New Republican Party: Smart @SarahPalinUSA And @RealDonaldTrump Versus @SpeakerRyan And GOP Establishment

Sarah Palin is so smart. Idiots mock Sarah Palin because they don’t like her speaking voice, or her manner of speaking, or her education outside the Ivy League. The idiots think Sarah Palin is an idiot. But Sarah Palin is so so smart.

Yesterday Sarah Palin even outsmarted us. In our previous article we suggested if a big name Trump supporter, joined by every Trump supporter, donated money to Paul Ryan’s primary opponent Paul Nehlen – that would send the necessary message to Paul Ryan and his ambitions to run for president in 2020 by sabotaging Trump in 2016. Sarah Palin trumped us. Sarah Palin will do more than just send Paul Nehlen a check:

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin announced on Sunday she will work to defeat Paul Ryan in his Republican primary.

This came after Ryan would not endorse the Republican nominee Donald Trump for president.

Sarah Palin says Paul Ryan will be “Cantored”:

Sarah Palin will work to defeat House Speaker Paul Ryan by backing his primary opponent in Wisconsin, the former Alaska governor told CNN’s Jake Tapper.

Palin said in an interview that airs Sunday on “State of the Union” that her decision was sparked by Ryan’s bombshell announcement to Tapper last week that he wasn’t yet ready to support Donald Trump, the Republican presumptive nominee. Palin endorsed Trump back in January.

“I think Paul Ryan is soon to be ‘Cantored,’ as in Eric Cantor,” Palin said, referring to the former Republican House majority leader who was ousted in a shocking upset in 2014 when challenger Dave Brat ran to his right in a Virginia primary.

“His political career is over but for a miracle because he has so disrespected the will of the people, and as the leader of the GOP, the convention, certainly he is to remain neutral, and for him to already come out and say who he will not support is not a wise decision of his,” Palin continued.



Sarah Palin got what smart people get: results.

Ryan says he would step down as convention chair if Trump asks

Sarah Palin did Donald J. Trump a solid. Trump’s hands are clean on this because he did not coordinate with Palin on the very clear threat to Speaker of the House Paul Ryan. Trump can proceed in good faith to his Thursday meeting with Paul Ryan. Trump should listen to Paul Ryan then conclude the meeting with a firm “go to hell”.

Speaker Ryan wants to neuter Trump. It’s what we call Trump without Trumpism”:

When Paul Ryan declares that the GOP “standard bearer” should bear the GOP standard what Paul Ryan means is “Trump without Trumpism”. Paul Ryan will tolerate Donald Trump only if Trump does what loser Paul Ryan commands. “… Trump had yet to prove he shared the conservative values and principles necessary to be the party’s standard-bearer” means Paul Ryan wants Trump to be the GOP establishment chump. Trump without Trumpism is what the GOP establishment and Paul Ryan demand.

The GOP establishment goal is to sabotage Trump and the new emerging Republican Party so the ancien régime can maintain control and maintain their privileges. The ancien régime will do nothing for the American people other than continue the disaster of policies which weaken American workers with low wage policies and turn America into a garrison state for international taskmasters. Trump rejects all that.

This is where we elevate Sarah Palin to “very smart” status. Sarah Palin was merely “smart” when she Kabonged the treacherous Paul Ryan with a threat, not only to his Speakership, but to his very existence as a legislator. But Sarah Palin must be considered “very smart” because of what Sarah Palin sees, that we saw long ago, and that the GOP establishment only at this very late date begins to perceive.

We, Sarah Palin, and a few others see that there is a New Republican Party rising. Pretty boy Paul Ryan and the GOP establishment want to abort the birth of the New Republican Party.

That is what this election cycle is about. You can’t “Make America Great Again” without a new political establishment. The New Republican Party, built with the bones of the Obama destroyed Democratic Party of old, is rising.

THERE CAN BE NO PEACE BETWEEN DONALD J. TRUMP AND THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT. FOR THE NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY TO RISE AND MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT MUST DIE.

The GOP establishment knows of their death to come. So the ancien régime dreams fevered dreams and new plots to stop their own funeral.


There can be no peace. The GOP establishment must be killed. Consider, both major political parties for their own selfish reasons, seek to impose illegal immigration amnesty, common core, disaster trade policies such as TPP. Both parties are in cahoots on these issues. Donald J. Trump is against illegal immigration amnesty, common core, disaster trade policies.

The GOP establishment wants to sell the notion that the problem with Donald J. Trump is one of “tone” and bombastic “personality”. But the GOP establishment’s problem with Donald J. Trump is one of policy. That’s why there can be no peace. One must die for the other to live.

Donald J. Trump is against what both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party want to impose on this nation. Recall that many of the abominations of the Obama gangster government were birthed by Republicans. TARP, Common Core, bailouts, trade deals – were authored by George W. Bush and then co-authored by Barack Obama. ObamaCare? It used to be called RomneyCare.

Donald J. Trump is against what both the Democratic Party of Barack Obama and the Republican Party of George W. Bush have imposed on American citizens. The American people are against what the Democratic Party of Barack Obama and the Republican Party of George W. Bush have wrought. That’s why there is a New Republican Party rising.

Donald J. Trump, aided and abetted by the voters, will bring about a realignment – a New Republican Party. Sarah Palin will help birth the New Republican Party.

Apocalypse Yesterday: Sarah Palin’s Voice, Donald Trump’s Power, Ted Cruz’s Teddy Bear Problem

Update III: Conservative intellectuals to issue manifesto denouncing Trump. In a special all-Trump edition of National Review! It’s over for Trump now gals and guys. This should put Trump over the top even in Hawaii and Massachusetts come November.

Trump couldn’t pay for that much help from National Review if he owned the magazine, and ordered every story to praise him in pages perfumed with scents from Araby.

Is Trump the luckiest man alive ever??? On Saturday Ted Cruz will try to stop the death spiral of his campaign in Iowa with Glenn Beck! Glenn Beck people, Glenn Beck! Glenn Beck will bring more TEDdy bears for Cruz to distribute to illegal immigrants while TEDdy Cruz talks about how tough he is on illegal immigration. Zonkers Bonkers!

Speaking of illegal immigration, how much fun do you think Donald J. Trump will have with the up to now secret arrest of Marco “Tony Montoya” Rubio? It’s a Jeb Bush opposition research dump on Rubio but Trump will get all the laughs from this one (remember that last minute story about George W. Bush’s arrest record).

Luckiest man alive. Maybe Barack Obama will give a speech devoted to Trump hate too and get Trump over 90% of the vote.

———————————–

Update II: Shock Iowa poll from CNN: Trump leads Cruz by 11, Sanders leads Hillary by eight. Ted Cruz supporters who ignored our analysis have found an answer to the facts on the ground as they face reality: Maybe Trump really is quietly running Cruz off the field and he’s gearing up to run the table in all 50 states. Not enough horse tranquilizers in the world.. Horse tranquilizers! Thorazine can be found in Iowa in ample amounts.

Thorazine for the Canadian backers as reality bites. What about Hillary supporters? For the Brooklyn brains of Hillary2016 who still think the Obama third term strategy is smart – we suggest they get off the LSD.

——————————————-

Update: Confirmation of what we wrote below comes from the first real good Iowa poll (not these) since the debates and the Trump v. Cruz and Hillary v. Sanders wars broke out. Holy Guacamole!!!:

Donald Trump holds a commanding lead in Iowa as Sen. Bernie Sanders takes control of the Democratic race in the critical first-in-the-nation voting state, according to a new CNN/ORC poll released Thursday.

Trump leads Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who is in second place in the GOP race, among likely Republican caucus-goers, 37% to 26%. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida, is in third at 14%, the only other Republican in double digits. Ben Carson failed to register half of Rubio’s support and is in fourth place at 6%.

Sanders, meanwhile, has opened up an eight-point lead over Democratic rival Hillary Clinton, leading her in Iowa 51% to 43% among likely Democratic presidential caucus-goers.

The full impact of the Sarah Palin effect has yet to be felt in Iowa. This is the best case scenario for Donald J. Trump we have written about before anyone else: Trump wins Iowa then runs the table to become the early nominee. Hillary loses Iowa which leads to a death march against Sanders and the multiplying problems of more candidates and that yet-to-be-revealed candidate, behind the tapestries with the knife, which will be revealed at the convention – to stop Hillary. Get used to saying “President Trump”.

———————————————–

Get over yourselves. What you feel doesn’t matter. What you think doesn’t matter. Unless you’re in Iowa your thoughts and feelings don’t matter. The ball is now in Iowa. The roulette wheel is spinning. Your thoughts and feelings will not move that little ball and get it to land in your favored slot. Get over yourselves. And don’t speak too soonFor the wheel’s still in spin – And there’s no tellin’ who that it’s namin’ – For the loser now will be later to win – For the times they are a-changin’.

After the “he won’t run” then “he’s not serious” then “he has no support” then “he can’t beat the others” then “he can’t stay on top” then “he will fade” then “the establishment candidates can’t beat him but another outsider will” we’re now at “Cruz will be different than Walker and Carson ’cause he will win” and right back to the risible “it’s over for Trump”. Donald Trump was supposed to once again lose in Iowa. Then the Apocalypse arrived.

Donald Trump was supposed to lose Iowa to Scott Walker, then Trump was to lose to Ben Carson, then Trump was to lose to Ted Cruz. Donald Trump had other plans. What Donald Trump feels and says matters because he can influence where that little ball lands. That’s all yesterday was about. Sarah Palin was about winning Iowa. Donald Trump’s Cheshire cat smile was about winning Iowa. Everything that happened yesterday was about winning Iowa. It’s all about Iowa right now. Whether we or you or the woman on the moon feel good about Iowa as the lead state or think that is bad, does not matter. It is.

After Iowa it will all be about New Hampshire. At that point all your feelings and thoughts won’t matter – unless you vote in New Hampshire. Then the feelings and thoughts of Iowa won’t matter at all. Right now, Iowa matters. If you live in Iowa your feelings matter, your thoughts matter. Everyone else: get over yourselves – your thoughts and feelings don’t matter. Capiche?

That does not mean we cannot try to understand what is happening. Unless you are a candidate for president or a voter in Iowa, or someone hired by one of the candidates or volunteering for one of the candidates, all you can do is try to understand what is happening in Iowa. Feelings and thoughts are not worth one bit of damn if you are not in Iowa.

The Sarah Palin Apocalypse of yesterday was all about Iowa. If Sarah Palin helps Donald Trump win Iowa then, as we wrote yesterday and even earlier, it’s over – but not for Trump. If Trump wins Iowa Trump wins the nomination. If Hillary on the same night loses Iowa then we think Trump is elected president months from now.

Let’s understand what is happening. There’s really not much to add to what we have written before. But every time we have to explain. Let’s start with Ted Cruz supporters who are livid with Sarah Palin. Let’s make this as clear as possible once again: Ted Cruz has no chance of being the GOP nominee. It’s either Trump or Jeb!

The GOP establishment might try to squeeze Rubio in if Jeb continues his death march to oblivion but it is either Trump or Jeb. All Ted Cruz can accomplish is join the list of all the other “surge” candidates (recall when we wrote that Carly Fiorina would surge from the low single digits to the high single digits then back to the low single digits?) propped up by the GOP establishment to take down Trump – but Cruz will not be the GOP nominee. Get that through your thick skulls. Ted Cruz will never ever be the GOP nominee. It’s either Trump or a schlub chosen by the GOP establishment.

As we wrote in August of last year:

Is there anything dumber than a Ted Cruz supporter? Well, maybe a Carly Fiorina supporter. Maybe a Ben Carson supporter. [snip]

Some of the dummies will find what we say provocative. But take it from those of us who attended the 2008 Rules and Bylaws Committee of the Democratic National Committee. [snip]

Hey, dummies, why do we call you dummies, especially you Ted Cruz dummies? We call you dummies because you think that once Trump goes away your candidate will rise and maybe have a chance to win. That’s so stupid. Your candidates don’t have a chance. The fix is in. We think Ted Cruz supporters are especially stupid because they think that the establishment figure most hated by the establishment due to his personality and obnoxiousness (which we do think should be admired by the way) won’t be swept away with ease by the very forces that have tried with all their raw power and vitriol to destroy Donald Trump.

We have to mock any and all supporters of candidates who say “oh, I like so-and-so,” “oh, so-and-so is so inspirational,” “so-and-so candidate is really blah-blah-blah and I really think that he/she has a strong chance to win this thing,” or the dumbest of all “I just want a candidate that can win and so-and-so is it!” Hardy-hardy-har-har – LOL – ROTFL – Ha!

The fix is in dummies. Only one candidate can win now other than Jeb Bush. Like it or not it is Trump or Bush.

Since we wrote that article last year, as “it’s over for Trump” was still the mantra of Big Media, Donald J. Trump has pretty much smashed Jeb Bush. But the ancien régime will plot and not go quietly. Jeb Bush is a moldy peach completely rotted after weeks in the heat but he is still the establishment’s moldy peach. The moment Donald Trump is removed, the moldy peach is the meal. Eat dogs!

Ted Cruz thinks he is a shiny apple who could be nice to Trump, then at the last moment push Trump aside. Do you laugh or cry at such foolishness?

Ted Cruz has had a really rough day yesterday. Add to a lawsuit filed in Texas by a Democrat lawyer questioning Cruz’s natural born status, an avalanche of bad news. We side with Cruz on ethanol subsidies but the savage attack by the very popular Iowa governor made headlines in the only state that matters and is more important than what we think and feel.

Sarah Palin, like the force science terms “gravity”, pulled it all together yesterday. The assault of bad news against Ted Cruz reached crisis levels. The news coverage “medium is the message” made a lie of the claim that Sarah Palin did not matter. If Sarah Palin’s endorsement did not matter, why did it matter so much on every communications media on earth?

We’ll take a moment to comment on Sarah Palin’s physical voice – which is what many settled on as a consolation prize to mock Palin. Yeah, Sarah Palin’s voice is a high pitched nightmare. So is Hillary Clinton’s “screech”. Guess what? Women have voices that hit high registers and the louder they get the more painful it is at times. But we hear “why don’t they take voice lessons to lower the screech?” Then these same people will say they want “real” “authentic” voices, not manufactured voices. But, then voice lessons, right? If you don’t like the candidates put through the “makeover” process and turned into manufactured overly processed messes, then don’t ask for voice lessons. It’s a problem for women. It’s a long term problem for women. At the same time screechy voices are annoying and… well, we don’t know what to say about all this. It’s unfair and we should recognize our unfairness. We do know that Sarah Palin’s powerful political voice is a problem for Ted Cruz:

Say what you will about her, but Sarah Palin always did have great political timing.

Palin’s specialty is upending the news cycle, or “kinda stirring things up a little,” as she put it in Iowa on Tuesday. [snip]

Some will say Palin won’t help Trump much. She has, after all, faded from the public eye in recent years as her stunts grew less political and more profitable. [snip]

But the naysayers misunderestimate Palin’s unique appeal—and that of her chosen heir, Trump. In a normal election year, Donald Trump’s three marriages and his casinos would discount him amongst the social conservative, largely evangelical Iowa Republican primary electorate. But this is a base that isn’t looking for a peacetime nominee. They’re looking for a wartime nominee and the enemy is Washington.

If battle with the establishment is your goal, there is no greater ally than Palin, who has made a very lucrative career out of being the bane of the Grand Old Party’s existence. Just ask Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, who, Trump noted in the news release announcing Palin’s endorsement, once said that he “would not be in the United States Senate were it not for Gov. Sarah Palin. … She can pick winners.

Cruz is vying for the anti-establishment mantle and in recent weeks overtook Trump in Iowa polls. Palin’s endorsement comes the same day that Iowa Gov. Terry Branstad, once an establishment man who got elected, in part, with Palin’s help, said he hopes Cruz is defeated in Iowa.

Palin’s endorsement could help reassure conservatives wavering over Trump’s somewhat liberal record and, as Cruz put it in the last debate, his “New York values.” And, as Palin herself noted, she brings even more heightened attention, media coverage and notoriety to Trump’s campaign, which has hardly been lacking for any of those things. Her campaign events with Trump will vastly overshadow those of any other candidate for the rest of the week.

“Mr. Trump, you’re right. Look back in the press box. Heads are spinning. Media heads are spinning,” Palin said with glee, circling her right index finger around. “This is going to be so much fun.”

Fun is probably not the word much of the Republican Party, including rival Cruz, might use.

Today, as Sarah Palin continued her march through Iowa alongside Donald J. Trump, more bad news for Ted Cruz:

FEC complaint filed against Ted Cruz for undisclosed loans in 2012 Senate campaign

The left-leaning group Texans for Public Justice filed a complaint Tuesday alleging that Ted Cruz purposely hid more than $1 million in loans from major banks during his 2012 Senate campaign.

The allegations mirror details uncovered last week by The New York Times, which found that Cruz had failed to report loans from Goldman Sachs and Citibank to the Federal Election Commission, as required under federal campaign law.

It is a big deal,” said Craig McDonald of Texans for Public Justice. “He left the voters of Texas in the dark as to who was underwriting this campaign.”

Cruz is railing against the big banks and Wall Street, and yet he hid the fact that CitiBank and Goldman were actually providing him the money to run the campaign,” he said.

To all the attacks against Ted Cruz the response from the Ted Cruz campaign has just been announced. It is a catastrophic response. It is a catastrophic response for Ted Cruz. This will not help Ted Cruz, but rather will implode his campaign in Iowa and everywhere else:

Glenn Beck to appear with Cruz as he swats at Trump

Conservative media personality Glenn Beck will make appearances with Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz on Saturday in Iowa, ABC News reported late Tuesday.

The news came shortly after Beck took to Facebook on Tuesday to attack Cruz’s rival Donald Trump and Sarah Palin, the 2008 GOP vice presidential nominee who endorsed Trump the same day.

Why is this Beck move a bad move for Cruz? Well there is that business about Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin’s Downs Syndrome child. Cruz better have a lawyer’s briefcase full of why attacks on Sarah Palin’s kid is not a problem. Where Glenn Beck will hurt Ted Cruz the most is what we will call “the TEDdy bear problem”:

Ted Cruz Joins Glenn Beck to Deliver Soccer Balls, Teddy Bears and Food To Illegal Immigrant Kids

Just when you think things can’t get any crazier with the illegal alien invasion of the United States through our porous southern border, it does. The hullabaloo occurring because of “children” crossing the border, which the mainstream media touts as the majority of crossers in opposition to actual fact, is producing controversy between upholding the law and breaking the law. Glenn Beck is taking soccer balls and teddy bears along with meals and clothing to the Texas border to “help” these children using his own money and money he solicited from his followers. The surprise in all of this is that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is now joining with Beck at the border on Saturday to “feed, clothe, and provide toys for illegal immigrant children.

Isn’t that special? Teddy bears from Ted. Ted Cruz’s record on amnesty for illegal immigrants is the focus of several attack ads already. Get ready for the TEDdy bear ads.

TEDdy bear attack ads against TEDdy bear Cruz? Will that work? What we think or feel about illegal immigration or amnesty does not matter right now. What do the people of Iowa think? The pro-amnesty Des Moines Register reported yesterday:

Iowa proves hard place for immigration reform message

The Republican hopefuls who have spent time at the top of the Iowa polls this cycle — Trump, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas and retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson — have made their opposition to so-called amnesty for undocumented immigrants a key part of their platform. Republican candidates who support allowing some sort of path to legal status have struggled to get traction. [snip]

As the presidential campaigns got underway, the candidates argued whether U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants are bona fide U.S. citizens, while deploying the derogatory term “anchor baby.” The term accuses women of crossing the border illegally to give birth, thereby conferring citizenship on the baby and providing advantage under U.S. law to other family members seeking legal residency.

Conservative favorites like Cruz are running on anti-amnesty and pro-border-security platforms.

“People are fed up with empty talk,” Cruz told the Arizona Republic. “We have a crisis on the border. The federal government is not doing its job.”

There’s a crisis on the border and Ted Cruz came armed with TEDdy Bears.

Glenn Beck in Iowa will revive Ted’s Teddy Bear problem. We suppose Beck and Cruz will plead they are “bleeding hearts” like the liberals they mock. But we imagine Donald Trump will have something to say and do with this ammunition. Think Trump will use this ammunition? You betcha!

Since he announced, Donald J. Trump has been savaged by the left, the right, the center, and Big Media. Donald Trump has been attacked by just about everyone and he has not only survived, Trump has thrived. Think anyone else on the GOP side could withstand what Trump has withstood?

Donald Trump has shown the political establishments and Big Media the power of his message. Ted Cruz has a teddy bear.

Goldman Sachs? #Hillary2016? @TedCruz? #MGSP??? – Today The World Ends If Sarah Palin Endorses @RealDonaldTrump!!!

Update: Here we go: Palin to endorse Trump. It’s the Apocalypse!!! Not since David Bowie won the Melody Maker poll for top artist has there been such glee and envy.

Jeb Bush gets Lindseed Lohan, er Lindseed Graham, er, Lindsey Graham from South Carolina to endorse him and bring his dozen supporters into the fold. Trump gets Palin. Sarah Palin. Mama Grizzly.

Think Sarah Palin in Iowa with Trump is not important? Get a grip. This is monumental. For a short while there Trump trailed Cruz in Iowa. Then Trump began his Cruz bruise. Cruz went down like a hooker in the park.

Today Trump does two things. Once again he demonstrates his campaign is smart, swift, and prepared – the best of all campaigns. For a while Trump said he had endorsements he would unroll, today Trump unrolled which proves this was well planned. Today Trump stomped on Cruz with Sarah Palin’s high heels.

Trump also proved, once again, in a humongous way, that he is a master Big Media manipulator able to make Big Media dance to his tune, not the other way around. Trump controls the narrative and not the Obama Party the Republican Party nor the Big Media party can wrest that power from him. Brilliant! Trumptastic!

There will be those that try to skunk this endorsement. But Sarah Palin still commands loyalty from many and her past endorsements have helped those she blessed. And please do notice that no other endorsement has garnered this much attention this election season. And what great timing!

Still think Sarah Palin’s endorsement is a blah? Still think that “yeah, this might secure Trump Iowa, but so what?” Well, think again.

If Sarah Palin today secures an Iowa victory for Donald J. Trump in effect today is the day Donald J. Trump becomes the de facto Republican nominee for president. Still not impressed?

If Donald J. Trump wins Iowa, he wins New Hampshire, and Nevada, and South Carolina, and Super Tuesday, and Florida and the nomination and with it the hostile takeover of the loser GOP is complete.

Still not impressed? If Donald J. Trump wins Iowa and the nomination Hillary still wins right? Wrong. Trump wins the nomination as fast and furious as we think, this does not bode well for Hillary2016. Why? Did you see the latest poll from New Hampshire with Bernie Sanders at 60% against Hillary at 33%?

Picture: Trump wins Iowa and all the early states and almost immediately wins the GOP nomination officially. Hillary manages to lose Iowa and New Hampshire and as the New York Times writes today, has a long slog to maybe eventually get the nomination that Barack Obama intends to deny her. Now do you see why today is a monumental day?

This might be the day that Trump won the White House.

——————————————-

Trump: Please join me tomorrow in Iowa for a major announcement featuring a special guest. Tomorrow is today and today the world ends!

Today we expected to write a smart little thing about the destruction of Ted Cruz via the DemDebate this past Sunday. Consider, at the Dem Debate Bernie Sanders attacked Hillary Clinton for the hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees Hillary was paid by Goldman Sachs.

Before Sunday the Goldman Sachs attack spear was thrown against Ted Cruz at the GOP Debate. At the GOP Debate Donald Trump schlonged Cruz because of the million dollar loan obtained from Goldman Sachs by Mr. and Mrs. Cruz – so that Ted could fund his senate campaign. The additional crouton in this Goldman Sachs soup was the fact that Ted Cruz’s wife Heidi Cruz made her living strolling the halls of Goldman Sachs for pay. It didn’t take long before some nasty wags tongued out the epithet/cry “Heidi Ho”. For shame!

The very smart Heidi Cruz deserves respect even if she has, well, um, New York Values. She’s a smart woman, investment manager, but when did that stop anyone from smearing a talented smart woman?

Her background in finance has proved useful: Quite at ease asking for large sums of money, Mrs. Cruz makes as many as 10 calls a day seeking the maximum contribution couples can make to the campaign.

“The $10,800 contributions is my lane,” she said.

Inside the campaign, Mrs. Cruz has built a model that seems lifted from Wall Street, with donors labeled “investors” who are privy to “quarterly investor meetings” to discuss the “product.”

She also helped recruit an important fund-raiser, Lila Ontiveros, after Ms. Ontiveros left Goldman Sachs.

At times, the dual role of Goldman executive and political spouse has attracted attention, tugging the firm’s name into contentious political debates. For example, when Mr. Cruz helped cause a government shutdown over President Obama’s health care law, Mr. Cruz was pressed into acknowledging that he was covered by his wife’s Goldman plan, valued at more than $20,000 a year.

And this month, Mr. Cruz said his 2012 Senate campaign had failed to properly disclose large loans from Goldman and Citibank, muddying the couple’s tale of having poured their life savings into the race.

Last spring, Mrs. Cruz took an unpaid leave of absence from Goldman, immediately focusing on fund-raising for the campaign.

As Darth Vader once said, “impressive, most impressive.” An incredibly talented woman with the grandest of commercial New York Values.

Ours was to be an excruciatingly proper discussion of how Hillary Clinton’s Goldman Sachs connections both helped and hurt her and that Ted Cruz and Heidi Cruz were about to experience a proctology examination the likes of which Hillary Clinton has endured for many a day.

But Darn That Trump.

Our explorations of the designer halls of Goldman Sachs, the art collection of same, has now been eclipsed by the advanced firepower of the Donald Trump death-star. In other words, Donald Trump has once again seized control of the news cycle, with what might or might not be an earth shattering announcement or maybe just a run of the mill, for Trump, endorsement. It started innocently enough:

Join me on Tuesday, January 19th at the Iowa State University Hansen Agricultural Student Learning Center in Ames, Iowa! I will have a major announcement and a very special guest in attendance. You will not want to miss this rally!

M.Joseph Sheppard, a smart politics watcher, a master tweeter and website owner, as well as long time Sarah Palin supporter/observer got things a blazing:

Is Palin Trump’s Mystery Guest? What Is Known So Far

I would of course caution that all this is speculation but there are some major commentators who have given a degree of credence to the concept-we shall see. In the meantime;

FreeRepublic has a feature up which links to a private jet that left Anchorage Alaska at 11;14 a.m. Alaska time and arrived in Des Moines today.

There is a lot of speculation on the site that Governor Palin might have been on board.

Hells Bells, we assumed the mystery date was Mike Huckabee. It would be the smart move. Huck has no chance of winning. Dislikes Cruz. Wants to at least influence the selection of the GOP nominee. Is tired of the second string kiddie table debate. So Huckabee it is, we thought. But we were never any good at Mystery Date (which we have only played in our imagination anyway).



Open the door for your Mystery Date, sigh.

So who will it be? Huckabee? Falwell Jr.? who says great things about Trump but denies he is the Mystery Date?



Or Grizzly Mama? We don’t know, we would say we can hold our breath until it happens, but darn it, we wanna play. We wanna win, Mystery Date.

The clues came hot and heavy. First the private jet. The aircraft company. Clues from Tulsa to Ames. Obligatory pictures of Trump and Palin together at the pizza summit. Big Media Trump/Palin hater Mark Halperin with gasoline for the fire: Where is Sarah Palin???

Trump hater Guy Benson reached for the liquor bottle – bourbon, which proves you should never drink something stronger than you are. Hannity watchers weighed in. Maybe the Mystery Date is just “big” not “yuge”. The pro-Ted Cruz Steve Deace made some claims about the Mystery Date but when those claims fell through he declared Pretty much everybody I know now believes Trump’s special guest in Iowa tomorrow night is now going to be Sarah Palin. Expectations setting or preparation for a Vodka binge?

This could be Mama Grizzly Sarah Palin getting back at Cruz lover Glenn Beck who has insulted both her and Trump. Or it could be MGSP putting the Cruz back in the bottle which she helped uncork when she endorsed him and made him a star. Or it could be MGSP does not like Goldman Sachs. Or maybe MGSP wants to nuke Ted Cruz for other reasons cause her endorsement would nuke Teddy boy. Or it could be MGSP really really liked that pizza place Donald J. Trump took her to when he was her Mystery Date.

If Grizzly Mama Sarah Palin is Donald J. Trump’s Mystery Date, the world will end. Twitter will melt. The Sun will be blotted out from the sky.

We’ll know at 3:00 p.m. Goldman Sachs time; 5:00 p.m. Iowa time.

Watch And Learn #Hillary2016: Donald Trump V. Fox News – PLUS – China! – Iran!- PLUS PLUS PLUS – Our Very Big Big Big Question for Fox News, Megyn Kelly, Chris Wallace, And Bret Baier – PLUS PLUS PLUS Why Does Donald Trump Call So Many People Stupid Losers???

Update II: CNN poll of Iowa: Trump 22, Carson 14, Walker 9, Cruz 8, Fiorina 7. Earthquake warning..// eart*!#qu**#@!&ak*(^%3e ”\\/wa##rn(*&ing… new Io*&$wa poll*&^)$^^. Bush is at 5 along with Rand Paul and Rubio. Establishment election fixers for boy Bush are a’skered. Hold me closer tiny dancer.

————————————–

Update: Echelon Insights post-debate poll: Trump 29, Carson 10, Fiorina 9, Rubio 9, Bush 9. Call him “Zombie Trump” because the GOP establishment and Big Media put him in a coffin, nail it shut, bury him, and still… Zombie Trump. Lots of caveats with this Patrick Ruffini online poll based on Googled information, and Trump is actually down a few statistical noise points from the last Echelon, but still Zombie Trump walks, talks and is fresh as a daisy – confirming all the recent polls that Trump is still tops. The news from this poll? Look at the man for whom the GOP establishment tried to fix this primary election. Bush is 20 points behind Trump. Call the medics!

————————————-

Let’s start with our “very big big big question for Fox News, Megyn Kelly, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baier”: Does Fox News or do any of you have email? or Twitter? or assistants? or texting capacity? or cell phones? or phones? or access to the internet? or Facebook? We hear you do have such advanced technology and have many assistants at work for Fox News. Which leads to a whole lotta other questions.

Now, we know that Fox News wanted to bait Trump to anger so that the guards waiting off stage could come in and perp walk The Donald off the stage. We already wrote about that. We quoted the L.A. Times quoting Bret Baier about the well crafted strategy to ignominiously dump Trump in front of millions after Trump fell into a Cecil the lion type well crafted trap. We know about the anti-Trump strategy, but doesn’t some form of decency and respect as a “fair and balanced” news organization compel a slight change in strategy when a big news event occurs?

Before 8:00 p.m. on debate night (the debate started at 9:00) a rather astounding event occurred. This event was massive in impact, had many implications for Obama, Hillary2016, Republicans, Republican candidates for president, the 2016 elections, war, peace, Europe, the Middle East, and of course impacted the economy and just about everything else. The shocking non-shocker is that this event was a total surprise yet not a completely total surprise and therefore a lot of people anticipated this event, feared this event, or hoped for this event, but in any case were on the lookout for this event. Well before the debate began this event occurred. Fox News viewers, all 24 million lured by Donald Trump’s appearance, heard not a beep or a peep about this stunning event.

The event? Democratic Senator and presumed to be the next leader of the Senate Democrats Chuck Schumer declared his opposition to Obama’s give-Iran-the-nuclear-bomb deal. Move-on immediately attacked Schumer as did James Fallows on Twitter – all well before 8:00, an hour before the debate. Chuck Schumer has long been considered THE vote in congress that could block Obama’s treachery because Schumer wields a lot of influence as a Jewish member of Congress and of course that little bit that he is the Senator from New York. Oh, and on the House side Elliot Engel joined Schumer to oppose the Obama gift to Iranian Valerie Jarrett and the haters of Jews and Israel.

Did Fox News viewers learn of any of this on the night when fifty million eyeballs were tuned on Fox News? No. Not a word. Thomas Sowell, not a Trump fan at all, denounced the debate “moderators” because of their “disservice” to the country on the Iran issue.

Megyn Kelly did not think this was worthy of a question to the Republican candidates for president. Neither did Chris Wallace who frequently indulges himself with foreign policy on his Sunday TV show on Fox News. Bret Baier also did not think this news about Iran merited a mention let alone a question to the assembled presidential candidates for the Republican nomination.

There was an Iran question buried in the middle of the debate. But imagine if the very first question from Bret Baier was an announcement about the Chuck Schumer opposition to Obama’s Iran deal and the question was “Raise your hand if you agree with Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer that the Obama Iran deal is bad.” Would have led to an entirely different night, right? But the strategy was to dump on Trump and not even a world shaking event would be allowed to distract from that main mission. Or we could be wrong and Fox News does not have texting, email, assistants, or breaking news gathering capacity.

The viewing public and Donald Trump saw the attempt to trash Trump. Unless the viewer had political motivation(s) or was in favor of another candidate and enjoyed the Fox News alliance to destroy Trump and advance the candidate of choice it was apparent to all that Fox News structured (Bret Baier’s word) the questions to take down Trump.

Donald Trump noticed and that’s why Donald Trump went to war against Fox News. Trump has been the star of a “reality show” and dealt with the assaults from tabloid media. Trump knows that how you “structure” (Bret Baier’s word) a debate or a reality show will determine the outcome. Trump saw the threat and instead of ignoring the threat he threatened back.

Now, many say Trump should just have let it all go and stuck to his issues. That was the advice of now removed Trump advisor Roger Stone and even Rush Limbaugh. To be frank, we would prefer Trump stick to the issues. We don’t think the attacks against Megyn Kelly, Chris Wallace, and Bret Baier are the course we think is wise. Not our preference. But at the same time we do think that Donald Trump was wise in his attacks against Megyn Kelly, Chris Walace, Bret Baier, and Fox News.

Why is Donald Trump’s war on Fox News wise? Because presidents and presidential candidates do not get to determine the issues. They can only pick and choose which to run on. But then some issues sort of creep up on you or jump on you. Picture the next president who wants to base his/her presidency on domestic issue X. But then in the first week in office Iran explodes a nuke. Continue with domestic issue X, or wake up and address the issue that just jumped on you. Presidential candidates that say “we must stay focused on the issue of blah-blah” while the public wants another issue addressed are stupid losers.

A president comes into office and wants to do X. But then H happens and all hell breaks loose. The president that persists with X and ignores H is going to get in trouble. There is something to not getting distracted, but sometimes what you think is a distraction, is the distraction that people want addressed.

The GOP establishment wanted the issue to be X. The GOP establishment did not want to speak about illegal immigration. Donald Trump spoke about illegal immigration and the public responded. The GOP establishment is not happy because a candidate came forth that spoke about what the public wanted to hear, not what the GOP establishment wanted to hear.

Donald Trump was smart enough to see that Fox News and the political establishment (as we define it that includes both political parties, lobbyists, Big Media, etc. etc.) was out to get him. The public saw that Big Media and the establishment were out to trash Trump. That became the issue the public wanted addressed. Was Trump really tough enough? Would Trump take on his “allies” on Fox News? Would Trump defend himself thereby giving the public confidence that Trump would defend the country? Or was Trump a tough talking schlemiel? Trump gave the public what the public wanted and thereby saved himself from the plots and schemes of Big Media and the GOP establishment.

So Trump went to war. It was a bloody war. In the end peace reigns. But it was a peace won through strength. Donald Trump won the war on Fox News because Trump stood strong.

The vast technological apparatus of modern political warfare targeted Donald Trump and Donald Trump won.

Trump was accused by Rich Lowery of “whining.” Donald Trump, like a queer on Gay Pride day took the “queer” and turned into into a boastful “Queer And Proud” affirmation:

“Well I think he’s probably right, I am the most fabulous whiner. I do whine, because I want to win,” Trump said on CNN’s “New Day” when host Chris Cuomo asked about Lowry’s remarks in a New York Post column.

I am a whiner, and I’m a whiner and I keep whining and whining until I win. I want to win for our country, and I’m going to make our country great again,” Trump said on CNN.

“Our country right now is a debtor nation, we have airports that are third-world airports, we have roadways that are falling apart, we have bridges that are coming down and that are unsafe,” Trump added.

The fun bit of the “whining?” It was on CNN, not Fox News. Build up CNN, ignore Fox News was the Trump strategy and it worked. But no one should think that while the GOP establishment waged all out war against Donald Trump, that Donald Trump waged all out war. Donald Trump was actually kinda nice.

Donald Trump did not once play the race card against the Red State Gestapo that disinvited him to their rally. Trump could have noted in a loud voice that Red State did not invite Ben Carson to the event at all. “It was racism” Trump could have baited. Trump likewise could have highlighted in Big Media appearances the sexist attacks against Sarah Palin by Fox News that Bristol Palin wrote about:

It’s official. I used to use this blog to point out how liberals use the “outrage industry” to manipulate people and keep their power. Now Republicans are just as bad.

By now you’ve undoubtedly heard that there’s a guy named Erick Erickson, of RedState, who disinvited Donald Trump from a gathering of conservatives because, as he put it, “there are even lines blunt talkers and unprofessional politicians should not cross. Decency is one of those lines.”

Want to learn some “lessons in sexual and political decency” from Erickson? Here are three: [snip]

And we get the Fox moderators asking questions that the New York Times applauds? Please. Let’s don’t use the Democratic “war on women” talking points when we have ISIS to worry about.

Mark Levin said the debates were an “embarrassment as far as I’m concerned… while the New York Times and CNN praised the event, I considered it an exploitation of the process, which is supposed to inform the American people. Not gotcha questions, not gossip… I think the American people are owed an apology.

Oh and before we get off the topic of Fox News and the fact that they are “oh-so-shocked” at the supposed sexism of Donald Trump… here’s a little perspective.

Back in 2010, Chris Wallace joked about having my Mom sit on his lap during an interview. In 2011, Roger Ailes said, “I hired Sarah Palin because she was hot and got ratings.”

Fox and Erickson need to get off their high horse on how outraged they are NOW about sexism and decency.

No, Donald Trump did not go nuclear, but he could have. Donald Trump waged smart war against Fox News. What Trump did was he focused the mind of Roger Ailes on what could happen.

The next GOP debate in September is on CNN. Trump will get that debate ratings as he did last week. CNN can utilize the next debate to raise their ratings. Pre-debate, debate, post-debate, CNN can use the debate to become a news network not the silly station it is now. Trump was willing to help CNN and Roger Ailes saw that. Ailes blinked. Now Trump can get back to other issues.

Peace through strength. It was a great example of how to deal with Iran, ISIS, China, etc. It was presidential.

Speaking of China, who is the candidate that has been talking about China’s manipulation of it’s currency. Who is the candidate that constantly talks about China’s devaluation of its currency which hurts America? Who is the candidate that alerted the world best about the latest China currency devaluation? Um, Trump. The issues that Trump has chosen to highlight are the issues that matter and that the public understands matter and wants addressed.


Trump owns the China issue because he warned and his warnings continue to prove correct:

Presidential candidate Trump: China devaluation will devastate US

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump on Tuesday said China’s devaluation of the yuan would be “devastating” for the United States.

“They’re just destroying us,” the billionaire businessman, a long-time critic of China’s currency policy, said in a CNN interview.

They keep devaluing their currency until they get it right. They’re doing a big cut in the yuan, and that’s going to be devastating for us.” [snip]

China has been a frequent theme for Trump since he entered the 2016 presidential campaign, promising to be a tougher negotiator with Beijing in order to bolster the U.S. economy.

“We have so much power over China,” he told CNN. “China has gotten rich off of us. China has rebuilt itself with the money it’s sucked out of the United States and the jobs that it’s sucked out of the United States.”

The markets agree with Trump. The same Trump that has attacked ObamaTrade policies. The same Trump that sides with unions against the Chamber of Commerce on ObamaTrade – unlike most if not all other candidates except for Saint Bernard.

Maybe now that Trump has won the war against Fox News there will be a “fair and balanced” discussion about how correct Trump has been about China and currency devaluation.

Trump won the war against Fox News when Roger Ailes capitulated and called Trump. Trump then appeared on Fox and Friends (but did not discuss Megyn Kelly) and will appear on Hannity as well. Ailes promised that Fox News coverage will be “fair and balanced” and Trump won. Trump’s victory is bigger than it appears.

Now that Trump has trumped Fox News he is catnip for all news outlets who see the opportunity to exploit the rift to get themselves a little bit of The Donald and those juicy ratings. Read this and weep Fox News:

The feud seemed to thaw Monday after the network’s chairman, Roger Ailes, reached out to Trump directly to clear the air.

“I assured him that we will continue to cover this campaign with fairness & balance,” Ailes said in a statement.

Trump said on Twitter that Ailes had assured him he would always be treated fairly by the network.

“As far as I’m concerned, I’m fine with it,” Trump said in a freewheeling, 30-minute interview with CNN’s “New Day” when asked about the flap after concluding his interview with Fox.

The CNN conversation was much more heated, as host Chris Cuomo pressed Trump on his lack of specific policy proposals since declaring his presidential run. His campaign has said it plans to unveil new policy plans soon.

“They want me to come up with a 10-point plan, a 14-point plan, a 20-point plan. It doesn’t necessarily work that way,” said Trump, who argued that, in business, flexibility is key.

Asked about how he would achieve his goal of simplifying the tax code, Trump responded: “Here’s what you can do: You can have a fair tax, you can have a flat tax, or you can leave the system alone, which is probably the simplest at this point, leave the system alone and take out deductions and lower taxes and do lots of really good things, leaving the system the way it is.”

“And I know exactly what I want to do, I just don’t want to announce it yet,” he added. “I’m just not prepared to tell you right now.” [snip]

On both shows, Trump refused once again to rule out a third-party run.

We’re going to keep the door open, we’re going to see what happens,” he said on Fox. “I want to run as a Republican But I do want to keep that door open in case I don’t get treated fairly.”

The medium is the message. Notice how Trump made news on CNN even as he returned to Fox News? Trump now has both Fox News and CNN as options. If one screws him, he turns to another. If the Republican establishment screws him there is another option. Want to know our experience with billionaires? Two trains running. Billionaires always have an escape route. Billionaires always want another option. Billionaires and successful people always have a two trains running strategy. If one train stalls, they hop on another. It’s the art of the deal. It’s how to win.

What Donald Trump is doing is exactly what we advised Hillary Clinton to do to MSNBC in 2008. Instead we got one single solitary Hillary quip taking down Chris Matthews to his face when he asked Hillary to come to his show. Hillary should have blasted MSNBC and rallied her troops to her side with the same savage fury Donald Trump supporters have rallied to Donald Trump.

All this leads us to a question: Is anyone in Brooklyn watching The Donald? Will Hillary2016 learn anything from Donald Trump’s victories? The troubles for Hillary2016 are mounting and her response is to issue more position papers and garbage no one is reading or listening to. Those position papers really helped against Obama in 2008 didn’t they? To borrow from Olivander from Harry Potter books: The issues choose the candidate, the candidate does not choose the issues.

We hope for an answer from Brooklyn headquarters someday that is congruent with reality and the issues people care about. We won’t hold our breath for the answer. We do however have an answer to our question as to why Donald Trump calls so many people STUPID LOSERS?

Rick Perry has run out of money, can’t pay his staff, so Perry can continue to call Donald Trump a “cancer” because no one cares anymore, he’s out of the running. Rand Paul has decided to turn his entire campaign into an attack Trump careening tricycle.

The rest of the candidates and their supporters don’t realize that it’s either Trump or Bush. There is no other. Carly Fiorina is now fluffed by Big Media and the GOP establishment because fluffing Jeb Bush has not worked. So Jeb will sit back and Tweet. Fiorina and Carson or whomever will be fluffed in turn before they are snuffed. Fluff then snuff. Fluff then snuff – the GOP establishment strategy once Trump is dispatched. It’s an attempt to stop Trump using various squirrel candidates, divide the opposition, then having stopped Trump, Mitt Romney Jeb Bush is last one standing. Fluff and snuff. Fluff to snuff Trump, snuff Trump, then snuff them all. Jeb wins without Trump.

So want to know why Donald Trump calls so many people STUPID LOSERS? Because they are.

PC Blues: Yellowbelly Erick Erickson Of Red State Bans @RealDonaldTrump From #RSG15 Because Donald Trump Is Not Politically Correct

Update: Bernie Sanders is now effectively a hostage of #BlackLivesMatter. Sanders has the PC Blues. The people that went to hear Saint Bernard could not do so because of three politically correct leftist criminals. These are the wages of leftist politically correct speech codes and criminal coddling. Trump would have had them arrested. Jeb Bush and Erick Erickson would have gone the Saint Bernard PC route.

————————————-

Breaking: Trump out at #RSG15. Yeah, Donald Trump is having a “binders full of women” Mitt Romney moment as the establishment right borrows PC speech codes from the establishment left to destroy anti-political establishment Donald Trump. Friday night on CNN Donald Trump attacked Mr. Chris Wallace and Megyn Kelly by stating blood was coming out of their eyes as they smeared Donald Trump during Thursday night’s debate. Now things have become twisted as they usually do when Big Media protects its own.

Those that deplore Donald Trump’s exquisite use of English can go to Hell. For too long the American People have needed a major figure to attack Big Media with the same nastiness Big Media employs. For too long the American People have needed someone to stand up and tell the unvarnished truth for everyone to hear.

Now Donald Trump is telling the truth and attacking Big Media. Instead of applause from those that decry speech codes, hate speech laws, the politically correct stranglehold that declares certain issues out of bounds, Donald Trump gets attacked. That the attacks come from alleged conservatives who have made careers decrying the leftist PC culture should infuriate freedom loving Americans.

When Donald Trump responded with verbal fists against the attacks by John McCain the accusation from the PC police was that Trump had insulted veterans. That failed to destroy Trump so the establishment tried again.

When Donald Trump defended his use of language in his years long war against Rosie O’Donnell and declared war on politically correct “tone” sentinels such as Megyn Kelly who tried a “war on women” war on Trump that failed too. So the establishment tried again.

When Donald Trump swatted blood-sucking mosquito Rand Paul at Thursday’s debate the accusation from the PC police was that Trump had insulted the hearing impaired. That failed so the establishment tried again.

Now the accusation from the PC police is that Donald Trump has attacked Megyn Kelly unfairly and in a sexist and misogynist way. It’s the “war on women” war on Trump.

Hypocrites! Vipers brood!

An hour before midnight last night the “leader” of the website and convention “Red State” informed the Donald Trump campaign that Donald Trump was “disinvited” to speak to their Red State Convention. The leader of Red State, Erick Erickson, then invited Megyn Kelly in Donald Trump’s stead.

Those of us who witnessed the sexism and misogyny against Hillary Clinton by Barack Obama in 2008 are extra angry. We don’t recall Red State denunciations when Barack Obama said this about Hillary:

“I understand that Senator Clinton periodically, when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal,” Obama said.

We don’t recall Erick Erickson clenching his vagina when Barack Obama exploited sexism and misogyny to beat Hillary Clinton. It was the rare conservative, such as Jim Geraghty, that noted the sexism and misogyny utilized by Barack Obama against Hillary Clinton in 2008:

Okay, there’s also the time Obama, after a particularly tough exchange with Hillary, told a crowd, “You challenge the status quo and suddenly the claws come out.” And, “You know, over the last several weeks since she fell behind, she’s resorted to what’s called ‘kitchen sink’ strategies. . . . She’s got the kitchen sink flying, and the china flying, and the, you know, the buffet is coming at me.” Also, “I understand that Senator Clinton, periodically when she’s feeling down, launches attacks as a way of trying to boost her appeal.” (This one is especially benign, considering he went with “periodically” instead of “every 28 days or so.”) And when Obama offered the backhanded compliment “You’re likeable enough, Hillary” in a New Hampshire debate, some women may have wondered why we never heard this kind of jab at John Edwards or Bill Richardson.

Few on the left, other than us, spoke up clearly as Sarah Palin was smeared and attacked. The sexism and misogyny against Sarah Palin should have choked Erick Erickson but he apparently survived.

Now Erick Erickson is offended by something Donald Trump said. This Erick Erickson is offended by Donald Trump:

Thinking of showing my son a picture of AJ McCarron’s girlfriend and reminding him to be a quarterback.

The latest tribune of women’s rights is this Erick Erickson:

Fox News Host Megyn Kelly Shreds Lou Dobbs And Erick Erickson Over Women In The Workplace

Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly just conducted a heated interview with colleagues Erick Erickson and Lou Dobbs over recent controversial comments the pair made about women’s roles as family “breadwinners.”

While discussing a recent study that showed 40 percent of American households with children have female breadwinners on Wednesday, Erickson called it “anti-science” for men not to play a “dominant” role in a family.

It was something to which Kelly clearly objected when she brought the pair on Friday afternoon.

“I was offended by your piece,” Kelly told Erickson, adding that she was not an “emo liberal” that Erickson subsequently called out while addressing criticism of his comments.

“Just because you have people who agree with you doesn’t mean it’s not offensive.”



Megyn Kelly appears to be strong enough not to need big ol’ Viking Erick Erickson to defend her. Looks like Erick Erickson could use someone to defend him from her. Yet Erick Erickson decided he would protect the little woman and use the favorite trick of the left to censor and silence Donald Trump with PC police terror. So this red-faced Red State pig Erick Erickson is the new hero of women?

Here’s what happened:

Donald Trump disinvited to speak at RedState event; Megyn Kelly invited

ATLANTA — Conservative commentator Erick Erickson on Friday night disinvited GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump from speaking at an activist conference he is hosting here this weekend, citing disparaging remarks Trump made hours earlier on CNN about Fox News Channel anchor Megyn Kelly. [snip]

Trump’s campaign said in a statement that Erickson’s decision was “another example of weakness through being politically correct. For all the people who were looking forward to Mr. Trump coming, we will miss you. Blame Erick Erickson, your weak and pathetic leader. We’ll now be doing another campaign stop at another location.”

Trump’s CNN interview Friday evening instantly drew controversy and criticism after he said Kelly, one of the moderators of Thursday’s Republican presidential debate in Cleveland, “had blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever.” [snip]

He has also drawn criticism for saying impolitic things, once calling retired Supreme Court Justice David Souter an “[expletive] child molester” and First Lady Michelle Obama a “Marxist harpy.” He has since apologized for both comments.

Trump’s words about Kelly simply went too far, Erickson said Friday, making him, someone who enjoys and appreciates barbed political rhetoric, uncomfortable and queasy. And with his invited guest dominating the 2016 race, and few if any conservatives reining him in, Erickson thought he’d try. [snip]

I’ve gotten a lot of people e-mailing me telling me thank you. Reporters, conservatives, other politicians.

No surprise the political establishment is happy with Red State pig Erick Erickson.

But what really happened? What did Donald Trump say? Here is the full interview:



Colorful? Yeah, real colorful. You can just see the blood red as Donald Trump attacks both Chris Wallace and Megyn Kelly with the blood-out-of-eyes comment. The only clip played by the establishment tools is the section about Kelly, not the extended version with Trump saying Wallace too had blood coming out of his eyes. We suppose we’ll have to get a sound specialist to determine whether Trump said “her, whatever” or “her, wherever.” Whatever.

It does not explain the Red State disinvitation nor the invitation to Megyn Kelly. Is Megyn Kelly running for president? Kelly, Wallace and Baier, were all attacked as unfair by Donald Trump. We’re sure they don’t like the attacks. But they deserve the attacks especially since they had more speaking time than any individual candidate at the debate.

Remember that guy we wrote about at HotAir who swore he would never vote for Donald Trump, that Donald Trump was dead to him because of what he said about John McCain? The same guy that a few days later wrote he would vote for Trump in the general election and that he has been wrong about Trump every single time? That guy has a different take on the Red State controversy. Trump out at RSG15: another view

Everything he does is outside the normal political process. The man has taken the rule book, set it on fire and dumped the ashes on the heads of everyone else. And what seems to be driving everyone in the politico class to drink is that he still manages to stay on top. This is perhaps the reminder we all needed. There was a time when the rise of blogs was attributed to the fact that so many Americans were sick of seeing a handful of network news stars acting as the gatekeepers of how the election game should be played. Social media and citizen journalists came in like barbarians at the gates and threw down the old order. But now we’ve been doing it for so long that new media outlets such as Salem Media Group properties like RedState and Hot Air are hosting major political events like RSG and even getting in on moderating debates. (Hugh Hewitt is also part of the Salem network and will take on those duties later in the campaign cycle.)

The point is that, having reached these dizzying heights (if you find them to be such), have we begun to assume the role of the previous gatekeepers, feeling that we can define what the boundaries of acceptable behavior are? [snip]

In the end it is the public who makes the final call, and if they decide that what Trump is doing is good enough for them to keep him as their standard bearer, we were the ones who got it wrong. [snip]

[DISCLOSURE: I’d thought this would go without saying, but for new visitors it is probably worth noting that Hot Air and RedState are properties of Salem Media Group, as are Townhall, Twitchy, Bearing Arms, Human Events, and numerous other print, radio and sundry media outlets.]

Old gatekeepers, meet the new gatekeepers. Leftist PC police meet your auxiliary force the Right-wing PC police following leftist PC laws. All the forces of the establishment are armed and ready to make Donald Trump bleed for what comes out of his mouth in front of national television cameras.

Resist we must. From the left or from the right, we will resist the speech police and the censorship of politically correct control of free speech and a free people. The bullsh*t establishment “conservatives” who decry the tyranny of the establishment left want to impose the tyranny of the right using the same techniques and politically correct speech codes concocted by the left.

Although Red State uses leftist PC police law Red State is not “blue.” Red State is yellow.

A Trump -nado Hits Laredo – Big Media, GOP Establishment Worst Hit

The Trump has landed. Trumpnado continues. Yes – the massive Donald Trump plane has landed in Laredo. Surrounded by Latinos, sharpshooter Donald Trump pulls a John Wayne and moseys on down Rick Perry way. Two birds, or three birds, with one stone: Trump hits Perry, Trump hits on his biggest issue, Trump grabs the spotlight and smothers every other candidate. Triple Trumpnado!!!

In 1992 Bill Clinton was behind George H.W. Bush, and both of them were losers to the #1 H. Ross Perot. Did Bill Clinton whine? No, Bill Clinton put on dark shades, grabbed a saxophone, and went on the Arsenio Hall show and made his own luck. That’s how its done.

Are Republicans/conservatives who hate on the Trump as smart and brave as Bill Clinton? No, it’s whine all the time.

Whine all the time: Glenn Beck has turned his show into a “Trump-free zone”. In other words if you don’t like the news ban the news.

Glenn Beck is taking a page from the totalitarian left Huffington Post which has banned Trump to it’s “entertainment” coverage (the dummies don’t realize that entertainment sections are more popular with the public than political pages).

Whine all the time: GOP donors wanted Bush, Rubio, and Walker to boycott debates unless Trump was disqualified. Just try and ban Trump from the debates. He’s just the #1 guy in the GOP polls right now. The biggest reason to watch the August 6 debate has become Donald Trump. Donald Trump eating pizza with Sarah Palin opposite the GOP debate would get more viewers.

Whine all the time: AFL-CIO Controlled Union Intervenes, Cancels Trump’s Border Tour Planned by Local Agents. Agent Garza confirmed to Breitbart Texas that the national union had stepped in and insisted that the Laredo local back out of honoring Trump with the border tour. Latino Agent Garza wanted to guide Trump but he cannot be seen to tell the truth. This only helps Trump prove his points about what is happening to this country.

Why is Trump such a winner? Because he puts himself into win/win situations and avoids win/lose scenarios. AFL-CIO blocks Border Patrol agents from Trump’s border tour Trumpnado – Trump gets another illustration of what he is talking about so bravely.

Why is Trump such a winner? Consider what we wrote recently:

Shorter version of the Republican National Committee statement: “We want Donald Trump out of the nomination race before the August 6 debate and we will do whatever we have to do to drive Donald Trump out of the race and to Hell with our supposed role of being neutral.”

Where have we seen this before? Yeah, Hillary Clinton 2008. [snip]

The Democratic Party establishment succeeded in gifting Barack Obama the nomination and Hillary and Bill Clinton wandered about like drunks trying to figure out what truck hit them.

Which brings us to Donald Trump. Donald Trump better realize that he is up against the Republican establishment and that what the establishment wants the establishment gets.

So does Donald Trump realize he is up against the Republican establishment? It appears he does. Trump: If RNC isn’t “fair” to me, I’ll run as an independent. Boom! Trumpnado. If the RNC is not neutral, Trump… keeps the threat alive. [Hillary, are you watching this and learning?] Yesterday Trump was backing away from an independent run. Keep them unsure. Keep them guessing. Piaget feeding schedules anyone?

The fear-mongering conspiracy squirrel talk that Donald Trump is a Hillary plant is epic dumb. Hillary2016 would love to run against Jeb Bush. Why? Because Jeb versus Hillary means a Hillary win. Against Trump, all bets are off. 2015 polls won’t matter. Trumpnado threatens all.

Donald Trump has the Republican establishment on the run. We need our own Hill-nado. Hillary Clinton should realize the Obama Dimocrat establishment needs her and she does not need them. Until she realizes that she will be a loser.

Does Hillary Clinton Want To Be Raped? Carly Fiorina? Sarah Palin? – Meet Bernie Sanders The Rapist

The promise of Baltimore O’Malley went up in riotous flames. The Kook Left is stuck with Bernie Sanders as their man. And what a man Bernie Sanders is. Let’s meet Bernie Sanders – rapist:

Sen. Bernie Sanders’ Essay: Women ‘Fantasize About Being Raped’

In a 1972 essay, presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (D-VT) opined that men fantasized about women being abused. He also claimed that women fantasized about being gang raped.

In an article entitled “Men-And-Women,” published in an alternative newspaper called the “Vermont Freeman” Sanders shared his thoughts on male and female sexuality in ways that would cause a media firestorm if it had been penned by any current GOP candidate. Even one with as little chance at grabbing his party’s nomination as Sanders currently has.

A man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy,” wrote Sanders. “A woman on her knees. A woman tied up. A woman abused.

Maybe that is why kook socialist Sanders wants to run against Hillary. Maybe his campaign is a fantasy rape scenario of his drug addled mind. A woman enjoys intercourse with her man–as she fantasizes about being raped by 3 men simultaneously.

At conservative National Review Charles Cooke writes a smart but premature defense of rape fantasist Bernie Sanders:

And it wouldn’t just be Ted Cruz or Rick Santorum who would be asked about the essay: it would be every Republican in the race. In fact, it would be every Republican not in the race, too. Moreover, we’d see a host of think pieces on the GOP’s apparent ”rape problem”; we’d see endless Salon posts claiming stupidly that these attitudes were the product of free-market economics or a lack of gun control or of the pernicious influence that Protestantism has on the American mind; and we’d see dubious “studies” and ill-gotten “polls” commissioned to back up the message du jour. On cable news, the Democratic party’s cheaper mouthpieces would reference it over and over again. On social media, snarky memes would be made and sent around, the better to influence the low-information voters who are crucial come presidential-election season. Immediately, Planned Parenthood would start a fundraising drive. And eventually, when the drumbeat became too much to handle, the essay’s author would resign or withdraw or commit some form of political seppuku.

And here’s the thing: That’s bloody awful.

Bernie Sanders wrote these words — and a lot of drivel besides – in 1972. Maybe he was young and foolish. Maybe he was a different man back then. Maybe society was unrecognizable and he had bought into all sorts of faddish psychology. Who knows? And frankly, who cares? Sure, the Democratic party would crucify a Republican for the same offense. But they shouldn’t. A society in which people are drummed out of politics for things they wrote 43 years ago is an ugly society indeed. Sometimes the best way to address hypocrisy is to take the high road. This is America: land of second chances. This is a place of redemption and of reinvention and of continual learning. Nobody honestly believes that Bernie Sanders is a sexual pervert or that he is a misogynist or that he intends to do women any harm. Nobody suspects that he harbors a secret desire to pass intrusive legislation or to cut gang rapists a break. Really, there is only one reason that anyone would make hay of this story, and that is to damage the man politically. Perhaps I’m old-fashioned. Perhaps I’m hopelessly idealistic. But until I see any sign of actual wrongdoing I’d much prefer to slam Sanders for his dangerous and ridiculous politics than to delve back into his past and embarrass him with a long-forgotten opinion. I certainly hope that my fellow conservatives will feel the same way, even if they do not enjoy the same courtesy from their adversaries.

Charles Cooke prematurely ejaculated absolution for Bernie Sanders. As Cooke himself writes about what Bernie Sanders wrote “Who knows” if Bernie Sanders still holds such views. Charles Cooke does not know what Bernie Sanders thinks now. Maybe Bernie Sanders like the rest of the Obama party is a turgid fortress of misogyny and woman hate. Charles Cooke does not know, but yet he absolves.

Imagine for just a moment Mr. Cooke, if Barnie Sanders wrote “Black people like to be abused. Black people want to be beaten and racial epithets spit onto their ebony faces. A black man goes home and masturbates his typical fantasy, himself on his knees. He’s tied up. Racially abused.” Would Cooke then think Sanders deserved absolution without so much as an explanation for what he wrote?

But sexism and misogyny don’t count as much as racism for the political class. That’s why in 2008 Barack Obama could talk about Hillary’s “claws” coming out once a month menses clockwork and Howard Dean could claim he never saw any misogyny until way after the election.



Maybe Bernie Sanders owes an explanation for what he wrote? Maybe what Bernie Sanders wrote merits some Big Media attention?:

Why Bernie Sanders’ Decades-Old Rape Fantasies Matter to 2016

Though written more than 40 years ago, the candidate’s remarks still offend. And if he’s a serious candidate, he shouldn’t get a pass.

The reaction to what presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders wrote in an alternative newspaper in Vermont back in 1972 about men and women with rape fantasies has, of course, been divided: His defenders argue that the article is so far in the past that what he wrote then is irrelevant, while critics feel it’s only fair to crown him this year’s Todd Akin. (Unless you’ve mentally blocked it, perhaps in the same way that Akin said women can mentally block conception following “legitimate rape,” you’ll recall that the GOP congressman, who was Senator Claire McCaskill’s Republican challenger in 2012, became his party’s poster child for how not to talk about sexual violence.)

Conservative writer Dan Joseph sounds a common theme on the right when he argues that while reporters shrug over what Sanders wrote, if “Ted Cruz or Rick Santorum wrote something along these lines—even 40 years ago—the media wouldn’t stop talking about it for weeks.” Which is incontrovertibly true.

On the other side, a piece on the feminist outlet Jezebel attempts to thread the needle, both countering and conforming to Joseph’s challenge. In that article, the whole thing is written off as the weird-but-so-what ramblings of “an aging hippie who—theory—might have been stoned out of his gourd while writing.”

But here’s the thing: There is no statute of limitations in presidential politics. And if Senator Sanders wants to be taken seriously as a candidate for the highest office, then the right answer is to note that what he wrote about rape 43 years ago, at the age of 31, is seriously messed up. [snip]

Do we in the media really only care about appalling views when Republicans and/or front-runners hold them?

Bernie Sanders is not a serious candidate. We know that. Josh Kraushaar is correct to write that Bernie Sanders is proof of how kooky the Obama Dimocrat Kook left has become. That Hillary2016 is “spooked” and therefore caters more to the Bernie Sanders Kook Left than to the voters Hillary will need in the general election is, as Kraushaar writes, the real damage a Bernie Sanders poses.

As Obama Dimocrats prepare to re-fight the losing “war on women” campaign ploy in 2016 it is time for real advocates for women to stand up and demand answers from Kook Left Obama Dimocrat Bernie Sanders. It is perverse that a fictional rape on Game of Thrones gets more attention than a leftist Kook candidate for president’s fantasy rape ruminations.

Bernie Sanders is a full tilt kook who is seeking attention and the presidential nomination. Big Media should provide Sanders with full attention regarding his rape fantasies. As Bob Schieffer on his last day as host of Face The Nation confessed about Barack Obama 2008, “Maybe we were not skeptical enough.” How about a little skepticism now? How about discussing sexism and misogyny from the kook left?

In 2008 the Obama Kook Left waged a war on a woman and every woman who disagrees with them. From Ralph Nader to Barack Obama to Bernie Sanders the Kook left is a woman-hating misogynistic corruption. Whether it is Hillary Clinton or Carly Fiorina or Sarah Palin the misogynistic war on women by the left must be exposed.

The question that must be asked: Is Bernie Sanders’ presidential run a rape fantasy?

ObamaCare Chess: Supreme Court Moves To Checkmate King

It’s political warfare on a Constitutional chessboard. On Friday the Supreme Court announced it would review the King decision. Checkmate.

The Supreme Court did not wait until Monday as it would ordinarily do to crush Barack Obama. Unlike most others, we are not surprised at all. For us, there is no Shock: Supreme Court will decide whether federal consumers are eligible for ObamaCare subsidies.

It is as we have foreseen – on the very day of the Halbig and King decisions:

We wrote about Halbig HERE. It’s a big, big, big, decision which almost surely forces an an Obama appeal to a full panel of the appellate court. Obama will win that fight because he packed the court when Harry Reid ended the Senate filibusters on judges to courts other than the Supreme Court. But then the case will go to the Supreme Court and we’re walking on the sunny side of the street and believe the Supreme Court will ratify today’s three judge panel decision. [snip]

Here’s a complication: There is another case on the same issues in the Fourth Circuit. It is likely the Fourth Circuit appeals court will rule in favor of ObamaCare. The losers in that case will then be able to appeal directly to the Supreme Court if they so choose and force the issue faster than anyone expects but still after the November 2014 elections.

How’s that for bloody good analysis? Almost immediately after we wrote that, the Fourth Circuit did exactly as we predicted. We then wrote an update to take into account the latest decision:

Update II: Well that was quick. Two hours after the Halbig decision the Fourth Circuit issued its decision on ObamaCare. As predicted below, the Fourth Circuit upheld ObamaCare’s subsidy scheme as twisted into existence by Obama. This means a split in appellate court decisions and Supreme Court review.

More importantly, the plaintiffs that lost in the Fourth Circuit now can immediately appeal to the Supreme Court and not bother with an appeal to the full panel of the Fourth Circuit.

Feel free to point out any small diddly thingamajig in which we were wrong ObamaCare supporters. Go ahead. We dare you. We double dare ya!

Our mockery of the Fourth Circuit decision added tickles when ObamaCare architect Jonathan Gruber’s videotaped statements emerged from a rathold. Gruber made it clear that ObamaCare subsidies were intended only for state exchanges.

Our brilliant, genius, Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious, analysis hit full flower soon thereafter:

We predicted that Gruber’s comments will be, either through judicial notice or part of the record, introduced by ObamaCare opponents into the judicial record.

We have been proven correct. Plaintiffs in an Oklahoma ObamaCare case have moved to supplement the record with Jonathan Gruber’s helpful comments and history. For our non-regular readers, here is a video hilarity of Gruber’s helpful comments for ObamaCare opponents:



Some would call it genius. We’ll be modest and just blush. Some of what we wrote was mundane:

Our Gruber prediction was not very daring. It was obvious.

But when others clutched their pearls at the swift Fourth Circuit decision on the same day as HalBIG we stayed fixed to the north star and well… we were brilliant in our analysis:

Less obvious at the time to all but us here at Big Pink was the good fortune of that Fourth Circuit pro-ObamaCare decision that came in two hours after the D.C. Circuit cut the guts out of ObamaCare. Our prediction? We predicted that the Fourth Circuit plaintiffs would race to the Supreme Court and skip the en banc stopover. Result? We are right again.

The Fourth Circuit plaintiffs could have asked the full panel of the Fourth Circuit to take up the case and therefore tie themselves down alongside the ObamaCare plaintiffs in the D.C. Circuit where the ObamaCare scam artists ask the full en banc court panel to take up the case. ObamaCare lawyers, it was widely presumed, would appeal their loss in D.C. to the full en banc panel which is packed with Obama appointed judges after Harry Reid destroyed the Senate and its filibuster rules. The likelihood was (although this was before Jonathan Gruber’s comments came to light) that the full D.C. panel would uphold ObamaCare and thereby end the “split” decisions in the circuits making it less likely that the Supreme Court would take up the ObamaCare HalBIG cases.

But we suspected and predicted that the Fourth Circuit plaintiffs would skip the full panel in the Fourth Circuit and instead go directly to the Supreme Court. This they did and we go to the head of the class.

Oh dear, we’re on the verge of being immodest. What will mater and pater say? But damn it to blazes, we were right and so right that old articles we wrote are as daisies fresh sprung from the soil:

On Friday, August 1, pro-ObamaCare lawyers, as predicted by most, filed their appeal for an en banc hearing before the entire D.C. Circuit panel. On July 31, however, the plaintiffs in the Fourth Circuit made their move. The “losers” in the Fourth Circuit beat the D.C. “winners” to the Supreme Court.

The writ to the Supreme Court by the Fourth Circuit plaintiffs cites their new pal “architect” Jonathan Gruber: [snip]

As we predicted the timing was the interesting aspect:

Under the court’s rules, lawyers who lose in an appeals court have 90 days to seek a review in the Supreme Court. And normally, lawyers take the full time. But in this instance, the opponents of the Affordable Care Act want the court’s conservative justices to have a chance to take up the new healthcare case in a few months so they can rule by next spring.

The Obama administration has the opposite strategy on timing. The Justice Department said it planned to ask the full appeals court in the District of Columbia to reconsider last week’s ruling by a three-judge panel. If so, that could delay a final ruling from the appeals court until next year and push off a Supreme Court decision to 2016.

By then, millions of Americans will have relied for several years on having health insurance they could afford thanks to the subsidies. A single adult with an income up to $45,960 and a family of four with an income up $94,200 may obtain insurance on an exchange at a reduced cost.

Did we ever tell you we are great at chess? Since childhood. Great at chess. And ObamaCare is a great chess game. Like Deep Blue we here at Big Pink knew how the chess pieces would move before the players knew what they would do. We wrote it is one giant political chess game on ObamaCare and that was the reason the Supreme Court would checkmate King:

We’ll address the issue of hooking Americans to ObamaCare subsidies as a political strategy below. We’ve already addressed why this line of HalBIG cases can be successful politically for the courts and that the Supreme Court will see that these ObamaCare cases are best settled outside the 2016 (and 2014) election window. Obama of course wants to attack the Supreme Court in an election year just like he so successfully used that timing to his advantage in 2012.

The Writ Of Certiorari filed so quickly, not waiting 90 days, comports with the strategy we have espoused of avoiding as much as possible an election year fight which will fill Chief Justice Roberts with angst. A non-election year ruling right after the November 2014 elections but well before 2016 is just what Roberts needs to calm his nerves.

It’s all come to pass. The Supreme Court waited to read the election returns. Now the Supreme Court will move against ObamaCare before the 2016 election and safely after the 2014 elections. ObamaCare has been hit by an electoral truck and is off to the Sarah Palin death panel.

If you doubt ObamaCare is about to die read the analysis of the Greg Sargent analysis. It’s a hoot. Obama high-priest and ObamaCare scorched earth defender Sargent unwittingly wrote the Supreme Court decision against ObamaCare even as he thought he wrote a brilliant defense for ObamaCare! Hilarius. Sargent and Gruber will eventually be seen as the ObamaCare supporters that buried ObamaCare.

ObamaCare supporter Timothy Jost is soiling his briefs with accusations that the Supreme Court is making political, not legal judgements. But the ones playing bad political chess are Harry Reid and Barack Obama with their court packing maneuvers. Chief Justice John Roberts will have to negate the Reid/Obama court packing schemes if he wants to preserve the integrity of the Judicial Branch.

The pearl clutching dummies will see a Supreme Court checkmate of ObamaCare as great for Barack Obama because it will give him an issue on which to fight. But that is a non starter. ObamaCare is hated just about everywhere. If anything a Supreme Court checkmate which destroys ObamaCare will strengthen the newborn Republican congress. Obama will have to crawl to Republicans for help to rescue his “legacy” disaster. Republicans will prove to not be in a giving vein.

ObamaCare, Ebola, they are all dancers in the Masque of the Red Death hosted by Ebola Obama.

Ebola Obama, this wretched creature who believes he is a black king is about to be checkmated by the Supreme Court. The knights, bishops, rooks, Queen, pawns, and the opposing White King will do Obama in. The name of the White King in this game of chess?

The White King is called the Constitution.

Foxy Hillary Clinton Is Playing Politics!!!!!!

Update: We wrote about this in the early morning hours. It’s why Republicans/conservatives lose. The question? Is Hillary imploding? The short answer: NO.

An imploding Hillary is premised on a notion by Jonathan Last that Hillary will be destroyed by the horrid mess Barack Obama is responsible for. It’s an argument we made a long time ago.

Our advice to Hillary then was to attack Obama and separate herself from his mess. As we discuss in our article below, that appears to be exactly the path Hillary has finally begun to walk. Instead of imploding, as we ourselves suggested HERE, Hillary Clinton is beginning to correct course. And as to Terry Gross and DOMA, Hillary spoke the historical truth and that smack-down is the tough Hillary Americans like to love.

The imploding Hillary article is further undermined by the authors of the imploding Hillary article with their quote from JustKarl Does it matter whether Hillary is imploding when the GOP’s big idea is a man in a squirrel suit?

It’s a squirrel in more ways than one. Here’s how Hillary bakes squirrel pie:

———————————————————–

Take politics out of politics! Take competition out of sports! Take sex out of pornography! Take money out of business! Take corruption out of Obama! Take conservatives out of panty-sniffing! Take deviousness out of the left! Take stupidity out of the right!

The hypocritical and devious idiots on the left along with the buffoons on the right love, just love, to criticize Bill and Hillary Clinton for playing politics. “Everything they do is so calculated… they’re so political.” Guess what – we admire a politician that plays politics. What we detest is a clod who plays politics badly.

Barack Obama is a clod who plays politics badly. Oh sure, Obama is a gussied up trollop genius at self-promotion and self-advancement. Like a transvestite hooker on a street corner Barack Obama can get the cash but once the clothes come off he can’t deliver what he promised to the customer.

Put aside the great problem for Barack Obama: Americans know his loyalties lie not with America nor the American people but with himself. That’s a great part of Obama’s problem, one that Americans sensed from the beginning, that manifested itself in demands for documentation and a birth certificate. It wasn’t, as clever Obama campaign creeps twisted it, a “racist” attack or a perception of Obama as “the other”.

The problem was that Obama advanced from nowhere having done nothing other than vote “present” on critical issues and that he expressed loathing for simple things such as buying Christmas gifts and wearing flag lapel pins. There was Obama’s Iraq speech but that was entirely “a fairy tale” told to idiots.

Having race-baited his way to the White House a smart politician would have banked his gains by releasing all the information about himself denied during the campaign and reached out to co-opt the minority in order to achieve great things. But ever the clod Barack Obama beat his chest with declarations of “I won” and publicly masturbated his ego. It was dumb politics.

Here are the wages for dumb politics by a clod politician:

“This poll is a disaster for the president,” Todd said. “You look at the presidency here: Lowest job rating, tied for the lowest; lowest on foreign policy. His administration is seen as less competent than the Bush administration, post-Katrina.”

“On the issue of do you believe he can still lead? A majority believe no. Essentially the public is saying your presidency is over,” Todd added.

A smart politician playing smart politics would not constantly be seen taking vacations and golfing especially not during international crisis explosions. A smart politician would not visit with his robot giraffe friend (we don’t mean Michelle) during an international crisis. There are those who mocked Bill and Hillary Clinton for commissioning polls on where they should vacation but who is playing smart politics and who is a boob ignoring the will of the people?

You wanna throw a good dinner party? You better poll your friends to see what they eat and drink these days. You don’t want to serve steaks and assorted meats if most of your friends have gone vegetarian. You don’t want to serve vegetarian dishes if what your friends crave is a thick steak with greasy sauce all over it. Get the point?

You want to throw a big steak barbeque you better not invite your veggie friends who will be disgusted by the slaughter. It’s smart politics on a micro level.

A smart politician playing smart politics must know what the constituents who elected her are thinking. That does not mean that a smart politician is driven entirely by polls. But a smart politician better know what the people are thinking and what the people want and don’t want. Consider FDR.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt can be considered one the biggest liars ever. FDR ran on a promise of keeping the United States out of war and as president regularly restated that the United States would not get involved in the conflagrations and horrors abroad.

But FDR privately knew that he had to prepare the United States for the real world about to literally explode in their back yard. “Brilliant politician” FDR played smart politics. FDR provoked the Japanese with embargoes that threatened to choke the empire. FDR’s “lend lease program” sold as a neighbor lending his garden hose to a neighbor with a burning house is correctly called by historian Robert Dallek “patent nonsense”.

“Brilliant politician” FDR played smart politics:

I think the lasting importance of the Atlantic conference between FDR and Churchill was that they got along, that they had a kind of mutual view of the world. They accepted the proposition that the greatest thing they had to do was to defeat Nazi Germany, that this was an absolutely crucial thing for democracy in the world. And that this blight upon western civilization had to be overcome. And that they were both committed to it and it was clear, crystal clear to both of them that this was their agenda. Whatever tactics, methods they might use, that this was their ultimate goal and they shared it and they wouldn’t lose sight of it.

Liar or leader or both? What we do know is that FDR acted in what he perceived to be America’s best interests. The same cannot be said of Barack Obama whose interest in what is good for the United States is at best incidental to his pleasures and delusions of world historical grandeur.

We rejoice every time we see a brilliant politician playing smart politics. Indeed a great deal of Bill Clinton’s charms which Republicans/conservatives refuse to see even as it stares them right in the face and bites them in the ass is that Bill Clinton is a brilliant politician constantly getting himself in trouble – and then somehow getting himself out of trouble. Millions cheer the man on the flying trapeze!

Republicans/conservatives and leftists don’t seem to recognize that this “perils of Pauline” drama exemplified by Bill Clinton is also one of Hillary Clinton’s great strengths. Why are so many Americans so supportive of Hillary Clinton even if they cannot name one single solitary Hillary Clinton “achievement”? A great part of this inchoate admiration is that Americans admire Bill and Hillary Clinton because they can take a licking and keep on ticking (pun mischievously intended).

We intended to write today about Hillary Clinton’s achievements in the State Department and beyond but Tuesday’s tour-de-force performances on CNN and Fox News deserve more discussion. You won’t find much written about Tuesday’s Hillary appearances. The DailyKooks left sulked in silence because they hate Hillary even going on Fox News let alone planting bombs in Obama’s ass. Republicans/conservatives glumly stayed mostly silent too.

Republican/conservative John Fund had some nice things to say and saw some of what we saw:

She did put some distance between herself and Obama on the IRS scandal, making it clear she agreed that any controversy involving that powerful agency should concern Americans. She implied she didn’t think it was the kind of “phony scandal” the president has dismissed it as. She called for a continued investigation into wrongdoing at the IRS but insisted it be depoliticized as much as possible. [snip]

All in all, her opponents were given no new ammunition but supporters of President Obama were put on notice that she will continue to distance herself from his policies in both subtle and not-so-subtle ways.

Obama-lovin’ Joe Trippi saw pretty much the same thing many of us did:

Trippi, like us, was surprised Hillary came off “as relaxed as she did.” Trippi also said he thought Hillary’s worst moment was on the IRS. Trippi then noted that the IRS scandal hurts Barack Obama and in no way hurts Hillary. Smart politics.



Paul Mirengoff at Powerline had nice things to say too and also noticed this:

First, it confirmed the Clinton is prepared to distance herself from President Obama.

For example, on the Bergdahl deal, she insisted that she wanted a different, broader deal, and declined to come right out and say she would have made the deal Obama ultimately agreed to. She also implied that the Obama State Department may not be doing enough to free the Marine being held by Mexican authorities.

Clinton even went so far as to lump Obama together with President Bush (and her husband). [snip]

Clinton also struggled to defend her claim that the five Taliban commanders released in exchange for Bowe Bergdahl pose no threat to the United States. She relied on the fact that the five are in Qatar and “are supposed to be constrained from what they can do, and certainly they are not supposed to be permitted to travel.”

Clinton’s resort to the word “supposed” gives the game away. And even if the supposed constraints are meaningful, they are good for only one year.

Clinton’s Obama problem came to the fore when she was asked whether she agreed with Obama that the IRS scandal is “phony.” She admitted that the scandal might be real, but defended Obama’s comment by interpreting it to mean that the scandal is being used by some for partisan purposes.

Obama is under the ReadyForHillary bus on the IRS scandal and when the Obama Terrorist Squad starts to conspire and kill – Hillary will be positioned to attack Obama on his failed Qatar Obama Terrorist Squad death deal.

On the NSA, the American Marine imprisoned by Mexico, the sexist/misogynist dudes that wanted Hillary to attack Sarah Palin, and the sexist/misognyist ageist dudes working at the behest of Barack Obama – Hillary took aim and fired:



Most heart broken Obama troll? It has to be the dude who wants Hillary to run as Obama’s third term.

We have repeatedly pointed out that Hillary should consider Obama to be radioactive Ebola. “she can’t offer more of the same, because no one wants that.”

Republican/conservative Moe Lane at his site and RedState is begging Hillary to run as the Obama third term. Moe is a scamp playing smart politics at Boob Obama’s expense:

Empirical evidence to the contrary, it wasn’t exactly my intent to unload on the poor guy who has to somehow turn five and a half years of Obama by-products into something that people might not retch at the mere sight of. I’ve been there, you see.  I know how it feels when your party has given you nothing to work with – and at least then I still had a President with a strong moral sense and a stubborn refusal to bend on the policies that he knew that he had to defend, if he wanted to avoid going to Hell when he died.  This guy doesn’t even have that, and while I will not judge anybody who callously shrugs at the author’s poor life choices I’m just a big softy sentimentalist at heart, especially since it doesn’t actually cost me anything.

But seriously: Hillary Clinton should totally run on a promise for four more years of Barack Obama.  She should yell that from every podium, soapbox, sound stage, and maybe yodel it from the top of the Grand Canyon.  No. Really.  I insist.

Moe is goofing on Hillary but more on Barack Obama’s record of ceaseless failure. Moe Lane like every intelligent Republican/conservative wants to tie Hillary Clinton to the leper. It’s smart politics.

It’s smart politics what Moe Lane tongue-in-cheek advises. After Tuesday’s romp by Hillary the Shiite left is sulking and the Sunni right is unhappy that Hillary is wiggling out of the ropes that tie her to the Ebola carcass:

During a town hall on CNN on Tuesday, Clinton was asked about a recent surge of unaccompanied minors rushing over the Mexican border. When asked what the United States should do about this predicament, Clinton endorsed deportation.

They should be sent back as soon as it can be determined who responsible adults in their families are, because there are concerns whether all of them should be sent back,” Clinton said. “But I think all of them who can be should be reunited with their families.”

We have so to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean the child gets to stay,” she continued. “So, we don’t want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or will encourage more children to make that dangerous journey.

Rub your eyes and read that again. Then there is this:

On foreign policy, Clinton did nothing to counter the prevailing notion on the left that she is far more hawkish than President Barack Obama. “I don’t think we should be retreating from the world,” Clinton said, in an implicit rebuke of the Obama administration’s unstated doctrine of global retrenchment.

She distanced herself from the present administration on Syria, noting that the White House should have armed the Syrian rebels “you know, two plus years ago.”

To the likely dismay of The New York Times editorial board, which praised the administration’s outreach to Iran on Tuesday, Clinton expressed doubts in the utility of a partnership with the Islamic Republic. “I am not prepared to say that we go in with Iran right now, until we have a better idea what we’re getting ourselves into,” Clinton said.

At the CNN “townhall” Hillary demonstrated she understands the cobra that is the Iranian theocracy:

“What they (Iran) want to do in Baghdad is basically to envelop (Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki) in the Iranian embrace, maybe even use their own troops in Iraq, as they did in Syria. That is a very difficult position to put the United States in.”

Bush made a mess, Obama made is worse. We opposed the war in Iraq because it would benefit the theocracy in Iran. Now Obama wants to make monster theocrats in Iran American allies.

Glum Republican/conservatives see Hillary happy and slipping away from the radioactive Ebola leper:

Finally, on the persistent issue of the Benghazi attacks, Clinton legitimized a congressional select committee investigation by conceding that there are several unanswered questions about that event. “There are answers, not all of them, not enough, frankly,” Clinton said. “I’m still looking for answers, because it was a confusing and difficult time.”

The former secretary of state added that “there’s a lot we don’t know” about the nature of the attack, who participated, and what their motivation was.



In a subsequent appearance on Fox News on Tuesday, Clinton answered a series of hard questions about the Benghazi attack, her role that night, and how members of Obama’s administration responded. Not once did she bristle over the nature of her interrogation, nor did she suggest, as she has in the past, that Fox hosts’ lines of questioning were motivated by partisanship.

Similarly, when asked if she agreed with the president that this and other scandals, like that involving the IRS’s alleged targeting of conservative groups with undue scrutiny, were “phony,” Clinton appeared to suggest that she did not.

“Anytime the IRS is involved, for many people, it’s a real scandal,” she conceded. [snip]

In a post-game analysis of Clinton’s appearance on CNN, former White House advisor and current Crossfire co-host Van Jones expressed concerns that Clinton may be alienating Obama Democrats with her center-left approach to a variety of pressing policy issues. These performances certainly did nothing to reassure progressives like MSNBC host Krystal Ball who Tuesday called Clinton the Democratic Party’s Mitt Romney; “tone-deaf” and “unrelatable” as she is.

Hillary Clinton is not afraid of investigations into Benghazi and the IRS. Republicans/conservatives hope at least one of those scandals will hurt her but Hillary is fearless on both.

What does smart politician playing smart politics Hillary Clinton fear? The evidence mounts that she is afraid of one thing only: being tied to Barack Obama or being seen as the Obama third term. Smart lady.

Hillary Clinton Under Attack And On Fox News

Update II: MoonOnPluto in the comments section provides coverage of the Hillary appearance on CNN. As to the Fox News interview Hillary did very well. Hillary planted a lot of time bombs against Obama in these interviews (for example calling for more investigations of the IRS scandal). Without naming Sarah Palin while answering a question about Sarah Palin, Hillary shows some sister solidarity. She also attacks age based discrimination from Obama White House dudes against Ambassador Holbrook. Here’s Part I of the interview which is mostly about Benghazi and Bergdahl:



—————————————————————————————————-

Update: Hillary Clinton on a CNN “townhall” at 5:00 EDT is sure to be asked about the news that is breaking: US captures first suspect in Benghazi attack. CNN’s “townhall” is bound to be boring. There will be questions CNN will feel they have to ask and they will ask them. But to get a sense of what CNN really wants to dish about listen to the questions they choose “from the public”.

The real show will be tonight on Fox News when two, real, tough, fair and balanced journalists (brutal Bret Baier at 6; mighty Greta Van Susteren at 7) question the unsinkable Hillary. Fox News is Ready for Hillary. Hillary better be ready for Fox News.

———————————————————————————-

It’s fun to watch Hillary Clinton lead Republicans/conservatives and leftist haters down the garden path. The Hillary Clinton book tour is underway.

The reviews of Hillary Clinton book tour week one (and now week two) are in and they foolishly proclaim the whole ordeal to be a disaster. Those that lack the courage to attack Hillary directly take a dive and proclaim the book ‘a bore without news’. The left denounces Hillary as not sufficiently Obama level crazy. Republican/conservatives miss the point entirely.

Well not all Republican/conservatives. Sarah Palin and Matt Drudge showed Republicans/conservatives how to utilize the Hillary Clinton book tour to their advantage. But instead of following Sarah Palin and Matt Drudge’s lead most Republican/conservatives took a u-turn into futility.

What did Sarah Palin and Matt Drudge do? Last week, underneath a picture of a pig nasty Barack Obama observed by a serious Hillary Clinton, Matt Drudge blasted this headline: ‘SEXISM’ IN ’08

The DrudgeReport link was to a story in Politico:



In her new memoir, “Hard Choices,” Clinton wrote that she rejected a request from the Obama campaign to attack Sarah Palin, who was then running for vice president.

“That very first day, the Obama campaign said, ‘Well, we want you to go out there and criticize her,’ and I said ‘For what? For being a woman? No, let’s wait until we know where she stands, I don’t know anything about her. Do you know anything about her?’” Clinton said she told the Obama campaign.

In response to Clinton’s revelation, Palin tweeted: “Look who fired the 1st shot on the real ‘war on women.’ Hint: it wasn’t the GOP. See this excerpt from Hillary’s book,” accompanied by a picture of “Hard Choices.”

A senior Obama campaign official said that the request for Clinton to speak was tailored specifically to Palin’s speech after McCain picked her as his running mate, in which she made a direct pitch for Clinton supporters.

Notice, Hillary Clinton’s truth-telling gave Republicans a way to repudiate the Obama “war on women” attack against Republicans. The Obama henchmen saw the danger to their 2014 hopes and tried to limit the damage Hillary Clinton inflicted on them. To this day Hillary Clinton repeats the charge every time she is asked possibly because Hillary knows that if any leftist can be found to run against her in 2016 the sexism and misogyny of 2008 will return full force against her. Only Sarah Palin took advantage of this new weaponry.

Why did Hillary do this? Aside from a potential leftist candidate running against her using sexism as a not wo veiled weapon, Hillary takes seriously her commitment to women’s rights and wants to let out a bit of the truth of what happened in 2008. A lot of purist know-nothings that supported her in 2008 are angry that Hillary did not “speak out” at the time about the Obama sexist attacks on Sarah Palin. But we all knew and it was remarked at the time that Hillary Clinton never attacked Sarah Palin.

Lots of political “observers” waited in vain for Hillary to drop a bomb on Sarah Palin in 2008 but that never happened. The purist know-nothings wanted Hillary, remember she was at that point smeared as a “racist” and has-been by Obama thugs and Big Media, to say something against the Obama campaign that Obama Big Media would discount as “sore loser talk”. Instead Hillary managed to block, at least for a while the hate driven misogynistic and sexist attacks against Sarah Palin.

All this Sarah Palin understands and that is why she began to tweet. The “war on women” strategic lie which has so profited Obama Dimocrats could be undermined and Sarah Palin went for it. If Palin dared, she would send Hillary a very public thank you and ask for a meeting to discuss Obama sexism and how to fight politically motivated misogyny.

Palin and Drudge showed the way. Instead of taking a lead from Sarah Palin and Matt Drudge the blood ran hot on one too many Republicans/conservatives who chose to refight fights they have lost, lose and will continue to lose.

So what did Republican/conservatives do instead of investing time and publicity on this potentially game changing gift from Hillary? They went for broke.

It was sad. Republicans/conservatives and the leftist loons mocked Hillary saying that she and Bill were broke and in debt when they left the White House. What Hillary said is a fact and historically accurate. Further, other than feeding a need for mockery it gains Republicans/conservatives nothing. The Hillary hating left does not gain anything from this either.

Hillary and Bill left the White House broke and in debt because of all the futile panty sniffing investigations brought about by Republicans forced them to hire lawyers and get into debt. The public still has not forgotten nor forgiven Republicans/conservatives for such panty sniffing stupidity so Republicans/conservatives are doing their best to remind the public of their panty sniffing stupidity and how they are not to be trusted with the investigative tools of government.

Hells Bells, Kenneth Starr the sniveling panty sniffing inquisitor has admitted he made a mistake in his panty sniffing pursuits. Richard Mellon Scaife and his right hand man Christopher Ruddy – the top Hillary and Bill Clinton tormentors of the 90s – are now Hillary and Bill Clinton friends and even contributed to Hillary Clinton 2008. David Brock the top Clinton tormentor now is in the Clinton camp too.

But old habits die hard and instead of helping themselves by undermining the “war on women” hogwash Republicans/conservatives undermine themselves. The self described “morons and moronettes” at Ace of Spades are featuring frequent comments in many articles about Hillary requiring a walker to prop herself for a People magazine cover photo. This all comes from a moronic article at Washington Free Beacon alleging that Hillary was using a walker. More and more stories came out about doddering ol’ Hillary and the walker. This from a party that twice nominated for vice president a guy with many heart attacks.

The morons and moronettes at Ace of Spades are having fun and using some clever mockery of Hillary photos to pleasure themselves. We get it. It’s often fun to poke fun and laugh at your opponents and that is what Ace of Spades is engaged in even while trying to keep alive a narrative of Hillary being too old and feeble to be president. It’s a waste of time but we can see the fun of having fun. It will eventually come back to haunt them when sexist pigs fighting for survival in 2014 attack them as waging a “war on women”.

Tommy Vietor and the misogynist sexist dudes of Obama 2008 will clutch their pearls at those dastard Republican/conservatives who are saying such mean things about Hillary even though they are the ones who began the “war on women” and hate Hillary more than any Republican/conservative.

Smart Republican/conservatives should be inoculating themselves and their political interests by talking nonstop about nasty sexist misogynist Barack Obama. Hey we wrote about that long ago. But somehow they just can’t help it.

As foolish and emotion driven as Republicans are, the left is much worse. Take for example the Hillary interview at NPR. We’ll just copy from our comments section:

Hillary haters think this interview on gay marriage somehow hurts Hillary. But this is the tough Hillary we like. Hillary is right on the facts and the leftist interviewer is one of those “liberals” who ignores reality. Bill Clinton signed DOMA because it was the best strategy to stop a constitutional amendment against gay marriage proposed by Democrats such as Sam Nunn. It’s great to listen to Hillary call her out:

Hillary Clinton Snaps At Radio Host In Defensive, Testy Gay Marriage Interview

Transcript: [snip]

HILLARY CLINTON: “I think you’re reading it very wrong. I think that, as I said – just as the President has said – just because you’re a politician doesn’t mean you’re not a thinking human being. You gather information, you think through positions, you’re not one hundred percent set, thank goodness, you’re constantly re-evaluating where you stand. That is true for me. We talked earlier about Iraq, for goodness sakes. So for me, marriage has always been a matter left to the states and in many of the conversations I and my colleagues and supporters had, I fully endorse the efforts by activists to work state-by-state. In fact, that is what is working and I think that being in the position that I was in the Senate, fighting employment discrimination which we still have some ways to go, was appropriate at that time. As Secretary of State, I was out of domestic politics and I was certainly doing all I could on the international scene to raise the importance of the human rights of the LGBT community. And then leaving that position, I was able to very quickly announce that I was fully in support of gay marriage and that it is now continuing to proceed state-by-state. I am very hopeful that we will make progress and see even more change and acceptance. One of my big problems right now is that too many people believe they have a direct line to the divine and they never want to change their mind about anything. They’re never open about new information and they like to operate in an evidence-free zone. I think it’s good if people continue to change.”

GROSS: “So you mention that you believe in state by state for gay marriage. But it’s a Supreme Court too. The Supreme Court struck down part of DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, which prevented the federal government from recognizing gay marriage. That part is now struck down. And DOMA was actually signed by your husband when he was president. In spite of the fact that he signed it, were you glad at this point that the Supreme Court struck some of it down?”

CLINTON: “Of course. And you know, again, lets…we are living at a time when this extraordinary change is occurring and I’m proud of our country, I’m proud of the people who have been on the front lines of advocacy, but in 1993, that was not the case. And there was a very concerted effort in the Congress to make it even more difficult and greater discrimination and what DOMA did is at least allow the States to act. It wasn’t going to yet be recognized by the federal government but at the state level there was the opportunity. And my husband was the first to say, that you know, the political circumstances, the threats that were trying to be alleviated by the passage of DOMA, thankfully, were no longer so preeminent and we could keep moving forward and that’s what we’re doing.”

GROSS: “So, just to clarify, just one more question on this, would you say your view evolved since the 90s or that the American public evolved allowing you to state your real view.”

CLINTON: “I think I’m an American, I think that we have all evolved, and it’s been one of the fastest, most sweeping transformations that I’m aware of.”

GROSS: “I understand but a lot of people believed in it already back in the nineties. They supported gay marriage.”

CLINTON: “To be fair Terry, not that many. Were there activists who were ahead of their time, well that was every true in every human rights and civil rights movement but the vast majority of Americans, were just waking up to this issue, and beginning to think about it, and grasp it for the first time, and think about their neighbor down the street who deserved to have the same rights as they did, or their son, or their daughter. It has been an extraordinarily fast, by historic terms social, political and legal transformation and we ought to celebrate that instead of plowing old ground when in fact a lot of people, the vast majority of people, have been moving forward. Maybe slowly, maybe tentatively, maybe not as quickly and extensively as many would have hoped but nevertheless, we are at a point now where equality, including marriage equality, in our country is solidly established although there where be places, Texas just to name one, where that is still going to be an ongoing struggle.”

GROSS: “I’m pretty sure you didn’t answer my question about whether you evolved or was the America public the change –”

CLINTON: “Because I said I’m an American so of course we all evolved and I think that’s a fair conclusion –”

GROSS: “So you’re saying your opinion on gay marriage changed”

CLINTON: “You know, somebody is always first, Terry. Somebody is always out front and thank goodness they are. But that doesn’t mean that those who join later, in being publically supportive or even privately accepting that there needs to be change, are any less committed. You could not be having the sweep of marriage equality across the country if nobody changed their mind and thank goodness so many of us have.”

GROSS: “So that’s one for you changed your mind?”

CLINTON: You know I really, I have to say, I think you being very persistent, but you are playing with my words and playing with what is such an important issue.”

GROSS: “I’m just trying to clarify so I can understand -”

CLINTON: “No, I don’t think you are trying to clarify. I think you are trying to say that I used to be opposed and now I am in favor and I did it for political reasons. And that’s just flat wrong. So let me just state what I feel like I think you are implying and repudiate it. I have a strong record. I have a great commitment to this issue and I am proud of what I’ve done and the progress were making.”

GROSS: “You know I’m just saying, I’m sorry – I just want to clarify what I was saying – no, I was saying that you maybe really believed this all along, but, you know believed in gay marriage all along, but felt for political reasons America wasn’t ready yet and you couldn’t say it. That’s what I was thinking.”

CLINTON: “No. That is not true.”

GROSS: “Okay.”

CLINTON: “I did not grow up even imagining gay marriage and I don’t think you did either. This was an incredible new and important idea that people on the front lines of the gay right movement began to talk about and slowly, but surely, convinced others about the rightness of that position. When I was ready to say what I said, I said it.”

GROSS: “Okay, thank you for clarifying that.” (National Public Radio, “Fresh Air,” 6/12/14)

Leftist loons will attack Hillary for all the above. But Hillary is passionately stating the historical truth. The looney DailyKooks left will join Republicans/conservatives in attacking Hillary even on silliness such as this.

Then there is Iraq. Iraq is where the Shiite Left meet the Sunni Right to attack Hillary. Consider this National Journal article:

Hillary Clinton’s ‘Wicked’ Iraq Problem [snip]

On Syria, her early support for air strikes revived liberal concern about her self-described “bias towards action,” recalling her vote for the Iraq War in 2002 that stymied her last presidential ambitions. She recently apologized for the vote in her new book.

Now on Iraq, she finds herself in a familiar and uncomfortable position between a war-weary Democratic Party on one side and hawkish Republicans eager to paint her as weak on the other. She’s tried to thread this needle before and it didn’t work well.

“The current crisis in Iraq is a reminder of the dangers Hillary Clinton faces with the Democratic base,” said Stephen Miles of the progressive group Win without War. “Today, with the threat of military action once again on the table in Iraq, … we’ll be looking to see if her recent denunciation of her 2002 vote for the Iraq War represents a true change of heart or was simply an effort to rewrite history in advance of a 2016 run.” [snip]

A policy of weakness and accommodation that came from the Obama and Hillary Clinton team is one that’s led to very serious and negative results,” said Mitt Romney, the GOP’s 2012 presidential nominee, on Fox News. “There’s almost not a place in the world that’s better off because of [Clinton’s] leadership in the State Department.” [snip]

Some analysts predicted al-Maliki’s crackdown on the Sunni minority in the country would revive a dormant insurgency, but on Thursday, speaking at the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton said the insurgents’ success was unforeseeable. “I could not have predicted, however, the extent to which ISIS could be effective in seizing cities in Iraq and trying to erase boundaries to create an Islamic state. That’s why it’s a wicked problem,” she said.

Voters will have to debate that one, to determine if it’s a satisfactory answer for someone who likely wants to be commander in chief.

ISIS’s rise in Iraq may have no American policy solution, and for Clinton, that makes it an equally “wicked” problem politically.

WOW. That’s certainly damning and Hillary Clinton comes off as a total BOOB doesn’t she? Doesn’t she? Wow! Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious! Horrible if true! Problem is… well let’s get the entire quote the author of this National Journal nonsense snipped – from an article in the New York Times Rebels’ Fast Strike in Iraq Was Years in the Making:

Now that the spotlight has shifted to Iraq, the decision by the Obama administration not to arm moderate Syrian rebels at the outset is coming under scrutiny by critics who say the hands-off policy allowed the extremists to flourish.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who argued in favor of arming Syrian rebels, said last week at an event in New York hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations, “this is not just a Syrian problem anymore. I never thought it was just a Syrian problem. I thought it was a regional problem. I could not have predicted, however, the extent to which ISIS could be effective in seizing cities in Iraq and trying to erase boundaries to create an Islamic state.”

Gee, Hillary Clinton sure sounds smart and on the job when you read the entire quote. Hillary saw that this was a regional problem not just about one country. Wow, way to go girl.

Sure, the leftist loons at DailyKooks won’t be happy ever with her. But she sure sounds as if she knows what she is talking about. Mitt Romney’s comments sound kinda stupid when you read the full quote.

Read a little more from the National Journal article in which the author tries to belittle and wave away another interesting quote by Hillary Clinton:

In a different move that now looks more prescient, she in August of 2007 called on the Iraqi Parliament to replace al-Maliki with “a less divisive and more unifying figure,” prompting an angry response from the leader.

Now, her response to the situation in the country is dependent on the man who wielded her Iraq policy against her six years ago. As a Democrat and one of Obama’s top foreign-policy officials, the strength of her foreign policy record—and by extension, her raison d’etre for a White House bid—rides on the success of Obama’s.

Read that last line and you will understand why Hillary Clinton has to begin a protracted attack against Barack Obama and his failed policies. The left will hate her and the right will be confused, but that is what Hillary must do.

We’ll be watching Fox News on Tuesday to see if Hillary Clinton says “it’s time for a change, we can’t stay the course Barack Obama is disastrously on.”