It's a Day of Reckoning of Sorts Thing

Dear America,

At the risk of sounding out of touch with myself -- if not reality itself -- allow me to opine; while the inevitable use of everything in my power to say -- and do -- anything to win the day, even if such calculating and thoughtful meanderings of my mind takes me to places deemed somewhat polarizing, I feel, rightly so, fully entitled. Only the disingenuous and insincere rue the day; but to triumph, overconfident and willing to put forth truth and a reality seemingly against the masses, every day no less --  while in such a manner that organically, naturally, aligns and represents the past positions and arguments of our founders -- then allow the ambitious me, G, to lead the way.   Nothing secretive to see here; I am an open, free enterprising, free spirited, freedom loving blog.

A wink to the PINK:  it was just a fun way to bring to your attention the thirteen words NOT to use when describing Hillary.   It would seem that an outfit called the "HRC Super Volunteers"  -- most likely a sorry lot wearing pant suits from 1972 -- have nothing better to do and have concluded sexism lives through what they call "sexist code words." So don't use them, okay.

At least, don't use these thirteen words when describing Hillary -- go ahead and use them when describing someone like, oh, I don't know, maybe Sarah Palin, or Mia Love, or Michelle Bachmann.  For who are we kidding --  they play for the other side -- right, Lefties? 

You know, I remember a time, long long time ago, when we could just play.  And when I say play -- I mean, live.  And to live and let live and vice versa.   

Nowadays, we have rules for everything; everything from nutritional guidelines, to business restrictions and regulations, words to use and not use, to limitations on the free exercise of religion, 

And how does it happen --

How does it happen that almost overnight, a sea of protesters comes out with fancy banners and rainbow flags and takes over a narrative that has absolutely nothing to do with the LGBT agenda?  As if the LGBT agenda trumps all others.  Really?

First, Bill Clinton signed into federal law the very same law as Indiana -- dating all the way back to 1993.   Second, nearly half of all states in America carry the same law on the books at this present time.  

What gives ..... besides the fact that Indiana wanted to cover the issues created by Obamacare, covering such things as abortion, and giving those with religious beliefs who believe abortion to be wrong, legal cover that aligns with federal law, as well as affirming the UNALIENABLE RIGHT of the "free exercise thereof" of  our religion [that being all religions, mind you, not just the Christians whom the ugly, loud majority of The Left seem to love to hate] ?

READ THIS: from The Weekly Standard's John McCormack.

EVEN Barack Obama, as a State Senator for Illinois, signed the same law for the state of Illinois!

It's called the agenda rising.  

The agenda is no longer in the closet; and it's choosing to be punitive to all those who even appear to act against it.... the agenda.   Demagoguery rules the day. 

It's called the whittling away of America's foundation, being a nation proudly  living Under God.

And so, along those lines, READ THIS!   from The Federalist.com

It shares a link to Connecticut's state law that makes a clear distinction from Indiana's new statute -- one that leaves out  a key word -- "substantially" --  and simply declares basically any religious burden will do.... see for yourself.   

WOW Governor Dan Malloy -- you gonna change that?    You big fat polarizing, ignorantly-out of touch-with-your-own-laws, and yet highly overconfident hypocrite, consciously choosing to step into the fray in a rather offensive, calculating, disingenuous kind of way.   You must think there is a big win somewhere in the midst of taking sides with the anti-religious-liberty-bigots.   [It's not sexist when you swing both ways with any of the thirteen words btw.   But my sincere apologies -- I probably got carried away there  a wee bit...it's not fair to call him fat... that was totally uncalled-for.]

It's a wonder -- 

how did we get here --

how did we get here, to a place, where it now requires a law called the  RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT?

Just the idea of it is enough to make the head spin.

To call for a RESTORATION is to admit we have lost something already.

How can we be here -- at a day when a nation FOUNDED upon religious freedom must fight for our right to make it so, in the first and second place?

The entirety of the commentary of the times is something of a reckoning, of sorts.  Perhaps, maybe even a Day of .....reckoning.

You can take that any way you want.

Make it a Good Day, G

ps. i don't have any answers today.  just questions.  lots and lots of questions.   a sea of questions. and no answers.   swimming in circles.   

It's Just Two Things to Read Thing. Really.

Dear America,

so feeling a wee bit under the weather ....came on yesterday and has seemed to have settled in like a long winter's nap.  spring equinox, not so fast....

soooo,

cue the reading material to peruse, use and muse at your discretion,

The first thing begins with this opening:

First he comes for the banks and health care, uses the IRS to go after critics, politicizes the Justice Department, spies on journalists, tries to curb religious freedom, slashes the military, throws open the borders, doubles the debt and nationalizes the Internet. 

He lies to the public, ignores the Constitution, inflames race relations and urges Latinos to punish Republican “enemies.” He abandons our ­allies, appeases tyrants, coddles ­adversaries and uses the Crusades as an excuse for inaction as Islamist terrorists slaughter their way across the Mideast. 

Now he’s coming for Israel. 

Barack Obama’s promise to transform America was too modest. He is transforming the whole world before our eyes. Do you see it yet?

For the rest, go to the NY Post, Michael Goodwin, here.

The next thing is a real doozy and may just require a couple of days -- given the length of material itself and the weight of the message that comes along for the ride.

It's called What ISIS Really Wants, by Graeme Wood --   @ The Atlantic.  Go HERE.
It's amazing what we know.  No?

sooooo
have at it.
Don't waste another minute.

Go.
I need to gargle now.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's What Happens Under a Forced Marriage Thing

Dear America,

"We want to congratulate the Israeli people for the democratic process for the election that they just engaged in with all the parties that engaged in that election. As you know now, the hard work of coalition building begins. Sometimes that takes a couple of weeks. And we're going to give space to the formation of that coalition government and we're not going to weigh in one way or another except to say that the United States and Israel have a historic and close relationship and that will continue going forward," 

so lamented the White House aide, David Simas, courtesy of CNN through The Weekly Standard.

"we're not going to weigh in one way or another..." he said.

One thing's for sure -- we're definitely not going to congratulate one of our closest allies, Bibi Netanyahu, for his resounding re-election.

The second thing is highly suspect...

The American based One Voice Movement, now under fire for spending taxpayer funds for playing political gamesmanship in Israel, intent upon undermining Bibi's Likud group, is linked to the Obama administration; One Voice Movement -- as a recipient of almost $350,000 in recent grants from the Obama administration’s State Department – had violated its tax-exempt status when it began backing the virulently anti-Netanyahu Victory 15 campaign in Israel earlier that month.

Having worked under the radar since 2013, questions are finally beginning to surface from inside Washington.  Senator Ted Cruz --  alongside Rep. Lee Zeldin -- penned a letter (January 29) to the State Department inquiring about the legality of the 501(c)3's political activity, was recently interviewed @ FoxNews.com and made this stunning observation (or is it a question?):

What does it say about the President of the United States when he’s more concerned about undermining and attacking the prime minister of Israel than he is standing up to the mortal threat a nuclear Iran poses?


exactly.

This president was against Israel before he was for it -- it was a forced marriage; but with the actions of the One Voice Movement, he almost had this ball and chain gone for good.  Happy endings here we come again...


[and for more on this, go to Fox, here]

BUT ...What does it say?

What it says is that our current administration plays lip-service with our "close" diplomatic relations with Israel.  

Our "close relationship" -- David Simas --  couldn't be any further apart.

Our "close relationship" began to show strain from the moment this president  ordered Israel to accept Palestinian demands in a peace deal as he pledged American support for human rights in the Middle East...

(circa 2011)

Putting it mildly, our "close relationship" has been nothing short of  uncomfortable -- from leaving Bibi all alone at the dinner table (circa 2010)  ...to the downright snubbing the Prime Minister's visit to Congress just two weeks ago -- when pleading on behalf of the safety of Israel just as the United States  is in the midst of encouraging a more closer, kinder, diplomatic relationship with terrorists -- The Islamic Republic of Iran.   What?

.....as we collectively ask ourselves "what does it say?"  makes a sudden comeback.

The Obama Administration has been undermining and straining this relationship from day one to day 2251...(that's just ball-parking btw).

It's as if the "close relationship" is merely staying together on behalf of the kids, and we all know how awkward that can be for the obligatory reunions, holidays, and birthdays -- let alone the every day ...from family dinner to dealing with conflicting ideas of child rearing.

Needless to say, it's going to get uglier.  No use even hiding the animosity anymore, right New York Times?

So here we are -- having done a fairly bang up job self-destructing what was once formidable and sound..... built upon common ideals and dreams for the future in front of the entire world -- ground zero requires diplomatic relations to begin again, only same as it ever was.

[The reality is, Obama and Bibi never had a chance....that being the one-sided, ideological and callused opinion of One Barack Hussein Obama.]

I'm pretty sure having another baby is out of the question.

Make it a Good Day, G

It's Just About a Boy and a Letter Stating the Obvious Thing

Dear America,

funny.

President Obama is embarrassed for the Senators who signed the Open Letter to the Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran....

Read the OPEN LETTER, here.

Did you read it?

Did you?

Cuz if you did read the Open Letter, you would walk away going WTF?  What is the big deal?  There is nothing here but a reminder to the "Leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran" as to how our government works as to agreements: what is binding and what is not, is at the crux of the checks and balances system and keeps order.

The Letter was non-threatening. 

And aside from the fact that only republicans signed it....The Letter was non-partisan.

The Letter was simply stating the obvious -- emphasizing the CONSTITUTIONAL non-committal aspects of an agreement that really isn't an agreement at all!

The president should be the one embarrassed!

Want proof?  

"Yesterday" we were discussing the former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton and her propensity to lie through her teeth -- and that was fun.  But today, let's go to her replacement: John Kerry.

Mr. President:  Are you as embarrassed of your very own Secretary of State who, in the last couple of days, has concurred with the 47 Senators? 

Let's go to the headline at the Washington Post....

Even John Kerry says the Iran deal is not legally binding [Updated]

okay.

SO call me Just a Girl, but if “we are not negotiating a legally binding plan" --- then what are we doing?

And the president is embarrassed for the Senators?

Seriously?

Did the president actually read the letter?  

It's harmless; besides, it's just as harmless as whatever the Secretary of State John Kerry said anyway:

 "We've been clear from the beginning: We're not negotiating a, quote, legally binding plan," Kerry told the panel. "We're negotiating a plan that will have in it the capacity for enforcement. We don't even have diplomatic relations with Iran right now."

We don't have "diplomatic relations with Iran right now" and yet we are relating with them diplomatically?

What's embarrassing is watching my country, this administration, negotiate with terrorists -- a tireless, oppressive, ideologically Islamic Extreme  regime --  just for the sake of creating a political legacy of this presidency.  Hmmmmm.  I wonder what the value of a non-binding legacy is going for these days?  (It's a good question.)

Me thinks President Obama is really just embarrassed that we are all well aware of what a really bad deal this really is!   And what happens when a community organizer gets embarrassed?  He goes to the Alinsky rule book and starts playing the ridicule card.  duh.

What's embarrassing is the trailer quote of the president, as a teaser for an upcoming interview scheduled to run on Vice News on Monday (and plucked from Politico just this morning):

“I’m embarrassed for them. For them to address a letter to the ayatollah who they claim is our mortal enemy, and their basic argument to them is ‘don’t deal with our president ‘cause you can’t trust him to follow through on agreement,” 

Yeah, cuz that's exactly what they said.

Oh okay, Mr. President Thin Skin.

Poke fun at them all you want, but that snippet does more to diminish the office and influence of an American president more. What are you twelve?

And more than that --  you don't see the Iranian regime as an enemy -- an enemy against the United States, against Israel, against peace in the middle east, against women, against gays, against human rights, and anything else the "leaders of the Iranian Republic of Iran" do not agree with?  really?

Let's go another direction entirely --

What's embarrassing is having our president yucking it up with Jimmy Fallon and slow jamming the news...like this.  [oh, it's funny.  it's cool.  it's very funny...but presidential?]

What's embarrassing is having a couple of our Secret Service guys show the world  just how protected we keep our president and the president's house.  Wow.  And from another angle. WowWow.  

and on that note...

Make it a Good Day, G

It's a Catch Me If You Can Thing

Dear America,

so posting has been a game of cat and mouse this week...I get into position and begin, then something catches my eye, and off I go on a wild goose chase; or it's been a sit and wait -- waiting to get just the right angle, the right thread, the right way to go -- to get myself fully committed to something so that, for the most part, everything comes off almost second nature.  And it just flows. 

It's the way I like to do the day.

If anything becomes a great struggle, I will just stop and hold up -- and just maybe, totally delete what would otherwise be a pretty good thing going.  Divine inspiration sometimes takes some time.

It's not like there isn't enough going on around here, right?

I mean, geeze, "Selma" came and went and I didn't say a thing.  And I wanted to, believe me.  If you happen to have the strength to read the transcript on the president's say there, go here.  A link to the transcript is embedded deep in the middle of his monologue on  who "we" are.  It comes long after bitching about "the popo" -- for all intents and purposes from Ferguson to Fresno;  and coming shortly before making it sound like voting rights are currently at the top of his agenda ...having not changed one bit since the day he was born (in a year long before Selma).

But let's go to something that he said that actually rings true:

"First and foremost, we have to recognize that one day's commemoration, no matter how special, is not enough.  If Selma taught us anything, it's that our work is never done.  (applause) The American experiment in self-government gives work and purpose to each generation."

exactly.

We've talked about this so much ....

GOOD self-government is the cornerstone of America's exceptional system of order -- from the Rule of Law itself, to how we relate to each other in society, individually!   It's nearly all we really need -- good, decent, responsible, positive, self-government!  Hello!

And as such, it just so happens to be one of the greatest individual responsibilities, along with a plethora of duties,  in order to make it so and make a good society grow.  What happens when good self-government seems elusive, hard to come by?   Look around.   Welcome to a generational breakdown of understanding and grasping such a mandate, America's requirement of good self-government.   Cat meet mouse.

Ah Oh.  

Oh no.

Stay focused G.

Selma is not the topic today.

Don't go all blurred lines now, girl.  [Even though the president got all bluuuuurred lines in his speech...as always.  He says one thing, means another; or better, says one thing, then contradicts it in the next.  His remarks are full of it all the time. And it's exhausting.  And it's sad.  And it's not what where we are going today, G....]

right...

At the intersection of good self-government and the next presidential campaign, we find Hillary.

First,

and foremost,

she's a liar.

And what a set up.

She handed out the questions for "journalists" to ask, and then she answered them.

Here -- from Politico -- we have a taste of the Hill of yore:

Many questions will be raised in the coming days, but for now one looms largest: How could so smart and seasoned a political actor, perhaps the most scrutinized public figure in America, have been so blind to eventual appearances about the way she handled her email? According to 1994’s Hillary, it all goes back to that Rodham upbringing: “I was raised to really believe that what was important was what you thought about yourself and how you measured up to the standards you set for yourself,” she explained in April of that year, breaking a steady stream of dogged financial detail to pause and recollect her parents’ words: “‘Don’t listen to what other people say. Don’t be guided by other people’s opinions.’”

Well she cares what Americans think of her now, huh.  And she's desperate for your vote (maybe later).

For a gal who out of "convenience" chose to go against company policy and merge personal email with government email [upon her own server, no less]  -- measuring up to her own standards seems to be an afterthought now.  oops.

“After her work-related emails were identified and preserved, Secretary Clinton chose not to keep her private, personal emails that were not federal records,” her office said, in a defiant nine-page explanation for the unusual arrangement that has put her under political fire.  [For more from The Guardian, here]

And as if, 

as if she and Billy-boy communicate on email all the time...[hard to do when Bill doesn't even mess around with it, and we all know how Billy likes to mess around].  

So she stands up there and says out of convenience, she didn't know how to juggle more than one device, blah blah blah...and yet, just last month, she's gloating, coming clean, if you will, telling the world that she has both an Apple AND a Blackberry.  what?

and happen to love this part, (thanks, Slate) as she does a pretty good job thwarting trust and respect across the board:

“There are reasons when you start out in Washington on a Blackberry you stay on it in many instances. But it's also — I don't know, I don't throw anything away. I'm like two steps short of a hoarder. So I have an iPad, a mini iPad, an iPhone and a Blackberry."

so did she or didn't she...

Did you delete anything then, Grandma, or not?   

And wow, check out all the devices....

She's a liar.

If she is so intent upon living up to some kind of standard -- you would think keeping her worlds separated would have been a no-brainer. 

Oh that's right... 

"I opted for convenience to use my personal e-mail account — which was allowed by the State Department — because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal e-mails instead of two."

This excuse she pulls out of her Prada bag doesn't even make sense!

And besides, are we done yet-- I have another appointment, what difference at this point does it really make?.......

“I believe that I have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private."

I'm untouchable. 

Catch me if you can, she dares.

Oh and we will.

Can you even believe the AP today?

Can you say lawsuit, little miss State department?

I know,  It's nothing to write home about.  Nothing will come of it.  Hillary and Bill have skirted the law(s) for years; sometimes using Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, sometimes making up their own rules, sometimes heeding no rules at all, sometimes breaking rules all around, sometimes blaming some rules for other rules being broken, sometimes just blaming it on the convenience of it all.   IT's second nature for them.

It's awfully convenient to delete things, not remember things, make up things, hide things, plant things, and simply top things with a whole lot more things, just to make it all that more difficult to follow,   And it's a classic radical at play.

IT'S NOT GOOD SELF-GOVERNMENT, okay.

It's a game of cat and mouse decades in the making.

We shall overcome, right?

Make it a Good Day, G

It's a Boom Time Thing

Dear America,

today is about 4 things...maybe 5...

FOUR THINGS YOU CAN'T RECOVER:

the Stone after the throw.

the Word after it's said.

the Occasion after it's missed.

the Time after it's gone.

anonymous

and one more:

the Bomb after it's dropped.

well, I watched it.

I wouldn't miss it for the world -- 

--  given the momentous occasion, a world leader having his third visit speaking before America's Congress 

--  given the highly anticipated argument and choice of words he would make on behalf of freedom and liberty and peace... not only for Israel -- not only for the benefit of the Middle East -- but bearing in mind the full glory of the natural progression taking place in the moment, recognizing his message cascading the globe like a stone's throw ripples in time.  It's immediate and without a second thought. boom

Of course, between the moment he entered the chamber  -- to a house on it's feet -- all the way to the very end -- he was met with bipartisan support and enthusiasm and respect and applause.  What was it, like forty something standing O's!

You know, just a girl has just another thought; President Obama could have avoided diplomatic embarrassment by first of all, showing up -- not missing the freaking huge occasion!  And second, perhaps not acting like a petulant child before, during and after the speech heard round the world!   Grow up! 

[John Boehner has done ONE thing right; and that one thing was taking advantage of Bibi being in town for AIPAC and asking him to spend a little time before Congress. But for all I  know, perhaps Bibi RSVP'd to Boehner before committing to AIPAC...who really knows which came first,  as a plethora of chickens and eggs come to mind.]

No bother. Let's move.on.org.

The president went with seeming totally dumbfounded, markedly unaffected by Bibi's lack of "any viable alternatives."  And went on and on and on with his usual nothing to see here... he's offering nothing new...in an un-mistakable mocking of an  opponent - ally.  An ally who is being surrounded in the region from almost all sides, as we watch the moves made by Iran around the region... gifting weaponry and bombs and support to the Iraqi military with the expectation of nothing in return, right. Just out of the kindness of their hearts.  so sweet.

Jennifer Rubin, of the Right Turn column @ the Washington Post, gives us a tight response on the president's response to all of it.  Check it out, here.  It even includes a video stream of democrats coming out of the chamber and heading straight for the podium to commence the international backstabbing of a "friend forever" "mean it" moment with a string of partisan one-ups-man-woman-ship.  Am I right, Nancy?

And speaking of bomb throwers,  here's the catch  on the whole centrifuge reduction plan... written into the really, really good deal made by Obama. [Because, you know, President "if it wasn't a good deal,  I wouldn't be making it" Obama said so.]

Here's some reassurance just to back that up:

“What I can guarantee is that if it’s a deal I’ve signed off on, I will be able to prove that it is the best way for us to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon,”

President Obama said.

wow. captivating.   me thinks he needs to work on the arrogance factor next.

For another great take on Bibi's words of warning, go to my happy place @ the Patriot Post.  Just click HERE.

For the full transcript of Bibi's speech, go HERE.

For me, little old G, I like this part:

Ladies and gentlemen, I've come here today to tell you we don't have to bet the security of the world on the hope that Iran will change for the better. We don't have to gamble with our future and with our children's future. We can insist that restrictions on Iran's nuclear program not be lifted for as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and in the world. 

Before lifting those restrictions, the world should demand that Iran do three things. First, stop its aggression against its neighbors in the Middle East. Second... Second, stop supporting terrorism around the world. And third, stop threatening to annihilate my country, Israel, the one and only Jewish state. Thank you. 

If the world powers are not prepared to insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal is signed, at the very least they should insist that Iran change its behavior before a deal expires. If Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions would be lifted. If Iran doesn't change its behavior, the restrictions should not be lifted. If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country.

exactly.

Iran tells us who they are both in their words and actions.  It is no great secret.

From Bibi's world to ours  --

Thank you, America. Thank you for everything you've done for Israel. My friends, I've come here today because, as prime minister of Israel, I feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people: Iran's quest for nuclear weapons. We're an ancient people. In our nearly 4,000 years of history, many have tried repeatedly to destroy the Jewish people. Tomorrow night, on the Jewish holiday of Purim, we'll read the Book of Esther. We'll read of a powerful Persian viceroy named Haman, who plotted to destroy the Jewish people some 2,500 years ago. But a courageous Jewish woman, Queen Esther, exposed the plot and gave for the Jewish people the right to defend themselves against their enemies.

The plot was foiled. Our people were saved. Today the Jewish people face another attempt by yet another Persian potentate to destroy us. Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei spews the oldest hatred, the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology. He tweets that Israel must be annihilated -- he tweets. You know, in Iran, there isn't exactly free Internet. But he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed. For those who believe that Iran threatens the Jewish state, but not the Jewish people, listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, Iran's chief terrorist proxy. He said: If all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.

I love that cultural conundrum elevating the fraud underfoot  -- "he tweets...You know, in Iran, there isn't exactly free Internet.  But he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed."

Bibi is pretty handsome, and oh, so clear; more important,  he knows who the enemy is.  

And he seems pretty sure about how Iran should behave in order to be even considered a viable entity to even discuss viable alternatives within a framework of viable negotiations in the first place.

He doesn't even picture them worthy of having discussions of any kind until they change their ways.
 
He stands up for Israel and will not negotiate with terrorists, no matter how civil they seem to be face to face across a table with their fingers crossed underneath.

He doesn't trust them one stinking bit.
And to that end, history fully supports this position 100%!

So here we are.

President Obama believes he can resort to Iran to fix his ISIS problem.

President Obama believes Bibi is wrong and he is right; and, just as a reminder, said, “What I can guarantee is that if it’s a deal I’ve signed off on, I will be able to prove that it is the best way for us to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.”

I feel good about that.  DO you feel good about that?  

He -- President Obama -- SAID  he will be able to PROVE that it is the best way for us to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon. Period...you know...that being said, IF we get a deal that the president can sign off, that is.  



so there. 
boom.  
end of story 
(for today, anyway).


Make it a Good Day, G