be proud of her, and that we want to send a message to all our young people that being part of a democracy involves argument and disagreements and debate. And we want you to be engaged, and there's a way to do it in a way that doesn't involve you being demeaned and insulted."  President Obama @ press conference

He says, "even ones I may not agree with them on."

As if. Right. That's a good one, Mr. President.

Just what is this Mastermind-in-Chief saying here?  He is insinuating, under no uncertain terms, that he is consciously choosing to walk that political thin line of 'does he, or doesn't he?' 

Let's be clear.

He called Sandra Fluke because he is proud of her for speaking with conviction on a women's health issue, for being a good citizen, for taking the risk to stand up --  BECAUSE HE AGREES with her!  He is proud of HER for supporting HIS legislation.

It also means that this president is proud of her for fully supporting the USURPING of the Constitution, undermining this nation's first amendment, and be it ever so graciously and politely -- yet oh so radically -- uprooting the law of the land.

The president is being perfectly clear:  he IS proud of Sandra Fluke in every way, or else he would not pick up the phone to call her; nor would he double down on his remarks of how much her parents should be proud of her; nor would he make no mistake to tell his girls, Sasha and Malia -- and the entire press room -- and the whole world for that matter --  that he is proud of THIS girl, Sandra.  He sees Sandra speaking his language; she is saying and demonstrating the right stance to take all the way around.

[cuz like, did he, the president,  'stand up' to support Bristol Palin, when she was speaking with conviction of her pregnancy and her pro-life values ...and after doing so... becoming the target of viscous attacks from the Left????...ignore this, it's a rhetorical question]

Bristol's convictions do not serve the president's agenda.

The truth is, mathematically speaking -- half of the American women are proud of Sandra, too -- while the other half, not so much.

Is this really how all women choose to move forward?

I think not.

Isn't this sort of thing taking women a couple steps backwards?  Think about it.

Needing a brand-spankin-new entitlement program to cover birth control that costs less than a dollar a day?

Needing somebody else to pay for our prescriptions -- as if we have no means, no wherewithal at all, to figure it out and prioritize our medicinal and personal necessities of choice?

Casting the burden out to society to subsidize something that is very much our own responsibility?

If this is what [some] women are saying -- they might as well marry it -- the government -- and call it a day.

[Which is ironic, isn't it --- given how much the Left loathes traditional marriage...]

Sandra is going to graduate with a LAW DEGREE, for goodness sakes.  She is about to be entering a field of work that offers plenty of cash by the hour (and it has nothing to do with prostitution, but I guess it could be misconstrued as such.... but I quickly digress into the gutter, let's moveon.org....).  She is on the verge of making hundreds of dollars an hour and SHE wants an entitlement program offering free contraceptives to protect her -- and every other woman in America -- believing she has a right to have her sexual life subsidized on the backs of the taxpayers?  of all people.... seriously?

unfukeenbelievable.

yeah, let's hear it for women's liberation.
 -- are we?  
yeah. we've come a long way, baby.
-- have we?

today -- we are long past the burning of our bras and now look at us.

How pathetic.

But the president is proud of Sandra.

And he doesn't care if his Obamacare -- the Affordable Care Act -- rapes the Constitution; he doesn't care if it tramples all over the first amendment.  He doesn't care how it leaves us feeling, inside and out.  He doesn't care.

He is all about fundamentally transforming this country, beginning with everything that upholds our cultural roots of God, country, tradition, family, living in communion with one another and humbly under the Rule of Law.

and then we have the little Mrs. say this:



wow, right.

no.  these two videos are nothing new.  we have played them before.

it's just that,
as time goes by,
the more and more they haunt us,
as we find ourselves always looking over our shoulder.


today, just so you know, given how I feel --
I am consciously choosing to leave this on a really somber note.
But you run along and skip to m'loo up ahead.
Make it a Good Day...
I'll catch up with you later, G


AND just in case you need some really great back up on this administration's assault on America by "America's Most Biblically-Hostile U.S. President" --
go to The Blaze.  Print the article by Billy Hallowell, citing research by David Barton, and be shocked for yourself.  When it is down on paper -- and on film -- and when we put all the itty bitty details together -- we see clearly who this president truly is.      Kudos to Glenn Beck and his machine.