WHITE HOUSE INDIGNATION: Did Bibi Spit In Obama’s Face?

عکاسی-با-سرعت-بالا-11Originally posted at CLASH Daily

Pay attention! Barack Obama, the autonomous, Constitution-defying president who pretty much does whatever he wants is livid because Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to coordinate his March visit with the one who consults with no one.

That’s right – White House officials, on behalf of a man who “spits in everyone’s face”, have said that Obama believes that Netanyahu’s plan to speak before a joint session of Congress to address the dangers Iran poses to Israel and the world is tantamount to spitting in President Obama’s face.

In case you forgot, Benjamin Netanyahu is the guy who was left sitting in a White House meeting room when he failed to submit to Obama’s diktats concerning construction in East Jerusalem. Not only that, but talk about double-standards: Obama skipping Paris wasn’t “spitting in an ally’s face”, but Bibi accepting an invitation to address Congress is being likened to spitting in Obama’s face?

For years now, Obama has been looking for any excuse to publicly place Netanyahu in the same category that he’s placed the rest of his enemies. That’s why the president continues to regularly try to push the Israeli Prime Minister’s buttons – most recently to demand that Netanyahu tone down his rhetoric calling for sanctions against Iran. Bibi is smart and surely recognizes Obama’s attempt to set up a scapegoat to blame when the negotiations, which would never have worked with Iran in the first place, completely break down.

The problem for Obama is that clearly Bibi Netanyahu fears no one and is proving again that a fraidy cat like Obama does not intimidate him, and so, thanks to John Boehner’s newfound boldness, Bibi graciously accepted the invitation and has no intention of submitting to the president’s unreasonable demands.

According to a White House spokesperson, by accepting the Speaker’s invitation, Mr. Netanyahu did something “you simply don’t do. [Bibi] spat in our face publicly and that’s no way to behave.” Then, after calling out the Israeli leader’s behavior, Obama’s mouthpiece, on behalf of the president, issued a customary Chicago-style threat: “Netanyahu ought to remember that President Obama has a year and a half left to his presidency, and that there will be a price.”

Thus far, there’s been no price, or only a minimal price paid, for ISIS beheading Americans, no price for al Qaeda spilling French and Jewish blood, no price for ISIS gunning down 14 year-old boys for watching soccer matches, and no price for Boko Haram allegedly slaughtering 2,000 people. But Bibi Netanyahu agrees to come to the US to speak about a threat Obama refuses to confront – for that, “there will be a price”?

Based on the president’s conduct, all his foot-stomping has accomplished is to prove that tyrants simply can’t be negotiated with. Yet Obama continues to warn both Bibi and the Republican Congress that a sanctions bill would negatively impact negotiations with Iranian leaders.

What’s different here is that Boehner, who has talked tough and then summarily backed down with predictable consistency, must have gotten the loud and clear message at the SOTU from the cocksure Obama and decided to take his job seriously. Realizing that negotiating with the one who plans to negotiate with Iran isn’t going to work, Boehner extended an invitation to an authentic world leader.

Meanwhile, back at the White House, the camaraderie between Bibi and Boehner is probably infuriating for someone used to always getting his own way.

What’s funny is that Obama can taunt, sneer, snigger, and abuse whomever he pleases, but let that be aimed back at him and Barack “I won twice” Obama throws a public hissy fit. Barack Obama’s unique governing style came back to bite the haughty one in the butt, and lo and behold, he can’t take what he dishes out.

How dare the Israeli leader speak truthfully about the all-but-nonexistent US-led nuclear negotiations with Iran? And how dare Netanyahu, whose country is surrounded on all sides by enemies, urge US lawmakers to ignore Obama’s threats to veto and impose a new round of tougher sanctions on Tehran?

In response to Netanyahu’s plans to bring just that sort of message to the joint session of Congress, officials in Washington – who it was is unknown – said that the “chickensh*t” nickname an anonymous administration official gave Netanyahu several months ago paled in comparison to the salty language used in the White House when the real “chickensh*ts” got news of Netanyahu’s planned speech.

Meanwhile, citing “departure from… protocol,” Obama, who parties in Gwyneth Paltrow’s backyard, invites Beyoncé and Jay-Z to the White House and grants interviews to individuals who thank him on YouTube for raising taxes to provide them with free healthcare, has refused to meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu. That’s actually a good thing, because it deprives Obama of a second opportunity to be spiteful by leaving the Israeli leader sitting in a room somewhere in the White House by himself.

Share
Tags: , ,

Miss USA’s message of ‘hope and love and peace’ to terrorists

Miss-Nevada-Nia-Sanchez-e1402297758649-150x150Originally posted at American Thinker

The runner-up in the Miss Universe contest, Miss USA Nia Sanchez, gave an answer to her on-stage question that would make Barack Obama proud.  Chosen to be one of the five finalists, Sanchez was asked by Filipino world champion boxer Manny Pacquaio, in painfully broken English, the following question:

If you were given 30 seconds to deliver a message to a global terrorist, what would you say?

 

After furrowing her perfectly arched eyebrows, rethinking and repeating what she thought he had said, Nia replied:

I know as Miss USA I can always spread a message of hope and love and peace and so I would do my very best to spread that message to them and everyone else in the world.

Miss Israel wasn’t one of the finalists.  However, rest assured that if Doron Matalan, who served as a sergeant in the Israeli army, were asked a question about terrorism, her answer probably wouldn’t include the words “hope and love and peace.”

What, pray tell, has Nia been doing for the last 14 years?  Picking out shades of spray tan?  Is the woman not aware that just a few weeks ago 17 people were murdered in Paris by Islamic terrorists?

From the sound of Miss USA’s politically correct answer, there’s a good chance that when Jihadi John was busy beheading Americans James Foley, Steven Sotloff, and Peter Kassig with a kitchen knife, a preoccupied Nia was practicing how to walk around on sky-high heels while balancing a book on her head.

Either that, or the girl has inhaled way too much hair spray.

It would probably come as a complete shock to Miss Nia that if the global terrorists got their hands on her pretty little head, it wouldn’t remain on her shoulders for very long.

Could it be that the fetching girl from Nevada has been so busy having her teeth laminated and practicing good posture that she’s totally oblivious to the fact that every day, terrorists rape, genitally mutilate, and splash acid in the faces of little girls?

And that’s if they’re lucky.

If Nia and her second-place crown were to go on a humanitarian mission to bring her feel-good message to global terrorists, she’d be immediately sold into sex slavery, stoned for indecency, or beheaded.

Although we’re used to hearing such love-and-peace nonsense from Mr. Negotiation, Barack Obama, the fact that an American in a Miss Universe contest would give such an asinine response to such a serious question confirms that, by and large, beauty pageant contestants should really stick to strutting around in bikinis and evening gowns and quit trying to come up with solutions to world problems.

Still, Miss Sanchez probably has an exciting future ahead of her.

In fact, there’s always the chance that if the president tuned in and heard Miss USA’s brilliant answer to the global terrorist question, with her Latina heritage and all, she could qualify as a stand-in for actress Eva Longoria, who occasionally brainstorms with Obama on issues like border security.

In his quest to prove to the naysayers that “hope and love and peace” change even the hardest of hearts, Obama could ask the black-belt beauty to advise him on how to better endear himself to ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Iran.

In the end, it’s too bad that the USA wasn’t represented by a girl with both beauty and brains and the gumption to look directly into the camera and say: “My 30-second message to global terrorists is this: despite our lily-livered president, America knows where you are, and we’re coming for you!”

Share
Tags: , , , ,

‘Fruit Loop’ Obama’s Peculiar Priorities

imgOriginally posted at American Thinker

Barack Obama is a man who painstakingly sets his priorities. Take, for instance, the recent funerals of two NYPD officers who were shot in the head by a radical Islamist thug as they sat in their parked police cruiser. Sadly, the president was not able to attend either Officer Ramos’s or Liu’s funeral.

However, while the Big Apple was steeped in unbearable heartache, with a heavy heart about being otherwise committed and under much emotional duress, a greatly shaken Obama and the first lady did manage to soothe their grief with a $1,000-a-couple dinner at the swanky Hawaiian Vintage Cave.

Then there was the terrorist attack in France that killed 17 people. Following the bloodshed, a million-person march descended on Paris. French President Francois Hollande and 44 foreign dignitaries, including leaders from Germany, Italy, Britain, Turkey, Israel, and the Palestinian territories, attended the protest.

One would think that not even another fundraiser in Gwyneth Paltrow’s backyard could stop Barack ‘Citizen of the World’ Obama from participating in the show of unity. But again, unfortunately, the president was mysteriously engaged elsewhere, possibly doing whatever he was doing on the night of the Benghazi attack.

No matter which way you slice it, Barack Obama is a very busy man with an ever-growing list of concerns to attend to.

Consider all the time it takes for him to finagle free college tuition for 13th and 14th grade, or to plot how to veto Republican sanctions against Iran. Then there’s the effort he’s investing in releasing every last Islamic insurgent from Gitmo in time for them to get back on the battlefield to do some real damage, and the blood, sweat, and tears it takes to reprimand anyone who says the forbidden words: “Islamic terrorist.”

There are only so many hours in a day to clean up the planet and punish overachievers. Moreover, it’s probably Barack Obama himself who chases down and recruits former Democrat campaign staffers to play down-and-out housewives at State of the Union addresses.

And let’s not forget — when he’s not “fixing” our “broken” healthcare system, Obama is actively about the business of decimating our military, upping the minimum wage on behalf of the “hardest working people in America,” waving millions of illegal immigrants with infectious diseases across the border, and purposely contributing to racial unrest.

As if all that effort and responsibility isn’t enough to tucker one man out, now in the midst of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” without consulting the president, Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner goes and invites Bibi Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress on the dangers posed to Israel and the U.S. by Islamic extremism and a nuclear Iran.

Why, pray tell, does the Israeli prime minister have to issue this cautionary tale? After all, when and if he decides to, the president will be more than able to convince Iran to do things like release the imprisoned Christian pastor Saeed Abedini. In like manner, with a minimal amount of mediation on his part, an amicable Iran will also happily submit when Obama politely requests that they relinquish their nuclear ambitions.

That’s why, when the Israeli prime minister arrives in America, there is absolutely no reason to cut into the president’s packed schedule to meet with a man who was once left sitting in a White House meeting room for daring to defy Obama’s Palestinian-friendly wishes concerning Jewish construction in East Jerusalem.

To sum up, the president has no time to attend the funerals of slain police officers, or stand in solidarity with world leaders against radical Islamic terrorism, or waste time feigning hospitality toward allies like France, or worse yet, Bibi Netanyahu’s Israel.

Gone are the days of frivolous #bringbackourgirls hashtags. Instead, Barack Obama attends to truly pressing issues by granting interviews to #YouTubeAsksObama.

So, while House Republicans and an incensed Bob Menendez (D-NJ) look forward to gleaning insight from Benjamin Netanyahu, Obama, a man who’s certain his priorities are in order, chats it up with the likes of Hank Green. Hank, together with his brother John Green, author of The Fault in our Stars, rants on YouTube about “Harry Potter, Hong Kong, net neutrality and farting.”

While ISIS lines up teenage boys in front of firing squads for watching soccer games and Boko Haram kills thousands, with her green lipstick and occasional Ebonics the self-proclaimed “Queen of YouTube,” comedian and Internet sensation GloZell Green interviews the president.

The buxom GloZell is renowned for YouTube videos such as My Push up Bra will help me get my man; How to Draw Perfect Eyebrows; and GloZell’s Cereal Challenge, where the curvy woman with the unruly curls writhes around in a bathtub filled with Fruit Loops and milk.

Sad to say, but at this juncture it seems natural to utter the words Obama and Fruit Loops in the same sentence.

Nonetheless, during the mesmerizing interview, reminiscent of Obama’s “if I had a son” Trayvon Martin reference, GloZell told the president that, to keep her husband from getting shot by the “po-po,” she cut the hoods off all his hoodies.

Finally, Derek Hough’s dramatic paso doble partner on “Dancing with the Stars” last season, Bethany Mota, also gabbed with the president, who, by the way, did some dancing of his own with Ellen DeGeneres.

Via YouTube, Bethany announced that she put up Christmas decorations right after Halloween because she “…just decided that [her] room looked really sad.”

Speaking of “really sad,” that’s pretty much how Barack Obama has made America look on the world stage.

And so, short of volunteering to inflate deflated footballs or bowing to international protocol and flying off to Saudi King Abdullah’s funeral, as usual, while the world burns Barack Obama believes he has his priorities in order.

Share
Tags: , , , , ,

SNIPING AT ‘SNIPER': Hollywood Applauds Losers, Belittles Heroes

AMERICAN SNIPEROriginally posted at CLASH Daily

Hollywood is a place where movies about gay cowboys earn tears, inspire repeated standing ovations, and win Academy Awards. Hollywood is place where movies like Cider House Rules and Vera Drake, both of which commend slaughtering the unborn, are lauded as noble.

Hollywood is also a place where America-hating, Cuba-loving collectivists can become millionaires while criticizing capitalism, and the pot-smoking offspring of “radical Jewish socialists” can be catapulted to the heights of stardom for telling dirty jokes.

Hollywood is home to those who champion freedom of expression as long as what is being expressed supports the left-wing agenda. Yet those same people refuse to recognize that the right to express those opinions, regardless of how vile, was won thanks to the sacrifices of the men and women of our military.

Now, as American Sniper breaks all box-office records and receives six Oscar nominations, including Bradley Cooper for Best Actor, the usual Hollywood blowhards are expressing disdain for a film chronicling the experiences of the most lethal sniper in American history.

When recounting his role as an assassin, the subject of the Clint Eastwood movie, the late US Navy Seal Chris Kyle, nickname by insurgents “The Devil of Ramadi,” has been quoted as describing the adversary as “Savage, despicable evil.”

Those kinds of adjectives offend liberals because to them America’s enemies are heroes and America’s heroes are enemies.

In fact, based on some of the negative reaction to the movie’s success, it appears that there are those who would have preferred that Eastwood make a movie sympathetic to the Marine Corps veteran with PTSD who shot and killed Kyle and his friend Chad Littlefield at a gun range.

One Hollywood detractor bashing American Sniper is portly comedic actor Seth Rogen. Besides the recent controversial film about interviewing-in-hopes-of-assassinating North Korea’s Kim Jong-Un, Rogen has written, produced, and starred in such cinematic greats as the gripping and enthralling Knocked Up, the life-affirming Zack and Miri Makes a Porno, and the divinely-inspired The 40-Year-Old Virgin.

On Twitter, Rogen, who is beloved by the star of Eastwood’s “Empty Chair” series, President Barack Obama, compared the movie American Sniper to the fictional Nazi-sniper propaganda film featured in the plot of Quentin Tarentino’s Inglourious Basterds.

Seems Rogen, who once said “I mean, where I come from, ‘communism’ is not a terrible word,” is bent out of shape because Eastwood has made a hero out of a man who says things like “It was my duty to shoot the enemy, and I don’t regret it. My regrets are for the people I couldn’t save: Marines, soldiers, buddies.”

Similar to the lines wrapping around theaters nationwide, when Chris Kyle was memorialized at Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, Texas, there was a funeral procession stretching over 200 miles from Midlothian, Texas to Texas State Cemetery in Austin.

Sadly, for Seth there are no lines for his movies. Instead, while he’s busy criticizing American Sniper, which grossed $105.3 million in four days, The Interview, the lemon Rogen starred in with James Franco, is predicted to lose $75 million.

Nonetheless, Seth Rogen is not the only paunchy Hollywood type who enjoys the freedoms American sniper Chris Kyle protected. The other bigmouth hefty trying to demean true fearlessness is the corpulent anti-capitalist owner of nine properties and obvious consumer of lots of foie gras, director/producer/writer/author/ multimillionaire Michael Moore.

Chris Kyle once said, “It’s not a problem taking out someone who wants your people dead. That’s not a problem at all.”

Michael Moore, a man who has zero clue when it comes to valor, love of country, or heroism, took to Twitter to call Chris Kyle a “coward” who “shoots u in the back.” According to America-hating Moore, “snipers aren’t heroes, and invaders are worse.”

Michael the “Sicko” seems to be morally equating murderers like the DC sniper, who hid in the trunk of a car shooting random people going about their daily business, with the duties of a warrior protecting the lives of other soldiers.

This bunkum comes from a guy who embraces a health system instituted by a Cuban dictator renowned for lining up thousands and mowing them down with firing squads.

Then there’s writer and film critic Lindy West. In an article in the Guardian West, who received a social media award from Hanoi Jane, opines, “The real American Sniper was a hate-filled killer.” Then she asks the question: “Why are simplistic patriots treating him as a hero?”

West wrote of the film, “If [Eastwood], intentionally or not, makes a hero out of Kyle – who, bare minimum, was a racist who took pleasure in dehumanizing and killing brown people – is he responsible for validating racism, murder, and dehumanization?”

If she believes that’s true, then why doesn’t Lindy West admit that those who refuse to acknowledge that the religion responsible for the killing of white, black and brown people and for the raping and beheading of thousands in the name of Allah are also responsible for “validating racism, murder, and dehumanization?”

Rogen, Moore, and West are among those who wouldn’t hesitate to call Kyle an “American Psycho”. Yet that same group would probably refuse to label a Muslim extremist who kills to avenge Mohammed an Islamic terrorist.

This pathetic group of individuals scorns the memory of a dead soldier who, had he been in Libya on September 11th 2012, would have done more to help than a missing president who may have been busy watching a rerun of Rogen’s stoner flick Pineapple Express while four Americans, including an American ambassador, were being murdered.

In the end, the sad truth is that, predictably, liberals would rather support killing an unborn baby than a terrorist. But above all, be they in Hollywood, the media, or academia, liberals can always be counted on to disparage patriotism, censure heroism, and generally condemn anyone who dares to harm America’s enemies.

Share
Tags: , , , , ,

SOTU 2015 Special People Sky Box Guests

UnknownEvery year, the first lady’s State of the Union Special People Sky Box group includes individuals chosen specifically to either advance Obama’s political agenda or send an up-yours to Americans who disapprove of his ideology and job performance.

This year, Michael Moore and Seth Rogen were probably too busy criticizing dead American heroes to accept a VIP invite from the president. So instead, sitting next to Michelle Obama, wearing an outfit worth more than 10 of her husband’s proposed tax credits to the middle class combined, will be an esteemed physician working to stop the spread of Ebola.

Although he’d like to, due to time restraints Obama won’t be mentioning that after giving an initial $750 million and Congress allocating an additional $5.48 billion toward ending the outbreak of the deadly hemorrhagic fever, the virus drama appears to have waned on its own.

That’s why the contractors who participated in America’s effort to build clinics that are currently empty will not be sitting in the galley alongside the Ebola doctor.

Also in attendance will be union workers who have benefited from a stronger economy. Unfortunately, representatives for the 92 million other Americans who are currently unemployed and not benefitting from the stronger economy were not invited to the SOTU.

Sitting in a seat close to where 15-year-old Hadiya Pendleton’s parents Nat and Cleo sat last year just weeks after Hadiya was gunned down on Chicago’s Southside will be another victim of Chicago gun violence who miraculously managed to survive. This lucky gun violence victim’s injuries are being exploited to remind America that Obama still has two years left to dismantle the Second Amendment.

Sadly, the families of Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos, the two NYPD officers who were killed by a Muslim extremist with an illegal semi-automatic handgun, Ismaaiyl Brinsley, were not extended an invite.

Word has it that a brain tumor patient who was able to get surgery thanks to the ACA will be there. However, the families of the veterans who died on government-run VA hospital waiting lists won’t be there. Neither will the parents of the children who died as a result of Enterovirus D-68, the virus that invaded America with the unaccompanied minors Obama ushered into our midst in defiance of the will of the American people.

California residents dealing with rationed prescription cough syrup are too sick to attend, and the survivors of those who succumbed to illegal immigrant-perpetrated murder, DWIs, MDR-TB, drug-resistant pneumonia and the like would have been invited to the SOTU, but there wasn’t enough room to fit them all into the skybox.

Other elite guests include a government worker freed in a prisoner exchange, which was part of a ‘why can’t we be friends’ outreach to communist Cuba. The five Cuban spies, one of whom is also a murderer, who were returned in exchange for Alan Gross won’t be there because they’re currently free in Cuba to conspire against America, as are the five highly lethal Gitmo terrorists Obama exchanged for Army sergeant/alleged deserter Beau Bergdahl.

And finally, an illegal immigrant who has flouted the law and remained in the country under Mr. Obama’s temporary deportation amnesty will be sitting with Mrs. Obama. The message this individual will be sending to everyone thinking about sneaking across the border or already here illegally is that ignoring immigration law earns individuals free medical care, free social security, free education, and a standing ovation at the State of the Union.

So, as the SOTU approaches, America waits with bated breath to enjoy sights such as Sheila Jackson Lee, draped in a colorful pashmina, tackle a colleague in the aisle to get to Obama. Plus, along with Al Sharpton in the gallery and Harry Reid with an eye patch, disappointed voters can also anticipate watching the Republican representatives Americans sent there in November to make a change, instead clap and smile and make like the New England Patriots by exposing their “deflated balls.”

Share

WHAT’S THE STORY? The Truth Behind Obama’s Defense of Islam

Ob-Islam-300x180Originally posted at Clash Daily

Regardless of what Muslim adherents say, every time a terrorist beheads, shoots, or blows up civilized human beings, an unsolicited handful of world leaders feel it’s their duty to step forward to clarify that those doing the terrorizing aren’t really Muslims. That’s why someone should really find out who is convincing non-Muslim terrorists to pretend to be Muslim, because if ever there was cause for confusion, the “terrorists aren’t Muslim” issue is it.

From France’s President François Hollande to America’s very own President Barack Obama, apologists simply refuse to agree that those who openly admit dedication to the prophet Mohammed are fervent followers of the Islamic faith.

Although with great regularity Islamic extremists begin and end their bloodbaths by shouting “Allahu Akbar” and go enthusiastically to their deaths proud to be “avenging the prophet” Mohammed, for some strange reason President Obama feels it is his obligation to repudiate the testimony of martyrs.

Not only that, but a contradiction arises, because as the president has already proven with his “bitter clinger” remark, if a shooter were to shout “Praise Jesus” instead of “Allahu Akbar”, it’s highly unlikely similar PR would be offered on behalf of Christians.

Let’s face it – in the ongoing effort to place Christians in the crosshairs of progressive criticism, those on the left cannot afford to have Muslims out-evil the “right wing extremists” and Bible-thumpers. That’s why, regardless of how many body bags jihadists fill, Obama will always be at the ready to remediate the reputation of Islam in the eyes of those who see it for what it is.

So what if Muslims blow away political cartoonists for exercising the right to free expression. As evidenced by the Ferguson, Missouri street riots and the tacitly government-approved animosity directed toward police officers, here in Obama’s America, lack of tolerance exhibited by one group no longer justifies refusal to tolerate the intolerable in the other.

Yet the question here is why does Barack Obama refuse to take Muslim jihadists at their word?

Could it be because terrorism places Mohammed in a bad light, and according to a politically pragmatic president attempting to cultivate cultural and religious diversity, “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam?”

Also, according to Barack Obama, “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.” Therefore, by his insistence on portraying Islam in a light contrary to reality, what the president is actually doing is ensuring tolerance be extended to the intolerant.

As the body count continues to rise, Barack Obama continues to assert that “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.”

Huh?

Who cares if three individuals declaring vengeance for Allah wreak bloody havoc on an iconic European city? If Barack Obama decides that Islamic “rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings,” then even if what he says is contradicted by what is actually happening, one way or another his complicated rhetoric will twist the truth and blatant lies will eventually be accepted.

Let’s not forget, this is Barack Obama, the man who has redefined everything from Hope and Change to what constitutes police “acting stupidly.” Therefore, why shouldn’t he also redefine Islam, even if doing so controverts the profession of faith by those willing to be die for their beliefs?

What’s odd is that this defense of Islam is coming from a man who claims to be a Christian. Then again, it’s probably easy for Obama to disavow the claims of terrorists who call themselves Muslims because, despite admitting belief in Jesus, the president lives a life alien to the creed Christ lays out for His followers.

By his own example, Barack Obama has shed much-needed light on individuals who identify with a religious dogma and then act in a way contrary to their stated beliefs. Whether the president realizes it or not, the benchmarks he’s put forth in defense of Islam are standards that can also be applied to his own dubious relationship with God of the New Testament.

In truth, when it comes to liberal social edicts that support abortion on demand, gay marriage and free contraceptives, the president of the United States is nothing more than another radical extremist who, instead of an AK-47 or a machete, uses a phone and a pen. Moreover, everything that is “honorable, and right, and pure, and lovely” has already been dumbed down and ascribed a new meaning, so why not Islam?

Even still, notwithstanding the president’s effort to whitewash the “religion of peace,” in addition to Obama’s dogged assertion that disciples of Mohammed blowing away shoppers in a deli merely for being Jewish has nothing to do with the faith they proclaim, there may be other, more useful benefits that can result from the president reinventing reality.

Maybe what Obama is doing has little to do with Islam. The same way basic concepts of freedom and fairness have been redefined, mischaracterizing Islam may be just another example of the world’s most dedicated cultural Marxist assigning different meanings to conventional perceptions in order to skew the truth and control the opinion of the masses.

After all, the president’s socialist vision hinges on framing a make-believe world. That’s why the left’s most valuable tool is still propaganda. So, although initially the president’s “terrorists aren’t Muslim” posturing seemed confusing, on second thought it may not be confusing at all.

Barack Obama’s attempt to redefine a 1,400-year-old religion to suit his political agenda may have nothing to do with protecting Islam. Instead, shielding Muslims from condemnation may be part of an ongoing effort to remake, redefine, and impact reality so dramatically that what will finally take hold is unquestioning compliance.

Share
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Fully developed twins discarded in San Diego

twins-blue-672x372Originally posted at Live Action News

A woman somewhere in the vicinity of San Diego, California, recently delivered full-term twins. Whether the babies were born alive or were stillborn is yet to be determined by the San Diego Medical Examiner’s office and homicide detectives who are currently investigating the cause of death.

What authorities do know is that at some point, fully developed twins who appeared to have reached 20 weeks’ or more gestation were delivered, wrapped in a blanket, and dumped outside the gate of a private home.

Clearly, whoever discarded these babies didn’t swaddle them to provide comfort or warmth.

Instead, homeowner David Branford spotted the blanket in his driveway, which is located on the north side of St. Peter’s Catholic Church in Fallbrook. At first, Branford thought what he was seeing was a discarded doll. After doing his morning chores, Branford, who was still unsure, went back to check and realized it wasn’t a toy in the blanket, but two dead human babies.

Branford immediately called 911, after which paramedics verified that the twins, with umbilical cords still attached to one placenta, were both dead.

An investigation is now underway, and the San Diego Sheriff’s Department’s homicide detectives are requesting information from anyone who knows of a woman in the area who has no baby to show as a result of a recent pregnancy.

The Bible in Micah 6:7 asks, “Shall I give my firstborn for my transgression, the fruit of my body for the sin of my soul?” That pointed question is crying out to be answered by a nation whose transgressions have resulted in millions of women hiding their sin by tossing away the fruit of life from within their bodies.

In the meantime, regardless of the woman’s reason for her horrific act or the outcome of this particular investigation, any mother who would discard her child, dead or alive, on a cold street where garbage, glass, cigarette butts, and chewed gum litter the ground defies human imagination. And as disturbing as this tragedy may be, the case of the dead twins wrapped in a blanket lying in the street is just one more on a long list of examples of children, like rubbish, being coldly thrown away.

Share
Tags: , , , ,

BILL CLINTON: Friend of Pedophiles

clinton-liel-peres-partyOriginally posted at Clash Daily

Bill Clinton has been named in a lawsuit against a onetime billionaire “Friend of Bill” named Jeffrey Epstein. That means there may be another vast right wing conspiracy afoot. Accused by over 40 women of being a sexual predator, American financier Mr. Epstein is a man who, in a way similar to Bill Clinton’s weakness for White House interns, has a weakness for female jailbait.

Before Epstein admitted and was convicted of pedophilia and, thanks to his political connections, sent to jail for only 13 months, Clinton, who probably only has an affinity for the juicy fruit native to the Virgin Islands, was a frequent guest at the Caribbean playground.

No one is accusing Bill of participating in the “regular” orgies that were held at the ex-billionaire’s Caribbean compound. And even though flight records show that the former president visited Epstein’s private island, Little St. James, between 2002 and 2005, two or 20 or 200 times, that doesn’t mean the supporter of the Children’s Health Fund was doing anything untoward with the little ones on the private compound.

Humanitarian that he is, Slick Willy was probably in the Caribbean raising money for charity and sipping Cruzan Rum. Or maybe Bill was on a mission hoping to encourage his good pal to seek out age appropriate women as sex partners.

In addition to Bill Clinton, Epstein was also chummy with former Governor Eliot “Black Socks” Spitzer and Prince Andrew, the latter of whom recently was also accused of underage sexual abuse. British royal Prince Andrew even stayed at the ex-con’s New York City mansion months after Epstein was released from jail in 2010.

The lawsuit claims that in the early 2000s, while working on his philanthropic endeavors and while a distracted Hillary the Carpetbagger was busy clawing her way to the top of the New York State political heap, hubby was off consorting with a pervert who hosted orgies featuring young girls who were shipped to the island to service older men.

Epstein was investigated and ultimately convicted after a woman reported that the former billionaire paid her 14-year-old daughter $300 for a massage and sex. According to the women, Epstein hosted orgies attended by two young girls from New York and a least one young girl the suit identifies as Jane Doe 102 who allegedly was being kept there unwillingly.

It was reported in the National Enquirer that Jane Doe 102 was forced to live as one of Epstein’s underage sex slaves for years and had sex under duress with “politicians, businessmen, royalty, academicians, etc.”

According to the lawsuit, when Epstein was busted in 2008 for diddling around with underage prostitutes, Bill dropped him like a chewed-on cigar butt.

Far be it from anyone, let alone a Clinton fan like myself, to imply that the beret-and-blue dress connoisseur visiting Little St. James was one of the politicians serviced by a youthful sex slave. And anyone that would even suggest such a thing would likely be part of the same “vast right wing conspiracy” that Hillary says has been dogging Bill Clinton ever since his brilliance and charisma burst unto the political scene 30-something years ago.

Accusations of teenage prostitution aside, the lawsuit does reveal that Bill did have a grownup female friend who photographed young girls in sexually explicit positions. That friend provided Jeffrey Epstein with those photos as a kind of shopping list. In fact, Clinton was so friendly with this particular shutterbug that she took an afternoon off from distributing child porn to attend Chelsea Clinton’s $6 million 2010 wedding.

Still, there’s no proof of Bill Clinton’s guilt. However, as past history has proven, the likelihood of the ex-president visiting the Caribbean sex island and choosing not to participate in the festivities is about as probable as a cigar aficionado visiting the Gurkha $1,000 cigar factory in Miami and taking a pass on the hand-rolled stogies.

Nonetheless, just because he poses with prostitutes from the Nevada Bunny Ranch doesn’t mean Slick Willy would venture into the dark netherworld of pedophilia by having sex with underage girls against their will.

As for Hillary, in the run-up to 2016 a sex scandal comes at a very bad time. How will Hillary accuse Republicans of not doing enough for the children if her husband is suspected of statutory rape? That’s why only time will tell whether Bill Clinton’s affiliation with a pedophile will impact his chances to park his humidor back in the White House.

In the meantime, if Bill Clinton finds himself in another sexual pickle, so to speak, he can always wiggle his way out by reminding his accusers that when it comes to these tawdry, illegal accusations, “it depends on what the meaning of the word ‘pedophile’ is.” If that doesn’t work, irreverent liberal comedian Bill Maher can always deflect on Hillary and Bill’s behalf by placing added emphasis on Catholic priests molesting little boys.

Still, whether the man with the unquenchable libido had sex with little girls or not, what is undeniable is his friendship with an admitted pedophile and his time spent cavorting at the scene of the crime. Not to worry though, because when confronted with the topic of underage sex slaves, all Charlotte Clinton Mezvinsky’s totally believable grandpa has to do to clear his name is swear that he “did not have sexual relations with that 15-year-old girl.”

Share
Tags: , , , , ,

PETA, Palin, and the human life hypocrisy

0102-sbs-palin-son-on-dog-facebook-4-227x300Originally posted at Live Action News

Sarah Palin is under fire again, and not for her Naughty Monkey shoes. This time it’s because of a post on Facebook showing her six-year-old son Trig, a child diagnosed with Down syndrome, to reach an otherwise out-of-reach countertop, “step, baby, step[ping]” on the back of Jill Hadassa, the family’s black Labrador retriever.

Besides the fact that the dog appears totally at ease with the situation and not at all perturbed about providing the elevation barefoot Trig needed to reach the kitchen counter, once again hypocrisy is revealed in feigned outrage  when it comes to what’s acceptable and what’s despicable.

PETA woman of the year Ellen DeGeneres’s adorable Facebook posts aside, the reality is that labs are service dogs – good-natured, loveable, and strong.

10517550_10152602026212240_5446525939227889681_n
Source: The Ellen DeGeneres Show Facebook page.

 

One service dog website, anythingpawsable.com, described the breed this way: “Once you’re ready to face the world, they’ll always be by your side, shoring you up, no matter what you’re doing or where you’re going.”

And shoring up Trig is exactly what this wonderfully sturdy dog did.

And while standing on a dog isn’t something that one should make a habit of, the larger issue here is not whether Trig balanced his little body on the Lab; it’s that there’s just something wildly hypocritical about a group of individuals who largely support unborn baby abuse alleging dog abuse.

After all, in the group doing most of the criticizing, having an extra chromosome like Trig Palin is usually the only “stepping stone” needed to support the decision to dispose of unborn life.

So while radically pro-choice politicians like Barack Obama might be praised by animal rights groups for treating his dogs Sunny and Bo better than he treats humans, pro-lifers like Sarah Palin, a woman who defends the sanctity of life, is being condemned for allowing a barefoot child, determined to wash the dishes, to use a dog for a stepping stool.

Let’s just say that because of Sarah’s Facebook post, the “Save the Whales” activists came out of the woodwork for the ethical treatment of Labrador spines.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals called Palin’s New Years’ Day post unfitting, saying, “It’s odd that anyone — let alone a mother — would find it appropriate to post such a thing, with no apparent sympathy for the dog in the photo.”

Maybe PETA would have more credibility if they expressed concern over the unethical treatment of all mammals, including unborn baby humans, who are burned, suctioned, and dismembered by mothers concerned for their own convenience and not for their own offspring.

PETA president Ingrid Newkirk had this to say: “Then again, PETA, along with everyone else, is used to the hard-hearted, seeming obliviousness of this bizarrely callous woman.” The “callous woman” Ingrid is talking about is Sarah Palin, who, according to the saviors of eagle eggs, had the audacity in 2008 to grant an interview from a turkey farm where turkeys were being slaughtered.

PETA takes no official stand against abortion; and as long as members defend the life of non-human animals like turkeys, flies, and, any day now, amoebas, they can be either pro-choice or pro-life. Which means that just as long as it wasn’t in a turkey slaughterhouse, PETA would have reserved judgment had Sarah given that 2008 interview at an abortion clinic where fetuses were being slaughtered.

Based in Darien, Connecticut, the animal rights group Friends of Animals is headed up by President Priscilla Feral (as in cat). When presented with the frequently asked question What do you mean by animal rights?, Friends of Animals’ online response mentions “conscious beings…[having]…interests that should be respected.” The word “conscious” is code language that in animal rights circles would include the Palin family dog but exclude Trig in utero.

President Feral had this to say about the Palin dog-balancing to-do:

It’s no surprise to Friends of Animals that Sarah Palin is so insensitive she thinks a Black Lab should be tolerant of a child who isn’t told to not put his full weight on top of the dog’s back by standing on him. How lazy of Sarah Palin not to move the dog out of the way and teach her child the right lessons.

What is surprising is how the same people busy advocating for veganism remain insensitive to the reality and tolerant of the tragedy of 3,000 human babies exterminated per day.

What is also surprising is the audacity of people who make excuses for the millions of women who shirk motherhood and call it choice, but label Sarah Palin lazy for praising the disabled son she granted life.

In her supposedly controversial post, Sarah Palin said:

Trig just reminded me. He, determined to help wash dishes with an oblivious mama not acknowledging his signs for ‘up!’ found me and a lazy dog blocking his way. He made his stepping stone.

In the end, the Sarah Palin/Trig/Hadassa debate has little to do with whether it’s right or wrong to stand on a dog’s back and everything to do with the duplicity of the outraged.

As owner of two standard poodles, it is my belief that Palin commending Trig’s practical doggy-maneuver is much less troubling than animal activists who defend the spines of Labrador retrievers, but ignore “oblivious mamas” who deny children the God-given right to human life.

Share
Tags: , , , , , ,

Celebrating Airborne Diversity Gets Very Complicated

indexOriginally posted at American Thinker

Multiculturalism, all the rage among today’s academic and cultural elites, is fraught with what Marxism (all the rage among the academic and cultural elites half a century and more ago) use to term “internal contradictions. It is bullying, all dressed up in the language of tolerance. Witness the dilemma posed by the airborne collision of multiculturalism and religious diversity.

In Orthodox Judaism, a man having physical contact with a woman who is not a close relative or a spouse is expressly forbidden. In a case of cultural diversity run amok, a Delta Airlines flight from New York’s JFK Airport was delayed when ultra-Orthodox Haredi Jewish men refused to sit in assigned seats because if they agreed to do so they would be sandwiched between two females.

As a result, the men refused to violate the tenets of their faith and instead stood in the aisle, causing Delta Airlines Flight #468, due to fly from JFK to Tel Aviv’s Ben Gurion Airport in time for the Jewish New Year, to remain on the runway for half an hour.

This is not the first time seating arrangements have caused havoc on the runway.  According to Amit Ben-Natan, a passenger who was aboard an El Al flight that encountered a similar seating-arrangement problem, “People stood in the aisles and refused to go forward.”

According to a female passenger on that same El Al flight dubbed the “11-hour nightmare,” once the plane departed for Israel, rather than return to his assigned seat the ultra-Orthodox traveler who was ticketed to sit beside her stood in the aisle for the entire journey.

Following the flight, Sharon Shapiro from Chicago started a petition to prevent ultra-Orthodox passengers from “bullying, intimidating and discriminating against women.”  Sorry, but that was highly insensitive of Ms. Shapiro.  One would think that a Jewish woman from Chicago would take Barack Obama’s advice and show more sensitivity toward people who act and “look different than we do.”

A similar thing happened on Delta Flight #468.

The best part of the latest scenario was not that the orthodox men refused to be seated or that they demanded a men-only section.  Neither was it the potential fracas that could have broken out had the men’s fedoras blocked the view of the overhead movie screen.  The most disturbing part of the Delta Jewish New Year flight was that, à la Ms. Shapiro; two female bookends accused the ultra-Orthodox guys of discrimination.

In the past, for praying in the aisles on airplanes, Haredi have been called “stupid,” and ultra-Orthodox dedication has even been compared to Sharia.

Granted, it may seem like the Haredi men unnecessarily subjected airline passengers to a brand of pious orthodoxy that doesn’t belong on a commercial airplane.  Nonetheless, the female gender-equality advocates who were offended by being asked to switch seats probably consider themselves tolerant supporters of religious and cultural diversity.

Either way, Israel Radio reported that the Delta debacle was finally resolved when an American who obviously recognizes the need to show deference to difference offered to change seats with the gentlemen sporting the long beards and the big hats. In the end, what the Delta Airline seating brouhaha reveals is that, on or off an airplane, if tolerance involves a woman paying deference to a man, the line between diversity and discrimination is thin indeed. And good old-fashioned politeness can solve what ideology cannot.

Matters are far simpler when the niceties of democratic civil society can be disposed of. Saudia Airlines, the national carrier of Saudi Arabia, has encountered its own complaints about the mixing of the sexes, albeit with a different concern. The UK Daily Mail reports:

Saudi Arabia’s national airline is allegedly planning to separate male and female passengers on its flights, in accordance to strict rules enforced by the Gulf kingdom.

Gulf media report that Saudia will keep men and women segregated onboard, unless they are close relatives.

The move follows a spate of complaints from male fliers unwilling to allow other males to sit next to their wives and other female family members.

It is not their own purity that concerns the Muslim male complainants, it is the purity of their female chattel. Saudia management believes it has the problem well in hand:

‘There are solutions to this problem…we will soon enforce rules that will satisfy all passengers,’ Saudia assistant manager for marketing Abdul Rahman Al Fahd, told Saudi daily, Ajel.

It is thought that the airline will include instructions to flight booking staff at Gulf airports to keep these new rules in place.

Will females be relegated to the back of the plane, unless they can prove they are related to a male passenger? But if a married or brother and sister couple is sitting in a grouping of three or more adjacent seats, what happens if an unrelated male is booked into the third seat?

Still, it is far easier for Saudia to segregate passengers by sex than it would be for either of the two US carriers, Delta and American, serving Israel, even if they wanted to.  It is almost certainly illegal under US law.

Share
Tags: , , , ,