Archive by Author

DISGUSTING: From Planned Parenthood To Kathy Griffin — Are Decapitated Heads Now Fodder for Jokes?

Originally posted at CLASH Daily

Could it be that all the beheading ISIS does is merely the group’s attempt to inject laughter into a dour world? To prove that point, recently, on a three-minute Center for Medical Progress video, a Planned Parenthood of Michigan medical director flippantly said that pro-choice proponents should just admit that abortion is murder.

Now, how funny is that?

Medical director, Lisa Harris not only has the courage of her convictions, much like Jihadi Johnand youthful Mexican assassin, El Ponchis, this is a woman with a great sense of humor.

For her opening monolog, Harris warmed up the crowd by recommending that the best way to deal with those who oppose abortion is to make light of the violence. On the video, Harris joked around saying, “Let’s just give them all the violence. It’s a person. It’s killing. Let’s just give them all that.”

Yes, lets!

Then, further along in her slapstick routine, Harris kidded about trying to pull the severed head of an aborted baby out of its mother’s womb. Inserting levity into the abortion process, Harris jested about “The heads that get stuck that we can’t get out…[and] the hemorrhages that we manage.”

In other words, at Planned Parenthood amputated heads and profuse bleeding are fodder for laughing it up? Which proves, once again, that ISIS, abortion advocates, and now pro-choice comedians, are all on the same page when it comes to severed heads.

Take, for instance, irreverent comedian, Kathy Griffin.

In addition to telling Jesus to “suck it”, and saying that her Emmy is her God, Kathy appeared in a pro-abortion video with Cher to support the re-election of hilariously-witty-abortion-proponent Barack Obama. Then, in the height of the oh-so-funny #shoutyourabortion craze, Kathy tweeted approbations to a woman who had the courage to brag about relegating her offspring to a red biohazard bag.

More recently Kathy, who is all about the hilarity of headless corpses, posed for an amusing “Love Trumps Hate” photo with edgy photographer Tyler Shields. In her outstretched arm, the knee-slapping, buttoned-up Kathy held what looked like Donald Trump’s decapitated blood-soaked head.

Griffin’s homage to ISIS included dampening Trump’s blond hair with blood in a color that matched her own carrot-top red. The picture of Kathy is so uproariously funny it is sure to have Griffin-loving/Trump-hating fans absolutely rolling in the aisles.

During the photo shoot it is purported Griffin told Tyler that after the humorous assassination threat against a sitting president was released, to avoid prison, the comedy team might need to move to Mexico, where rib-tickling things like severing heads is a national past time.

And so, despite Kathy Griffin’s hollow apology where she blamed poor judgment on being a comic in search of good material, it’s final; ISIS, Planned Parenthood, and pro-choice comedians all think beheading is giggle-worthy.

With that in mind, although Americans are usually up for a good joke, maybe there is cause for some concern. After all, if ISIS laughs about removing heads for religion reasons, Planned Parenthood for convenience sake, and liberal comedians on behalf of politics, how long will it be before the violent Trump resistance has a good belly laugh at the thought of decapitating anybody who disagrees with them?

ACCIDENTALLY HONEST: Nancy Peolosi’s Addled Brain Makes Unintentional TRUE Statement About Gun Rights

Originally posted at CLASH Daily

For pro-choice Catholic Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) the extent of her confusion used to only be saying really dumb stuff about Obamacare, abortion, and American history.

Take, for instance, the time Nancy told an adopted woman — to her face — at a CNN town hall meeting that her birth mother deserved the choice to abort her.

Then, while out shilling for Obamacare, Nancy once said that besides 3,000 abortions a day that she heartily condones, Republicans stopping Obamacare abortion funding would result in “women dying on the floor.”

On behalf of her beloved ACA, Nancy also celebrated the notion that the Founders had the “entrepreneurialAffordable Care Act in mind for people who, in lieu of working full-time, would one day want to do other things like learn to play a musical instrument, or spend leisurely afternoons water coloring.

What’s scary is that this sub-standard level of American history expertise came from a woman who, despite confusing the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence, spent four years sitting just two heartbeats from the Oval Office.

Over the years, it’s been easy to blame Ms. Pelosi’s deer-in-the-headlight faux pas’ on things like way too many face lifts, having San Francisco roots or too much hair dye seeping into her smaller-than-normal brain.

In fairness though, Nancy’s ill-fitting dentures could be what makes her upper lip curl under when she speaks, which would distract the former Speaker mid-sentence. If her upper level is not the culprit, it could be those $10,000 Tahitian pearls she wears cutting the oxygen supply to her brain.

But now, at 77-years-old, and based on some of the outlandish things the almost-octogenarian has been saying lately, one can’t help but wonder whether the aging liberal is suffering mini-strokes, may be stricken with dementia, or perhaps clunked herself in the head with that huge gavel she swung around when she was Speaker of the House.

In February, during an appearance before Families USA, an activist group fighting the repeal of Obamacare, a mumbling Pelosi kept repeating herself, she instructed the audience to clap at her “applause line”, and called Republican John Kasich, the former governor of Ohio, the governor of Illinois.

Okay, so, just like U.S. history, maybe stand up comedy and geography aren’t Nancy’s forte either.

After those embarrassing moments, Pelosi went on to confuse Medicare with Medicaid, Martin Luther King Jr. with his long lost Asian relative “Martin Luther Sing”, and congratulated Families USA for her work.

Also in February, at a press conference, the House Minority diva mistakenly referred to President Trump as President Bush. Nancy, the spokesperson for the Democrat Party said: “While it’s only been a couple of weeks since the inauguration, we’ve seen nothing that I can work with President Bush on.”

Fortunately, Nancy didn’t complicate matters by referring to G.W. as Trump’s open-mic accomplice “Billy Bush”.

Nonetheless, in April, on ABC’s This Week, while discussing Democrats working with the White House Nancy did it yet again. Not known for having a wry sense of humor or comedic timing, to correct her Bush/Trump mix up, Nancy quickly said: “I’m so sorry, President Bush. I never thought I would pray for the day that you were president again.”

Blame it on poor eyesight; just a few weeks after the second G.W. Bush gaffe, at a California Democrat Convention, Nancy got so caught up in the excitement of the moment, she plopped her derriere into a seat marked “Reserved” for a wheelchair.

Clearly, based on this conduct the aging politician has no handle on American history, founding principles, or the resolve and work ethic of our Founding Fathers. Moreover, Nana Pelosi also has limited knowledge of where our nation’s governors hail from, can’t tell the difference between our 43rd and 45th presidents, and judging from her choice of seating, may even have an issue with ableism.

Yet despite all those examples, the Pelosi-is-very-puzzled pièce de résistance took place during remarks she made at the Peter G. Peterson Foundation’s 2017 Fiscal Summit.

It was at the summit that the shining star of San Francisco politics confused the gun rights activist group, the National Rifle Association (NRA), with the Department of Defense’s National Security Agency (NSA). While being interviewed, Pelosi was straining to suggest that that the president she confused with Bush – twice – conspired with the Russians and then obstructed justice.

Pelosi told CNN’s, Dana Bash:

To have a president say, if he did, to the director of the FBI, or the DNI, the Director of National Intelligence, or the NRA person that—um, uh, that they should not go forward, it raises questions that need to be answered in a facts and law way, and not hearsay.

One would think that Nancy, who just last year suggested that a gun control vote could “save 90 lives”, would remember her suggestion to Congress to “protect and defend” the U.S. Constitution by enacting harsher gun control measures.

Instead, what is ironic, is that Nancy confused the group that advocates for the Constitutional right to “keep and bear Arms” with a government agency that Democrats like Pelosi typically think is all that is necessary to keep Americans safe.

The NRA would disagree, but, either way, what is clear is that something’s up with Nancy Pelosi.

And so, notwithstanding Nancy misplacing the simplest thoughts, when the current Minority Leader mistakenly connected those who safeguard national security with the protectors of the Second Amendment – she didn’t mean to — but she actually got something right.

Brandenburg Barack Reprimands Donald Trump

Originally posted at American Thinker

Time and experience have taught Americans that we either agree with the Barack Obama or become the object of his wrath.  The former president is so physically uncomfortable with disapproval that he becomes myopically fixated and seems obsessed with the mission of convincing his critics otherwise.

There’s no doubt that Obama perceives the 2016 election as a complete rejection of everything he stands for. That’s why; of late, the ex-president seems compelled to correct those he perceives as having rejected what it is he believes.

So, when not kite-surfing in Tahiti, super yachting and relaxing in Teti’aroa, or gorging on Torta di Ceci in Tuscany, Obama is about the business of chastising Americans his eight years of continual haranguing did nothing to change and embarrassing the president those voters elected.

Take for instance Trump’s injunction concerning refugees and immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries.

Unable to restrain the urge to express his opinion on the subject, the former POTUS waited just one week before having his spokesperson congratulate Americans for protesting the ban. That’s right, less than six months out of office and by inspiring thugs to oppose Trump with street violence; Obama has slipped back into the role of community organizer.

Then, as a representative of the government knowing better than parents, Obama, who was busy counting the $3.2 million stipend he pocketed in Milan, sent a “riled up” Michelle to the 2017 Healthier Future Summit, to rebuke Donald Trump for daring to implement a policy.

Obama’s proxy was so irate, she accused the current president of not caring about the same children both she and her husband would have aborted so as to never require a school lunch. In fact, Michelle equated minor nutritional adjustments to the menu with Trump feeding children “crap!”
More recently, Obama again exhibited his incapacity to control the urge to outmaneuver anyone disagreeing with, or getting more attention than him.

Rather than canceling the speech he supposedly committed to last year, and in hopes of seizing attention from Trump during his first international visit, Obama agreed to appear beside the chancellor who is orchestrating the Muslim conquest of Germany.

In the run-up to that speech, in hopes of offsetting Trump’s exposure, “Dear Barack” photo bombed the current president. To ensure everyone was aware he was in Europe, prior to meeting up with the women he spied on, Obama thrilled the European press by strutting around Tuscany in sunglasses, accompanied by a wife dressed in a shoulder-baring laced-up number that looked like a ripped sheet.

Then, just days after 22 youthful-corpses were lined up in a Manchester morgue, felled by a Libyan refugee/terrorist-administered nail bomb, at an event commemorating the 500th anniversary of the Reformation, Obama exploited the event by discounting the value of finding a way to make it harder for terrorists to plant shrapnel in little girls.

Feeling compelled to add credence to absurdity, and to present a stark comparison an agenda he views as a personal affront, the ex-president garnered strength from the words of a liberal pop star who can’t co-exist with a husband, boyfriend, or Taylor Swift. Reacting to the Manchester massacre, singer and intellectual oracle Katy Perry pronounced that there should be “No barriers, no borders, we all just need to coexist.”  Such foolhardy gibberish was all the affirmation Obama needed to reconfirm his commitment to a message that emboldens extremists.

Obama also doubled down on former State Department SPOX Marie Harf’s suggestion that rehabilitating ISIS requires jobs programs. Without mentioning the far-right populist president’s name, in the shadow of Brandenburg Gate, the rock star usurper took it upon himself to school a man he clearly perceives to be intellectually inferior to himself, saying:

One way we can do a better job is to create more opportunities for people in their home countries. If there are disruptions in these countries, if there is bad governance, if there is war or if there is poverty, in this new world that we live in we can’t isolate ourselves — we can’t hide behind a wall.

In Germany, Obama promoted “new world”-globalism telling the crowd that, according to loftier thinking, “We can’t isolate ourselves — we can’t hide behind a wall.”

The ex-president elaborated by adding “a child on the other side of the border is no less worthy of love and compassion than my own child. We can’t distinguish between them in terms of… worth and inherent dignity, and that they’re deserving of shelter and love and education and opportunity.”

That kind of liberal rationale comes from a well-practiced hypocrite.

If Obama doesn’t believe in walls, why then does he “isolate” himself behind the brick wall that surrounds his Washington, DC rental property?

Moreover, is Obama saying that the children on the other side of the wall outside his DC brick mansion are “less worthy of love and compassion” than Sasha and Malia? By blocking children out, is Barack distinguishing “between [children] in terms of their worth and inherent dignity, and [implying] that [only two are] deserving of shelter and love and education and opportunity?”

As for the children Obama cited in his speech, could some of those “deserving” cherubs be the adorable unaccompanied-minor MS-13 gang members his administration knowingly released onto American streets and who are currently hacking off heads on Long Island?

Either way, with all bloodshed in Britain, Barack was not about to waste an opportunity to adjust the attitude of his detractors, especially if doing so provided an excuse to elevate his philosophies above those of his successor.

And so, based on Obama’s comments, the reason the world’s greatest defender of failed liberal policy traveled all the way to Germany was not to commend Martin Luther, but as an excuse to crash Trump’s party, exalt his egotistical self, and to reaffirm among friends that his worldview is far superior to Donald Trump’s.|

LOOK BEHIND THE CURTAIN: THIS Is Who Is REALLY Behind The ‘Impeachment Mania’…

Originally posted at CLASH Daily

The left is in the midst of a major temper tantrum. The reason? They cheated, connived, and manipulated a win for Hillary Clinton and she lost anyway.

It’s no wonder Clinton, the woman with the gleeful full-body-he’s-an-idiot shiver during one debate, nearly went ballistic on the night of the election after she realized she lost to a man liberals view as a clown with a canary-yellow pompadour.

So, rather than accept the results of a fair election, and rather than submit to the will of “We the people,” the “Love Trumps hate” crowd has formed a hateful resistance and is presently in the process of trying to drive Donald Trump from the White House.

How are they doing it? With the same playbook they’ve used to incite street-level chaos for 40+ years. Now, the left is hoping to undermine a free and fair election by employing Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, which, for progressives like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, is the Bible.

Alinsky’s ground rules worked very well for Barack Obama the community organizer when he applied them to incite worldwide chaos for eight years. Therefore, it stands to reason that liberals believe using similar strategies should be able to send an outsider like Trump back to his gilded Tower in New York City — permanently.

Currently, the game plan the left is testing involves trusty Rule #12: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.”

Those instructions are exactly what are being inflicted on Donald Trump.

The left has TARGETED Trump for destruction. They are portraying him as a threat to America and have FROZEN his image as a cartoon-like inept, loose cannon, “pu**y-grabbing” rich, white guy, whose affection for Vladimir Putin outweighs his love for America.

What is being said about Trump is very PERSONAL. The media, Democrats and deep state Republicans have managed to either confirm prior opinions or have successfully defamed his character in the minds of many. The president is being portrayed as a liar and a threat to national security and world peace.

The hope is that via leaks and news stories that portray a frustrated White House staff the public will view Donald Trump as a man CUT OFF from a SUPPORT NETWORK, a man whose most ardent admirers are presently fed up and jumping ship.

Trump’s adversaries are hoping that the unrelenting pressure, and unsupported accusations from the media, Democrats, and deep-state Republicans will tire out the public and make those who once supported the populist president UNSYMPATHETIC and doubting their original choice.

As they threaten our representative republic by opposing the will of the people, the resistance movement is attempting to portray themselves as lovers of America who are against one man, not the INSTITUTION. The HURT they claim they are inflicting is not against the presidency, but, for the sake of freedom and America, against the singular person of Donald Trump.

These are classic Alinsky street thug, community activist tactics, these are the antics that worked for Obama on a national and global level for almost a decade. The left knows that if applied with passionate zeal, Rules for Radicals work just as well on a micro level against single individuals. The left also knows that these “rules” have the power to stir up the sort of chaos that demands someone end the madness by ushering in change most Americans would oppose under less chaotic circumstances.

In this case, the goal is impeachment.

There is a manipulative spirit at work here, and Americans, regardless of their political persuasion, should both recognize and fear it.

Moreover, even those Americans who oppose Trump’s politics and his presidency, need to acknowledge the tremendous danger our republic is in if political hooligans successfully employ the media and manipulate public officials to overturn a democratic election via violence, false accusation, and lies.
If the left succeeds — America is lost.

Trust me, disgruntled Americans should just take a break from hating Trump for one second and look behind the curtain, what they will see is the Machiavellian hands of Obama, and those like him, who, in hopes of vindicating a failed liberal legacy, are seeking the help of their demonically-inspired idol, the late Saul Alinsky.

Former ‘lunch czar’ FLOTUS slams Trump

Originally posted at American Thinker

Speaking on behalf of herself and her husband, Michelle Obama recently reassured a crowd of fawning conference attendees that “we’re not gone.  We’re just breathing.”  That they are!  They’re not gone, and what they’re breathing…is fire!

After spending months with celebrities on a Tahitian vacation, and resting up from almost a decade of wreaking holy havoc on America, in an attempt to counter the sitting president’s policies, a revitalized Barack and Michelle are currently breathing fire in Trump’s direction every chance they get.

Quite unlike the 43rd president, who remained silent while Barack spent eight years making excuses for his own inadequacies by blaming his predecessor for every failure, both Michelle’s and Barry’s knee jerk reaction to public rejection is to respond by portraying fiascoes as achievements.

Take, for example, wealth-sharing/pay equity/carbon footprint-concerned Obama taking his private jet and a 14-car gas-guzzling entourage to Milan to collect $3.2 million for speaking at a Seeds & Chips, aka Dirty Deeds & Lyin’ Lips, Global Food Innovation summit.  While hubby was getting “free hugs” and stuffing his mom jeans with oodles of cash, less than six months after Trump’s inauguration, Michelle was busy blowing off steam at an annual Partnership for a Healthier America conference.

Seems Mrs. Obama is infuriated with Donald Trump for daring to point out that The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which masked government control as a nutritional concern, has resulted in wasted money, foul-tasting food, and 1.4 million kids dropping out of the school lunch program.

Trump’s secretary of agriculture, Sonny Perdue, agrees it’s time for change.

Perdue said, “We all know that meals can’t be nutritious if they aren’t consumed and if they’re put in the trash.”  That’s why Perdue is counteracting Michelle’s Healthy Food Horror Show by giving school “food service professionals flexibility” in deciding what to serve the kids.

What a revolutionary concept!  Someone other than a government czarina gets to control the menu.

For one, some salt, which not only adds flavor, but also is now said to have no impact on blood pressure, will be added back into the menu.  In addition, school districts will also be issued whole wheat waivers, and children’s brains can now benefit from the fat in low-fat chocolate milk.

In other words, the iron grip of Michelle Obama’s no salt, fat-free lunch diktats will be off the necks of garroted school districts.  In turn, food will be made more palatable so that schoolchildren will want to eat lunch instead of scraping it into the garbage.

In response to the plan to do away with paltry portions of quinoa and salt-free rice cakes, Ms. “Fried Fat Cakes” has become visibly livid.

Michelle told the Obamas’ personal White House chef and executive director of the anti-childhood obesity initiative, Sam Kass, that instead of swallowing the excrement Americans have been subjected to during the Obama years, with Trump in charge, kids will be “eating crap.”

On a full-blown Healthier America conference tirade, a know-it-all Michelle appealed to women in the audience with false humility, saying, “Moms, think about this.  I don’t care what state you live in, take me out of the equation, like me, don’t like me, but think about why someone is OK with your kids eating crap.”

This is a confusing statement coming from someone who supports a woman’s “right to choose.”  With that in mind, the big takeaway from Michelle’s indignation is that choice is acceptable only if the one choosing doesn’t feed a survivor of the womb a “crappy” bag of Doritos and a ham sandwich for lunch.

After indirectly suggesting that certain Americans “celebrate” policies that disregard the well-being of children, Michelle made another stunning statement.  All fired up, the former FLOTUS, who clearly misses determining how much we “eat, feed, and move,” reprimanded the audience, saying, “You take your eye off the ball on things, and you let other people determine what you’re eating, what you’re feeding, how you’re moving, and before you know it, your kids have Type II diabetes.”

Further implying a Trump undercurrent of malfeasance, Mrs. Obama pressed the Healthier America audience to “look at motives.”

For the purpose of federal bureaucratic control, Michelle, the queen of deceitful intentions, insisted on feeding schoolchildren cardboard, and she’s the one accusing Donald Trump of ulterior motives?

Doing what she does best, which is telling people what to do and how to think, Michelle instructed the audience, “You have to stop and think, ‘Why don’t you want our kids to have good food at school?  What is wrong with you, and why is that a partisan issue?  Why would that be political?'”

Then the über-partisan, politically motivated Michelle, who likes to “splurge” on the very French fries and ice cream she now polices, proposed stricter control:

How about we stop asking kids how they feel about their food because kids, my kids included, if they could eat pizza and French fries every day with ice cream on top and a soda, they would think they were happy until they get sick.

Undoubtedly, a proponent of government gavage, a woman whose husband marginalized American preferences, then shared that she believes it’s “ridiculous” to consider children’s food preferences when deciding what to force-feed them for lunch.

“You know what?” Michelle said.  “Kids don’t like math, either.  What are we going to do?  Stop teaching math?”

Correct, most kids dislike math, but not as much as real American’s dislike government overreach.  And that “not liking” is the very reason, Trump, the man the Obamas criticize, is now the president of the United States.

So, after eight long years of government inflicting itself on individual liberty, whether Michelle Obama likes it or not, “we the people” want our children to experience a small taste of American freedom by eating more of whatever they want for lunch.

Barack the BS Master Brags about Humility

Originally posted at American Thinker

Forgetting that it’s less than six months since the reign of illusion and delusion ended, the cover of the May 29, 2017 edition of People magazine recently featured a nostalgic story entitled “The Obamas: Their Lives Now.”

The caption below the photo read: “How Michelle and Barack are enjoying downtime with each other and their girls – and planning their surprising next moves.”

Irrespective of what People magazine attempted to represent, the goal of the glossy exploitation was to give the couple yet another excuse to denigrate Donald Trump.  That’s why the title should have read: “The Obamas: Still Belittling Everyone but Themselves.”

Authors Sandra Sobieraj Westfall and Kathy Ehrich began by portraying Michelle and Barry as regular folks spending lazy days fighting over closet space and trying to master the coffee maker control panel.

The article does mention a personal staff of 20, “many paid for by the former First Couple,” which makes one wonder why, after yachting in French Polynesia with the likes of Oprah, Forrest Gump, and The Boss, Michelle, or Barry would be futzing around with the Keurig.

In the first paragraph, the authors share a story about how, while heading home from what they call an “easy, breezy” food-industry trip to Milan, Barry, and his foreign policy adviser, Ben Rhodes, were “jolted by alerts” notifying them that Donald Trump had fired Obama-appointed FBI director James Comey.

The article stated that in response to the news, the egotistical Marxist – who fired a military general he had longstanding resentment toward and who has done more to damage the health of our representative republic – had this to say about Trump’s decision: “This is not normal.  This is not healthy for democracy.”

And who better to judge strange presidential behavior and what is detrimental to democracy than a pathological liar who spent eight years disrespecting the military and flouting the U.S. Constitution?

Westfall and Ehrich suggest that the nation is having trouble adjusting to a 45th president whom they describe as “erratic and impolitic,” which implies that Obama is neither of the two.  The article said “mission-focused” Obama yearns to settle into his downscaled life but is conflicted because of “Trump’s shadow” making it impossible for him, as an “engaged citizen,” to remain disengaged.

And so, according to the authors, Michelle and Barry distract themselves from the “chaos in Washington” they caused by doing everyday things like “plugging away at a congressional redistricting plan, spearheading educational initiatives, and writing his’n’-hers memoirs,” which will net “at least $60-million” of shareable wealth the duo will share with no one.

So, apparently, in addition to interviewing prospective terrorist ghostwriters to pen his third book, the community organizer is resolute in his efforts to eliminate political rivalry by pooling Democrat voters inside district lines that keep politicians he approves of elected and entrenched in office.

And if all this self-obsessed taking-over-the-world isn’t enough to alarm every clear-thinking American, the Obamas are also planning a Presidential Center for the South Side of Chicago that will be “more like a campus … [to train] the Michelle Robinsons and Barack Obamas of today, so they can take up the torch.”

To be authentic, the memorial should be named after the “evil genius” and Obama mentor Saul Alinsky and marketed as a place where hooligans learn to climb to the top by stirring up street-level mayhem.

The article also stated that after talking to Trump on the night of the election, the biggest BS artist on the planet told two close friends that what he concluded from the phone call is that the newly elected president is “nothing but a [BS-er]!”

With that in mind, friends stress that when he’s not kite-surfing in the British Virgin Islands, the ex-president is “[d]eeply concerned with what he’s seen.  But [he is] also optimistic and heartened that citizens aren’t just watching it happen but engaging with elected representatives at town halls.”

It appears as if Barack confuses town hall attendees with the anti-GOP resistance and the rowdy anarchists punching out Trump supporters, suppressing free speech with riots, “taking up the torch” with arson, and accusing a duly elected president of crimes no one can prove.

It all raises the question: who’s the BS artist?

The Obama article also stated that besides advancing progressive policy, Michelle and Barry are deeply involved in the lives of daughters Sasha and Malia, whose photos are allegedly on “every flat surface” of their rented Washington, D.C. mansion.

About older daughter Malia, Obama said this: “She’s still a teenager who deserves her privacy.”  This sentiment is somewhat disingenuous coming from someone who, although he denies doing so, undoubtedly spied on everyone from Bibi Netanyahu to Angela Merkel to the Supreme Court to the Vatican to the Trump transition team.

And then there’s Michelle, whom the article refers to as “riled up,” reassuring college-bound students that both “Barack and I are going to keep on … lifting you up no matter what house we live in.”

For Michelle, “lifting up” includes putting down.

The People piece said Michelle “dreamed of a long vacation where her husband could just sleep, knowing his legacy was safe with President Hillary Clinton.”  But after an overconfident Hillary cheated and connived, and then lost the election anyway, mournful Michelle, who’s been “all black” since the day she was born, told guests “I’m going all black for the next couple of years.”

Imagine Laura Bush responding to the election of our first black president by saying, “I’m going all white for the next couple of years.”

Nonetheless, by now, everyone knows that neither Tahiti kite-surfing Barack nor his bride takes rejection or correction well.  That’s why the always classy Michelle, irate over changes being made to her school lunch program, publicly accused Trump of wanting to feed school kids “crap!”

In the end, after denigrating another president and pretending to be the only mortal capable of saving America from Donald Doom, Obama ended the People magazine article exalting himself with an absurd comment about how “the longer he was in office the more humble he became.”  This demonstrates that just as a Nobel Peace Prize made a street thug believe he was a peacemaker, Barack the BS artist must also believe that bragging about humility somehow makes a narcissist humble.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/barack_the_bs_master_brags_about_humility.html#ixzz4kOpVEzGg
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

HAS FRANCE REWARDED Pedophilia by Electing ‘President Oedipus’?

Originally posted at  CLASH Daily

In April of 2015, on an ABC ,20/20: A Barbara Walters’ Special Barbara allowed a child molester and her victim/husband to explain: “How Mary Kay Letourneau Went From Having Sex With a 6th Grader to Becoming His Wife.” With that in mind, maybe Barbara would agree to come out of retirement to also explain how a woman named Brigitte Trogneux went from having sex with a 9th grader to becoming France’s First Lady.

In 1993, Brigitte Trogneux-Auzière was a married 40-year-old mother of three, teaching French literature, Latin, and drama in an elite private school run by Jesuit priests. It was during her tenure in Amiens that Brigitte did the unthinkable and seduced a 15-year-old student performing in “The Art of Comedy,” the school play she directed.

Now a 64-year-old grandmother-of-seven, Brigitte Trogneux’s sordid love story is not unlike that of the ten-years-younger Mary Kay Letourneau who, as a 34-year-old married woman, with four children, started helping 12-year-old student Vili Fualaau “develop his drawing skills”.

Unlike Vili, whose proclivity tended toward illustration, Trogneux, the daughter of millionaire chocolatier/macaroon-makers, thought Macron had an “exceptional intelligence”. Trogneux has said that she was so impressed with Emmanuel’s brain power, she felt as if she “[w] as working with Mozart”. Perhaps Auzière slept with the boy because, in his presence, she was overtaken by the sound of violins and a harpsichord?

Either way, in France the age of consent rises from 15-to-18 if the older party has authority over the younger victim. Whether or not France’s new first lady was actually having literal sex with her youthful understudy remains unclear. However, when asked for details by Anne Fulda, a journalist, and author of Emmanuel Macron: A Perfect Young Man, Brigitte replied, “Nobody will ever know at what moment our story became a love story. That belongs to us. That is our secret.”

Whenever the crime took place, rest assured, Macron was still a schoolboy, which is why Brigitte’s “secret” is so disturbing. One would think that even in Sexuellement libéré France, teachers shun sex with their students.

Nonetheless, at the start of the relationship, Macron, the son of two doctors, spent so much time with his middle-aged paramour, “rewriting the play’s script”, his parents thought he was pursuing Brigitte’s daughter Tiphaine Auzière who was in Emmanuel’s class.

Unlike Mary Kay Letourneau, whose in-laws reported her affair with Vili to the authorities, which resulted in Letourneau’s arrest, and a charge of second-degree child rape, “Emmanuel’s parents … did not lodge a complaint against Brigitte Auzière for corruption of a minor.”

Displeased that his son’s after school activities included things other than script revision, Macron’s father asked the seductress who was the same age as the boy’s mother to stay away from his son at least until he was 18. Brigitte refused and tearfully told her lover’s father, “I cannot promise you anything.”

Emmanuel’s father and mother’s false belief that sending their son away to college would end the inappropriate relationship was probably the only reason Brigitte escaped charges of statutory rape.

On the other hand, sex-offender Mary Kay Letourneau was less fortunate.

Immediately after Letourneau’s first release from prison, on condition that she stay far away from her underage inamorato, and in direct disobedience to a court order, police found the demure pedophile in the act of being impregnated a second time by Fualaau in a mini-van with steamed up windows. As a result of that encounter, and before being reunited with the teen-of-her-dreams and finally settling down to raise their two daughters, Mary Kay ended up serving 7.5 years in jail.

With plans for more children and hopes of returning to private schools and community colleges to help other children “develop their drawing skills”, Letourneau was released from jail in 2004, married 21-year-old Fualaau in 2005, and now works as a legal assistant.

Anne Bremner, an attorney who met Letourneau in 2002, said of the star-crossed lovers “Nothing could have kept the two of them apart.” In like manner, Brigitte also romanticized seducing a child, destroying her marriage and family, and devastating her husband of 33-years as merely “Love [taking] everything in its path.”

At 16-years-old Macron vowed to make the married mother of three his wife. So, after carrying on for 14-years while her dutiful spouse worked long hours; the year after Mary Kay married Vili, Brigitte divorced her shattered husband, Andre-Louis Auzière. Then, in 2007, at 54-years of age, a menopausal Brigitte, dressed in a short, white mini-dress, married her 29-year-old protégé in the same town hall where she wed her first husband three years prior to her groom being born.

To this day, Emmanuel Macron credits his wife with shaping him into the man he is. And so, the object of France’s president-elect’s mother fixation gave up making macaroons and, instead, has spent 20+ years making a Macron into a president. Thus, Brigitte Trogneux progressed from wife to mother to teacher to lover of a political Mozart who the new world order hopes will be the progressive remedy for European populism.

Think about how strange it would have been if Barack Obama had brought Marian Robinson to the White House as his wife instead of his mother-in-law. Meanwhile, France’s May/December couple affectionately refers to each other as “Manu” and “Bibi”, the latter of which means “grandma” in Swahili.

In the end, Mary Kay Letourneau gave birth to the second of Vili’s daughters behind bars.

But for Brigitte “Mme Robinson” Trogneux things have turned out quite different. After being part-and-party to a decades-long sex scandal, President Oedipus’s wife won’t be going to jail. Instead, Trogneux will be rewarded for her indiscretions with the title of France’s First Lady and will live with Manu like a queen in Élysée Palace.

Liberals should ‘own every preventable death’

Originally posted at American Thinker

Once again, Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez’s inconsistent statements confound both reason and sanity.  Take for instance the topic of giving shelter to illegal aliens.  Perez strongly believes in sanctuary cities making sovereign decisions.  But in the next breath, Perez says he also strongly believes “[t]hat [abortion rights are] not negotiable and should not change city-by-city or state-by-state.”

So, based on those contrasting statements, according to Tom, city or state decisions are either “negotiable” or non-negotiable, based solely on which agenda is being advanced.

Then, recently, at a May Day rally held in front of the White House, speaking Spanglish, Tom told the boisterous crowd, “No human being is illegal.  We must treat everyone with dignity.”

Again, it appears as if abortion activist/illegal apologist Tom Perez has mixed things up when he says that because they are human, illegals can’t be deported.  Yet, at the same time, unborn humans can be aborted.  In other words, in the mind of Tom Perez illegal + human = not illegal, while unborn + human = not human.

Stunning illogicalities of this sort don’t stop with Perez just conferring dignity on one group of humans while denying life to another.  As a matter of fact, recently, right ahead of the House vote to repeal Obamacare, Perez, who clearly doesn’t think about how incongruous his declarations sound, said that if Obamacare is repealed:

Trump and Republicans will own every preventable death, every untreated illness and every bankruptcy that American families will be forced to bear if this bill becomes law and millions lose access to affordable care. The 24 million that lose access to healthcare is not just a number.

Notwithstanding Tom’s stunning assertions, the DNC chair did aptly reconfirm for those he seeks to condemn that the sixty million lives lost to abortion, and the thousands who’ve died at the hands of illegal immigrants, are “not just a number.”

Nonetheless, similar to Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who, with oversized gavel in hand, once accused Republicans of wanting “women [to] die on the floor” for voting against funding abortion in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), the DNC chair is quick to accuse but slow to self-evaluate.

Tom personifies the mindset of liberal women on social media who now are saying that repealing Obamacare is tantamount to Trump forcing women who’ve been raped to pay for their own abortions.

Apparently, lefties like Perez and the pink pussy-hat brigade don’t realize that sentiments such as those implicitly equate American citizens with Islamist extremists who punish women who’ve been raped by stoning them to death.  Furthermore, maybe if Americans denouncing “preventable death” want to be taken seriously, they shouldn’t champion the slaughter of 3,000 unborn babies a day, or sanction the influx of those responsible for the daily demise of numerous fellow citizens.

Either way, Perez did go on to say that the American Health Care Act (AHCA) bill “represents fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers and even newborn babies with heart diseases or cancers that are too costly to treat without affordable insurance.”

Based on the left’s cadaverous track record, and although purely speculation, the outcry coming from the left over repealing Obamacare is probably rooted in an unspoken concern that less carnage may result, not more.  That’s why liberals should just own up to the truth and admit that besides wounded pride, their disappointment over the defeat of Obamacare has more to do with losing the power over life and death than concern for Americans dying.

Besides, after supporting the murder and selling of baby body parts, late-term abortion-loving liberals defending Obamacare by lamenting newborns dying from fatal diseases is sort of like cannibals grieving over those they never got to boil and eat.

In the end, by promising that Trump will “own every preventable death,” once again, Tom Perez has made a proclamation that, rather than place the onus on the Republicans, actually convicts the Democrats.  Therefore, if thwarting death is really Perez’s objective, maybe he can give credibility to his convictions by denouncing abortion and supporting closed borders.

A BIG Change in the Trump Administration? Will ‘SPICIER’ replace Spicer?

Originally posted at CLASH Daily

There’s renewed talk that former Victoria’s Secret model/former first lady of the City by the Bay, and current Fox News host, Kimberly Guilfoyle is negotiating with the Trump administration about possibly replacing Sean Spicer as the one who will be dealing with the ornery White House press corp.

If it actually does happen, Guilfoyle will have to make the tough transition from swinging her pins in time to music in front of the camera on The Five to obscuring two of her four best assets behind a podium adorned with the presidential seal.

Think of the potential jam up of notepads trying to squeeze through the door every time Kimberly, in a plummeting neckline, sashays up to the lectern to take questions.

Instead of the usually irritated redhead guy, the person getting everyone hot under the collar will be a curvaceous brunette, poured into a tight red dress, flashing a Colgate smile. The scene will be sort of like Boardwalk Hall in Atlantic City, except the White House press briefing room will have its very own brainy Miss America answering tough questions while everyone desperately tries to focus on her intellect.

In other words, if Kimberly takes the job, the White House Press Secretary will go from Spicer to even spicier!

Besides being a Victoria Secret runway model, and a Fox News anchor, 48-year-old Guilfoyle’s resume qualifies her for the job because it includes work as a former Los Angeles and San Francisco prosecutor.

As for her personal life, Fox’s most famous brunette was married for four years to the current Lt. Governor and former mayor of San Francisco, liberal left-wing-loon-nutcase Gavin Newsom. The couple separated in 2005 because their bi-coastal marriage was under pressure.

Letting no moss grow under her Manolo Blahniks, the next year, Kimberly divorced Gavin and married Eric Villency the CEO of the Villency Design group and gave birth to a son named Ronan Anthony Villency.

Three years later, Villency and Guilfoyle divorced.

Now, the New York Times is reporting “Trump has raised the Fox News host … to allies as a possible press secretary.” Guilfoyle recently said if she is offered, and decides to take the White House press secretary job, it will mean she’ll have to relocate from New York City to Washington, DC and that move will mean leaving her Fox family and a huge cut in pay.

Not to worry, low cuts and pay cuts are not a problem for Guilfoyle who claims:

I’m a patriot, and it would be an honor to serve the country. I think it’d be a fascinating job. It’s a challenging job, and you need someone really determined and focused, a great communicator in there with deep knowledge to be able to handle that position.

Recently, Kimberly, who has admitted to having her first celebrity crush on Howard Stern, had this to say about how to ensure successful press briefings:

If you want to be successful and do communications with President Trump, you have to be someone who he actually wants to spend a little bit of time with. You’ve got to insist on getting in front of POTUS, talk to him, and have like five, six minutes with him before you go out there and take the podium, and otherwise, you’re driving blind.

“It has to be somebody with a very close relationship, where there’s trust there, there’s inherent loyalty, someone who’s been there from the beginning,” she added.

Having known Trump and his family for more than a decade, Kimberly believes she just might be that person.

“I think I have a very good relationship with the president,” Guilfoyle said. “I think I enjoy a very straightforward and authentic, very genuine relationship, one that’s built on trust and integrity, and I think that’s imperative for success in that position.”

While all this is press secretary talk is very exciting for Kimberly, if she does leave, it poses a huge problem Fox News.

Why? Because to the amusement of male news junkies all across America, since 2006, Kimberly, her décolletage, long chestnut tresses, thighs and legal proficiency, have been prominently featured on the “fair and balanced” network. And so, seeing as Andrea Tantaros is suing the station, if buxom Kimberly does assume the position of White House press secretary Fox News will have to work fast and furiously to hire a fresh pair of legs.

CONTRADICTORY VIEWS: The Democratic Party’s Policy On Abortion Doesn’t Fit With…

Originally posted at CLASH Daily

If it concerns illegal immigrants, Democratic National Committee Chairman, Tom Perez, strongly believes in sanctuary cities making sovereign decisions. On the other hand, Perez also strongly believes “That [abortion rights are] not negotiable and should not change city-by-city or state-by-state.”

Judging from their 55-page, pro-abortion manifesto, the Democratic Party platform officially thinks that the right to kill the unborn takes precedent over human rights. That’s why, henceforth and in perpetuity, every candidate who runs as a Democrat must now stand on the side of abortion because, according to Tom Perez, “every woman should be able to make her own health choices. Period.”

As the titular head of the most progressive pro-death political party in American history, DNC chairperson Perez also demands from party members “absolute ideological purity.” Thus, pro-life Democrats (which is sort of an oxymoron) are not welcome in the party. This sentiment comes from a guy who criticizes Trump for alleged dictatorial tendencies.

Nevertheless, if given the opportunity, litmus-test Perez would likely argue that besides feeling that the unborn are not human life, abortion is “settled law” and settled law should not be superseded by emotional, personal, or religious belief. In other words, there is zero room in the Democratic Party to discuss the rights of the unborn, scientific evidence, or what ultimately constitutes God-ordained humanity.

Yet when it comes to justifying the presence of illegal aliens, Perez diametrically opposes the argument he uses to defend killing human babies in the womb.

For instance, the Democratic Party rationalizes abortion on demand by stressing that baby killing is a Constitutional right that must be protected. If they really believe that, why do those on the left likewise fight to help break immigration law?

Tom Perez stresses that abortion rights are “not negotiable and should not change city-by-city or state-by-state,” but then changes that opinion if a city or state harbors illegal felons. All in all, if a city or a state decides to defy the law and shelter illegals, a non-negotiable Tom Perez and the Democrat Party encourage them to do just that.

Recently, at a May/Labor Day rally outside of the White House, Mr. Perez, who sees Trump and the Republican Party as a threat to having carte blanche to cart 3,000 dead fetuses to the incinerator every day, told illegal immigrants and hordes of labor party representatives that “The Democratic party will always be here, fighting for you.

Perez emphasized that “our nation’s diversity is our greatest strength,” which means both he, and the party he represents, do not view “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” our nation’s greatest strength.

Shouting to the crowd in Spanish, Perez spurred the gathering to new heights by reminding them that the Democratic Party and the illegal community share the value of diversity. Not for nothing (as they say in Brooklyn), but judging from the news of late, some of the other assorted values Democrats and illegal felons share are fraudulence, thievery, law flouting, and, on occasion, rape and murder.

Moreover, if this dispute were truly about furthering diversity, why would the Democratic Party help illegal alien women gain full access to abortions that extinguish the lives of those Perez claims, if born, would add to the shared cultural mixture he so highly touts?

Besides not mentioning Trump by name, and before broaching the topic of big labor, bi-lingual Perez had a poignant message that epitomizes the hypocrisy that resides within the Democrat Party and this is what he said, “No human being is illegal, we must treat everyone with dignity.”

That’s right, according to the head of the Democrat Party, guilty humans cannot be illegal and despite breaking the law still deserve dignity. Meanwhile, according to the same Democrat Party head, although fully human, innocent, unborn beings do not even deserve the right to life.

%d bloggers like this: