“Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Beautiful, Hate Me Because I’m Rich”

Well that didn’t take long: the inevitable, unflattering comparison between our good Black Earth Mother Michelle and the evil white rich bitch Melania:Melania Trump is under fire for the outfit she wore in Michelle Obama's vegetable garden:

Trump's garden style is less accessible than Obama's clothes from J. Crew and Target. At $1,380 for a seemingly casual shirt, most people aren't likely to run out to copy Trump's style.

I for one was unaware that the main role of the  FLOTUS was to present “accessible” clothes to the public.

MO’s March, 2009 gardening debut get up

Now I don’t know how much that sweater-wrap thingy over the wrinkly leggings cost, but(t) to be sure, the Jimmy Choos that Lady M sported for her gardening debut in 2009 cost considerably more than Melania’s gardening debut Converse sneakers.

Jimmy’s  current model motorcycle boots are running over $1000.

So you tell me which one of these women looks more “accessible” - although that’s a trick question. It’s the Secret Service’s job to ensure that neither POTUS nor FLOTUS are ever accessible. And that’s a good thing.

For any number of reasons.

In summary: give me the $1300 Balmain shirt any day.

At least it looks like it belongs in a garden.

Linked By: Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, and BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!

FLOTUS Friday In Fuchsia

I loved the Calvin Klein business suit that Melania wore to the UN for PDJT’s speech in which he was said to have bullied Kim Jung Un.

In fact, I think I even had a suit like that back in the day. However, although it fit impeccably, I would have to put myself in the “not a fan” camp of the Madame Butterfly dress she chose for her speech on cyber-bullying.

All I know for sure is that Melania never makes fashion mistakes so I can only assume she was making a statement with this fuchsia dress the same way she made a statement with the fuchsia pussy blouse at one of the Hillary/Trump debates.

The Gucci “pussy bow” blouse alone would have said enough, but when paired with the matching trousers to create a new style “pants suit” she pretty much stuck it to everyone who needed to be stuck.

So if anyone can explain what the “hot pink Delpozo dress with statement sleeves” was all about please let me know…oh wait: maybe it’s the “statement sleeves!”

Melania, in just 2 appearances, replaced the de rigueur look of the Michelle Obama era - sleeveless, bare legged and above the knee frocks – with something altogether more appropriate.

*trigger warning*

No more pit shots!

She just made it quite okay for real women to wear slack suits again without fear of being viewed as an old washed-up feminst, and to sport dresses with season-appropriate sleeves and age-appropriate hem lines. Bless her for that. And let the Melania bullying begin.

Linked By: BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!

It Takes a Village…or Something

Daniel Greenfield’s article (h/t pointman12) is downright scary, but I think that’s his point:

The hysterical obsession with destroying Trump comes from the top down. It’s not just ideology. It’s wealthy and powerful men and women who ran the country and are terrified that their crimes will be exposed.

It’s why the media increasingly sounds like the propaganda organs of a Communist country. Why there are street riots and why the internet is being censored by Google and Facebook’s “fact checking” allies.

It’s not just ideology. It’s raw fear.

The left is sitting on the biggest crime committed by a sitting president. The only way to cover it up is to destroy his Republican successor.

A turning point in history is here.

If Obama goes down, the left will go down with him. If his coup succeeds, then America ends.

In the comments somebody named Zach says that Obama ‘never ordered wiretapping’ (“not a single time, never.”) and claims that “This article was written to just manufacture outrage from the republican base.” Ha haha ha ha…Zach, baby, the Republican base does not need manufactured articles to be outraged. The MSM, Obama and his Deep State operatives provided more than enough fodder for that. If you mean exposing their antics is creating outrage you would be correct, but that’s not the same thing.

Between Sharyl Attkisson’s corroboration regarding the Obama White House’s inclination to spy on political enemies for nefarious purposes and the unfolding of the unmasking scandal of Americans by Samantha Power and Susan Rice,

it looks like our worst fears were well founded all along. We can only pray that Mr. Greenfield proves to be prophetic:

And the Dems finally get their Watergate. Except the star won’t be Trump, it will be Obama.

Rice, Power, Lynch and the rest of the gang will be the new Haldeman, Ehrlichman and Mitchell.

And Hillary deserves more than a minor, lying, role in this scandal.

While conventional wisdom has it that it’s never about the crime, it’s the cover up let me be clear: this time it’s the crime(s).

Clearly Crooked Hillary had a lot of accomplices. Because it takes a village, or something.

Linked By: Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, and BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!

Consensus: It’s Settled Science But I’m Not Done Tinkering With the Model

The left is salivating over reports of Paul Manafort’s phone calls (with Russians!) being recorded by the government. They’ll be very disappointed when it proves there was no collusion.

U.S. government officials intercepted conversations between Paul Manafort, President Trump's former campaign manager, and Russian individuals about the campaign.

It was revealed Monday that Manafort, who has been entangled in an FBI investigation, had been wiretapped by the U.S. government during and after the 2016 campaign.

The recordings retrieved from the wiretapping have been handed over to special counsel Robert Mueller, who is heading up the federal investigation into Russia interference in the 2016 election and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, according to CBS News.

But wait, I thought the science was settled: I thought there was a consensus among 97% of all journalists  that there was no such wiretapping.

And as fate would have it, consensus or no, it looks like 97% of scientists were wrong about manmade global warming as well. Climate Change Not As Threatening to Planet As Previously Thought, New Research Suggests.

Apparently because their “models were wrong.” As with communism/socialism however, that won’t stop them.

Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modelling wrong, a new study has found. New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10-year-old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.

Got that? If the manmade model based on their hypothesis is wrong, instead of changing the hypothesis you simply create a new model. Like Venezuela.

"The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented but that socialism has been faithfully implemented."

Linked By: American Digest, and BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!

“WHY AM I NOT 50 POINTS AHEAD?!?!”

So, Hillary just might question Trump’s legitimacy after all: Hillary Clinton won't rule out questioning Trump's legitimacy, pending Russia probe. Just ponder on that as you await President Trump’s UN  address.

Hillary, still wondering how she lost to “that man”

And  I note that Jedediah Bila left The View “of her own accord” after the hen group went full Kim Jong-un on her after she dared ask Hillary a real question on the show last week. Because, you know, no tough questions for the smartest woman in the world.

It’s almost as if Rabbit Hole Wednesday starts earlier every week.

Linked By: Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, and BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!

Rotting Beef - Tastes Kind of Like Old Lamb: Funky and Stinky

Here’s a list of things I don’t  feel like talking about today: the Emmys, Kim Jong-un, St. Louis riots/protests, terrorist attacks anywhere.

Usually when I don’t want to be annoyed food is a safe bet, no?  No. I see that the cognoscenti of New York are promoting a new form of extreme eating based on extremely expensive extreme aging: Steak Aging Goes Beyond Weeks to Months for Some Chefs. This is beef aged for up to 180 days – that’s 6 months! In dog years I believe that translates to carrion.

But if you’re up for laying out a car payment for a hunk of rotting beef that tastes like stinky cheese this might be your thing.

The hottest menu item at New York restaurants may be a plate of rotting beef.

Dining spots around town are offering steaks that have been aged anywhere from 90 to 180 days, pushing the limits well beyond the typical aging period of 21 to 45 days. Restaurateurs and chefs say the added time allows for greater tenderness and depth of flavor than the norm.

“I’ve been describing it like the taste of roasted hazelnuts and dehydrated mushrooms,” says Billy Oliva, executive chef of Delmonico’s. The lower Manhattan restaurant is marking its 180th anniversary by offering a 180-day dry-aged bone-in rib eye, served on a keepsake plate, for $380. The special is offered through Oct. 14. – WSJ

Fear not, this isn’t just any old rotting meat,according to Mr. Oliva this is a  “a controlled rot.” Sounds like the sort of thing that would be popular in Washington D.C..

Oddly, just because it’s expensive doesn’t mean everyone loves it:

Which isn’t to say the flavor of the steak is one that every carnivore appreciates. Many chefs say the strong taste is a turnoff for most diners, especially when the beef has been aged for an extra-long time.

In other words, it tastes funky, like stinky cheese:

“It’s like blue cheese on a bone,” says Michael Lomonaco, chef and owner of Porter House Bar and Grill, a steakhouse in Midtown Manhattan’s Time Warner Center.

And if you’re one of those plebeians who doesn’t think shelling out 10 times as much for a steak that tastes  like roasted hazelnuts, dehydrated mushrooms and rotten meat sounds like good value – well, you just might be a deplorable.

Linked By: Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, and BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!

Wall Street Style

The Wall Street Journal arrived yesterday, along with its semi-annual Mens Style magazine. This is the cover:

Not shocking, as the WSJ men’s style editors have been pushing metro-sexual men for the better part of two decades and the downright goofy-gay “fashion” for the past 8 years. So the sight of Jared Leto* on the cover of their Fall Issue of the Men’s Style magazine in a “Gucci coat, Lena Skadegard necklace (top), Paul Morelli necklace and his own gold necklace” was not shocking. After all, this former business journal and bastion of Brooks Brothers haberdashery is now owned by Rupert Murdock’s boyz.

What did shock me is how much it reminded me of our former FLOTUS’s Joseph Coat of Many Colors:

The two of them remind me of Omar the Persian rug merchant.

I doubt that means anything, but then again, what does these days?

* Jared Leto – “an industrious quintuple-threat: Oscar-winning actor, stadium-filling rock star (with his band, Thirty Seconds to Mars), digital-media entrepreneur, burgeoning fashion icon and—as if you don’t hate him enough already—successful tech investor, whose long list of winning bets includes Uber, Snapchat, Spotify and Airbnb”

Linked By: Larwyn’s Linx on Doug Ross@Journal, and BlogsLucianneLoves, and Free Republic, Thanks!