Megyngate and The Donald

This seemed like the perfect occasion to dust off the old blog and get it running again. The whole debacle has my blood pressure rising and my fingers have gotten itchy to write again, so here I am.

I turned into the debate to check out supposedly the "top 10" of what the GOP has to offer this time. Trump's addiction to being in the media every day and being constantly talked about certainly falls in line with the stereotypical politician these days. However, I think he needs a filter if he ever seriously wants to become President. He has no control over his mouth and admittedly, his lack of tact makes for amusing reality TV, it has no place in the White House. I'd like to think we can all agree on that, especially already having someone like that for the past 8 years.

Anyways, back to the debate-

Although I'm not a fan and would probably have to close my eyes if it came down to me actually voting for him, I surprisingly came to enjoy hearing when it was Trump's turn to speak. I never knew quite what he was about to say, and loved the reaction the audience gave him - loud cheers building up to a crescendo and then coming back down that hill with boo's. Certainly shook up what's normally a snooze-fest, especially for the 1st debate. He had some good ideas in there too and said what other people were afraid to say. I walked away thinking higher of him than I previously did, even though I think he won't last long.

Another thing surprised me during the debate - the amount of animosity Megyn Kelly had for him. Ok, so you don't like the guy. But you are a moderator and a journalist - you are supposed to remain impartial. You are there to ask questions so the general public gets answers and to break up fights should there occur. That's it.

 

In the above clip, she asks him about comments he's made about women in the past. Is he a pig? Probably. Has he said nasty things towards women? Don't doubt it for a second.

But then in the middle of her question, he quips, "Only Rosie O'Donnell", followed by the crowds laughter. "No, it wasn't", Kelly responds back. She began the questioning lightheartedly, but as they continue, her gaze darkens and she seems annoyed by the continued cheering/laughing behind her. She smiles like a crocodile, as if thinking that she needs to take this clown down a notch or two. She puts up a finger like a teacher trying unsuccessfully to get control of her unruly classroom, glares at him with daggers in her eyes and says "For the record, it was well beyond Rosie O'Donnell".

Not professional. At all. I even said it at the time too - "Whoa, if looks could kill! Look at those daggers she is shooting at him". And who is watching this for your opinion? No one. Go back to asking the questions.

Unfortunately, it doesn't end there - "Your Twitter account has several disparaging comments about women's looks...[...] Does that sound to you like the temperament of a man that we should elect as President, and how will you answer the charge from Hilary Clinton, who is likely to be the Democratic nominee, that you are apart of the War on Women?".

Disgrace. Hard hitting journalism, my ass. He's not on trial, Ms. Kelly, and you are not a defender of all women to go for his jugular, just because you are personally offended. You want sexism? I don't think women make good moderators. They are too emotional and have trouble staying centered. To be fair, not all men should be moderators either. The two that were with her kept their composure better, but not by much.

(Side note: poor Bernie Sanders through all of this. Everyone on that stage just cast him aside. haha)

It's not your place to judge him. He said it was one women, not all. Move on. You didn't question anyone else's motives or actions on that stage. Your current temperament isn't that of a professional journalist. And this "War on Women" crap - are there sexist people out there? Yes. Does sexism exist? Yes. But if you go looking for it and assume that every downfall in your life happened because you just because you are a woman, then yes, you will believe there's a "war" on you. Brush it off, ignore it and be successful anyway. A few off-color remarks from the Donald does not make a "War on Women".

His comments on being politically correct and not having time for it is spot on. No, we don't have time for it. Let's talk about something important. You know, something that will actually impact this country?

He even recognized how poor she was treating him and called her on it. Good for you, but not very professional. This is where their feud goes back to the sand box.

I'm not saying he's right - he's not professional either. But it's not right when you poke the bear and then cry that the bear bit you. He's Donald - fire at him and he's going to fire back. Afterwards, he came out with his now infamous remark that "You could see that there was blood coming out of her eyes, there was blood coming out of wherever".

Now I used "daggers", he used "blood". Same meaning though. I was happy to see I wasn't the only one who noticed the looks she gave him. When I first read this, I read "blood coming out of wherever" meant that she was so hostile that she had blood coming out of every pore. None of this menstruating nonsense. What kind of sicko immediately jumps to that conclusion?? I guess it could... but it's a stretch and honestly not where my mind went first.

Apparently every white male out there did though. Ew, guys, really?!?! I never once thought that he was calling her hormonal. And we all know Trump - he's not one to mince words. He says what he means and if you call him on it, he freely, unapologetically admits it. He denied it and said he meant "nose". I believe him. The man's not smart enough to say things that require that much thought or deciphering.

One would think (and hope) that in a perfect world that the squabble would end there, but no.

Erick Erickson of RedState, here in Atlanta, was holding a forum where all of the Top 10 candidates could talk about their platforms.  Enraged by Trump's comments towards his friend (that he thinly veils about being offensive towards women), he dis-invites Trump... and invites Kelly instead.  What is this? A serious political event or a whiny girls' tea party? Did I miss something - is she a candidate now? How disrespectful and catty.

Erickson first made the announcement on Twitter and then blogged about it. To further illustrate what class he has, he even made an announcement to the crowd at his little girly get-together AND played the clip for everyone!! Are you kidding me... If you were really that offended, you'd dis-invite him, let everyone know why and then be done with it. Not carry on with this nonsense. Was your event about letting all of the candidates talk or about Donald? Congrats, you gave him free press...

And then he has the gall to interview all of his guests and ask what they thought about Trump's comments. I'd be offended if I was one of them - go all the way there, thinking this is a place where I can get more of my ideas out there and all you want to do is talk about another candidate. What a waste of time.

I'd say Erickson isn't a professional journalist either, but... he never claims to be, so at least he has that going for him. He's a radio talk show host, and blogger. He has a right to talk about anyone he wishes and to invite them to his event. But geez... do you hate the guy or do you love him?? I'm confused... make up your mind. Although interestingly enough... it came out after that Erickson, himself, had also made disparaging remarks towards women. Why is it that the person who is always so "OFFENDED" by someone else's actions/remarks/etc is usually guilty of the same thing?

Anyways, so all of the other candidates have some forward in defense of Kelly and have more of less ordered Trump to apologize. Hey... all of you know that Hillary is just loving this, right? All of the Democrats are just having a ball laughing at all of your inter-squabbling. This disgrace is a perfect example of why we can't have anyone of quality run for President - they don't want to put up with this mess and it's sad. THIS is why you are losing voters.

Aaand of course it doesn't even end there. I'm embarrassed for all of you, I really am. Kelly airs her opinion below:




Kelly says her question about Trump's electability and his thoughts towards women was "a tough but fair question", enough though he felt she was "attacking him" and thought "the question was unfair". She goes on to say that he did interviews, in which he attacked her personally. Kelly claims "not to respond" but yet... here she is, responding,

She mentions that he will not apologize and proclaims happily, "And I certainly will not apologize for doing good journalism". You should, Ms. Kelly, to the American people and to the other candidates on the stage, for having to watch that abysmal display of unprofessionalism under the guise of "good journalism".  "So I'll continue to do my job," she continues, "without fear or favor". If you were doing your job, this whole thing probably wouldn't have happened. "This is a tough business", she says, breaking out that admonishing teacher voice of her's - as though Trump's problem is that he can't handle toughness. Although I do agree with one thing she did say "It's time now to more forward and let's get back to the news".

Amen.


P.S. Mark Levin, thank you sooooooo much for being apparently the only voice of reason in this whole mess. Glad to see I'm not the only one who thought the debate was a debacle.