Archive by Author

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.

A Cocktail ‘Coup’ in the East Village

Originally posted at American Thinker

Located in the Manhattan’s East Village, the anti-Trump resistance now has a chic “protest-themed” place to seek adult libation.  A small, intimate venue done up in brown and blue, Coup is an up-to-the-minute watering hole owned and operated by liberals who claim everyone is welcome, but whose sole purpose is to appeal to progressives who have a strong aversion to President Trump and his policies.

“A coup, or more formally, a coup d’état, is generally defined as a seizure of a state by members of the military, or other figures high-up in a national government,” which makes one wonder how the name applies to pickled progressives on bar stools crying in their beer because they lost an election.

Nevertheless, until the 45th President of the United States is back in Trump Towers for good, if thirsty members of the resistance need a place to vent their frustration they can “#drinkwithpurpose” @coupnyc.

This particular protest pub is a creation of Ravi DeRossi who, besides claiming to be uninvolved in politics until Trump was elected, runs 15 New York City bars and well-known eating establishments such as Death & Co., Amor y Amargo, and Mother of Pearl.

When not opening bars, Ravi spends time contemplating “environmental waste and factory farming.”  In 2015, to cope with the stress of a terminally ill rescue cat, the saloon mogul started a journal that turned into a manifesto on life and determined how his businesses would henceforth be run.

And so, it was journaling about Simon that convinced the all-in vegan animal rights activist to evict meat from all his eateries.

Then, just like he did when his cat passed away, in 2016, after Donald Trump won the election, DeRossi became depressed and “traumatized.” In response, once again, Ravi’s “moral conscience” kicked in.

Looking for a way to effect change, the bar owner said, “I couldn’t sit at home and sulk. I wanted to do something more positive.”  So, after brainstorming night-after-night with two colleagues at Amor y Amargo the idea was born to protest the new president by selling drinks in support of killing the babies and saving the whales.

Ravi partnered with mixologist Sother Teague, whose handle on Twitter is @Creativedrunk, and head Coup bartender Max Green. To alleviate post-election trauma, the trio decided to use the money raised from selling cocktails made with charitable spirits to fund progressive/left wing organizations that liberals fear will be defunded by a certain teetotaler named Trump.

To encourage drink donations, at Coup, resistance-themed posters written on butcher paper decorate the walls. Having no meat to wrap in the butcher paper, the wall hangings are fitting for an establishment whose beverage profits support abortion.

Coup signs say things like: “The power of the people is stronger than the people in power,” “No, you cannot take my rights, I’m still using them” and “The pilgrims were undocumented.”

The problem with this sort of liberal opinion is that the strong power of the people is the very thing that elected the powerful person Coup patrons are buying drinks to protest. Moreover, the rights in jeopardy are not the rights of those buying charity cocktails at Coup, nor is it valid to justify modern day illegal immigration by citing “undocumented” pilgrims who arrived in America as pioneers when this land was an unsettled wilderness void of laws or need for documentation.

Either way, despite the inexactitudes of cool wall posters, with every drink purchased patrons are given a wooden token.  Non-drinkers can also purchase a round of tokens for $5 each.  Activists are encouraged to drop what’s left of the tree that lost its life into six recyclable jars that are designated for an assortment of supposedly nonprofit groups.

In other words, Coup approves of killing trees to make tokens that make a statement about saving trees.

There are jars for left-wing outfits like the legal arm of political correctness the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), a conservation group called Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) who defend planetary wildlife, but not planetary human life, and of course the puppy kindness police, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA).

Also in the lineup is Human Rights Watch.  HRW is the ombudsman group that has done nothing for the humans denied the right to life by baby body part chop shop Planned Parenthood which also has its name emblazoned on one of the glass receptacles.

According to Ravi, after labor, liquor, and ‘other expenses’ are covered and based on the number of tokens dropped into each, the bar’s profits will then be divvied among the jars.

So, in other words, what goes on at Coup appeals and makes sense mostly to politically intoxicated liberals.

One inscription even reads: “They tried to bury us. They didn’t know we were seeds.”

Don’t liberals know that the seed sentiment completely negates and undermines the purpose of having abortion rights jars to collect tokens? How can Coup fund raise to kill seeds of life growing within the womb while simultaneously identifying with the political power of political seed growing and developing into a living movement?

In the end, thanks to the Coup, irate extremists in support progressive causes needn’t fly to Berkeley to oppose the likes of Ann Coulter exercising her First Amendment rights, nor bloody their knuckles at a Trump rally.  Instead, members of the bitter resistance can come to an “activist bar” in NYC where “cocktails with a conscience” mix-it-up with the already confused.

Foxy News fires O’Reilly

Originally posted at American Thinker

No one would deny that in advertising, sex sells.  If that weren’t the case, then attractive women wouldn’t be promoting things like cat food and sparkling water.  Over at the Fox cable news network, conservative news is the profit-making vehicle of choice, and Fox sells that product with the help of provocatively clothed commentators.

Take, for instance, Megyn Kelly.  Before setting her sights on NBC, the former Foxy News diva primed her meteoric rise to fame by discussing the events of the day in a spaghetti strap halter while showcasing designer shoes and oiled legs under a see-through glass-top desk.  For a time, the Fox News golden girl’s foray into serious journalism included ditching soft curls for a robotic ’80s hairdo that closely resembled Sly Stallone’s ex-wife, Brigitte Nielsen.

The gams and glamor worked so well for Miss Megyn that the combo jettisoned the precocious pundit right into the center of a debate confrontation with then-presidential candidate Donald Trump.

In the end, Megyn’s “world’s most beautiful people” allure ended up outweighing the seriousness of anything else in Ms. “Kelly’s File.”  And so, with Megyn gone, Fox should be honest and just confess that in addition to clips of Geraldo Rivera going mano a mano with a hurricane, the network’s official policy remains committed to daintily posing shimmering pins on sky-high stools.

The problem is that unlike men who are clueless when being beguiled by feminine wiles, women can usually discern when other women are flaunting their sexuality to attract male attention.  That’s why, to the feminine half of the Fox News audience, it’s obvious that the conservative cable news channel considers it “fair and balanced” to coerce two thirds of its on-camera personalities to double as eye candy.

Surely, Fox News would argue that the parade of gorgeousness coincidentally belongs to a group of doubly blessed politically minded female newscasters.  Either way, the Murdoch men should know that making a woman’s cleavage the emphasis of a news alert distracts from the intellect of highly accomplished women.

In fact, predictable décolletage displays are the very thing transforming Fox News into a kind of cable news Hooters.  The only difference between the two is that Hooters girls in revealing T-shirts serve chicken wings to hungry men, while Fox News fillies, outfitted in sleeveless skin-tight sheaths, serve up cable news to bored men sitting home in their pajamas.

Speaking of men sitting home in their pajamas, for the sin of responding like a man to having the news of the day shared by women emulating peacocks doing a mating dance, Bill O’Reilly of Fox’s wildly popular The O’Reilly Factor is the second high-profile loss from a network guilty of fostering an environment where Victoria Secret models sell the news.

In addition to embarrassing the Fox news giant, Bill O’Reilly’s fall from grace also exposes the hypocrisy of Fox News.

Think about it: how can Fox stand by and watch female news anchors struggle to find a ladylike position for their bare legs on a curvy couch in the morning, and then penalize their most popular host for reacting to the bait at night?  After hawking a full array of bodacious bosoms, flowing tresses and skin-tight mini-skirts, Fox firing a dude for being seduced by the wares being peddled smacks of conservative cable news entrapment.

At any point in time, did Rupert and his sons Lachlan and James advise Bill O’Reilly that if a female guest on his show bats her mink eyelash extensions and puckers her bee-stung lips, it’s not because she’s signaling interest in attending a pajama party at his Long Island home, nor is it a green light for the 6’4″ bloviator to kiss her on the lips?

In other words, other than the receptionist Bill referred to as “ hot chocolate,” what appears to have happened was that some of the women who used sex to attract a male audience on one side of the camera ended up garnering unwanted attention from Bill on the other side.

Now, in response, a self-righteous Fox News Channel is playing the politically correct prude by describing uninvited attention toward the very women Fox encouraged to seek male attention…as sexual harassment?

So even though the gangly senior citizen answered his hotel door in his skivvies, Bill O’Reilly deserves a break.  After all, if hairspray fumes could be converted into pheromones, judging from the line-up night after night on The Factor, poor Bill’s hypothalamus gland was likely in perpetual overdrive.

That’s why, after being in the presence of a bevy of newscasters who share the news while crisscrossing their legs like Sharon Stone under interrogation, it stands to reason that the big guy couldn’t help grunting at some of them like a testosterone-infused boor.

Even still, instead of succumbing to the sexually charged atmosphere nurtured by the Fox News Channel, Catholic school- and Harvard-educated O’Reilly should have at least known not to bite the carrot.  Bill should never have behaved like a troglodyte.  Instead, the host of The Factor should have exercised self-control by aligning his 1960s caveman thinking with current safe-space standards.

Regrettably for O’Reilly fans, it’s too late for Bill to embrace his feminist side, don a man-bun, and save his job.

In the end, if Bill did harass the women alleging he made unwanted advances toward them, then there his no defense for his behavior.  However, Bill is still a man and would have to be either castrated or dead not to react to some of the sensuality being passed off as journalism over at the Foxy News network.

 

Preventing ‘Back Alley’ Suicides in San Francisco

Originally posted at American Thinker

Once again, the confused logic of liberals is almost impossible to comprehend.  Take, for instance, the multi-million dollar steel suicide barrier about to be constructed in San Francisco.  After 1,600 people, tragically died since 1937 by jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge, an obstacle to suicide will soon run the 9,000-ft. length of the bridge.

What’s perplexing is that this compassionate enterprise is taking place in a liberal state where assisted suicide is legal, and where, in 2011, out of 802,400 pregnancies, 184,552, or 23%, ended in abortion.

San Francisco is a city whose majority likely endorses the 3,000 abortions performed every day in America.  Yet Bagdad-by-the-Bay plans to spend 211 million in taxpayer dollars to deny one person, every two weeks, the right to choose to do what California law otherwise maintains should hinge solely on personal choice.

In other words, by erecting suicide barriers on the Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco liberals, who, for the unborn denounce the right to life, and, for the sick and dying support the right to die, want to inflict life on those who prefer death.

Even still, liberal Californians would probably argue that jumping off a bridge is different because, according to state law, to qualify for death with dignity one must be succumbing to physical, not mental, illness.

Sorry to have to be the one to say it, but, especially in a liberal bastion like San Francisco telling one group, they have a right to die while refusing another that same right smacks of the sort of discrimination liberals usually pride themselves on avoiding.

Nonetheless, if the rationale behind the Golden Gate Bridge safety net were to thwart ‘back alley suicides,’ maybe a better idea would be to gather up distraught bridge jumpers and shuttle them to a clinic where the downcast could be administered the legal End of Life Option drug secobarbital.   After all, ending one’s life in a less public place would be tidier, would shield the iconic reputation of the bridge, would spare the U.S. Coast Guard having to spend hot afternoons fishing bloated corpses out of the celebrated city bay, and, most importantly, would safeguard the left’s highly-prized right to choose.

Either way, except for when it comes to limiting things like guns and junk food, liberals typically insist that deterrents fail to work. As a matter of fact, it was San Francisco’s Nancy Pelosi who once said that if the GOP denied funding ‘safe and legal’ abortion, via Obamacare, women would have to resort to rusty hangers and, in turn, “die on the floor.”

So, if banning abortion doesn’t keep women out of back alley clinics, how does Nancy explain her contention that curtailing the legal Second Amendment will save “90 lives a day?” Or, more germane to the Golden Gate Bridge conversation, how does steel suspended from a bridge keep those desperate enough to end it all from finding another bridge?

Notwithstanding the belief that gun control and suicide nets impede fatalities, when it comes to building a wall on the border, liberals like Pelosi argue that physical restrictions do nothing to prevent dangerous immigrants from entering the US illegally.  Meanwhile, in 2015, a woman named Kate Steinle died on a San Francisco pier after she was shot to death by an illegal felon named Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez who, despite being deported five times, repeatedly snuck back across the southern border.

The stunning contradiction here is that this tragedy took place in a Sanctuary City where liberals who claim that walls do not stop illegal felons are now stringing up a steel barrier to stop suicides.

That’s why, even though San Francisco has strict gun laws, and thanks to their backing of open borders, a bullet from a .40-caliber handgun, stolen from a U.S. Bureau of Land Management ranger, ricocheted off a sidewalk, entered Steinle’s back, and severed the 32-year-old’s aorta.

Recently, at the Golden Gate Bridge Suicide Deterrent Commemoration Ceremony, Democratic Leader, Catholic-abortion-supporter, and open-borders-advocate Nancy Pelosi had this to say about the steel suicide barrier:

What a bittersweet day. The joy of the prospect of saving lives, the sadness of those we’ve lost. The Golden Gate Bridge is a source of immense pride in the Bay Area, but for far too many families it has also been a place of pain. We are honoring a deep moral responsibility to save lives whenever and wherever we can.

Likewise, for those yet to be born, Nancy Pelosi also ‘honors a deep moral responsibility’ to ensure pre-born bridge jumpers never make it out of the womb alive.

Under the banner of choice, when not hindering suicide, San Francisco continues to feverishly abort human beings and dispense legal euthanasia drugs and does so while refusing to enforce laws necessary to protect the likes of those who, if given the choice, would have chosen to live.

Ivanka and the JetBlues

Originally posted at American Thinker

For Christmas, soon-to-be first daughter Ivanka Trump, her cousins, husband Jared, and the couple’s three small children, Arabella, Joseph, and Theodore, booked a low-key commercial JetBlue flight to Palm Beach, Florida.

Brooklyn Labor Relations and Employment lawyer Daniel Jennings Goldstein was also along for the ride. The problem is that Goldstein took umbrage at having to share in-flight cabin air with the Trump-Kushner entourage.

Legendary in his own right, Mr. Goldstein is a fascinating guy. When not litigating sexual harassment lawsuits, and marching against Donald Trump with his Hunter College professor husband, Matthew Lasner, Goldstein enjoys staying active in liberal causes and taking family vacations with son Amos.

Goldstein’s most recent attention-getting episode unfolded when Harvard Ph.D. husband Matt spotted Ivanka and Co. in an airport terminal and responded by burning up his Twitter feed alerting Trump-haters and ISIS terrorists that:

“Ivanka and Jared [were] at JFK T5, flying commercial. My husband chasing them down to harass them.” Hashtag: “#banalityofevil’.”

A short time later, while the aircraft was in the process of boarding, Dan ruined everybody’s day when he couldn’t control an emotional outburst that berated the #banalityofevil by telling Ivanka, “Your father is ruining the country.”

Swinging his son around in his arms, Daniel’s anger issues were further exposed when he attempted to get an answer from the entire flight crew: “Why is she on our flight? She should be flying private.”

Clearly, based on their lifestyle, Matt and Dan are certainly not guilty of harassing hesitant women into having sex by crooning Christmas songs like “Baby, It’s Cold Outside.” However, based on Goldstein’s erratic boarding-behavior, the dynamic duo does seem to have an inclination to harass wealthy women on airplanes.

Although Jared Kushner was standing in the aisle the entire time, Goldstein, whose legal know-how counsels him to do otherwise, directed all his vitriol towards the woman.

Class act that she is, a poised and polished Ivanka ignored the immature liberal lunatic, tried to divert her children’s attention by occupying them with a box of crayons, and attempted to play down the whole incident.

Nonetheless, as the flight crew decided that the Goldstein-Lasner family unit needed to deplane, Dan defended his First Amendment rights by screaming, “You’re kicking me off for expressing my opinion!”

At the ready, Matt quickly updated his Twitter feed with breakneck speed pounding out with his muscular thumbs:

“Ivanka and Jared on our flight. My husband expressed his displeasure in a calm tone, JetBlue staff overheard, and they kicked us off.”

In response to the controversy, Daniel and Matt have since deleted their Twitter accounts and refused to speak to reporters. Yet the truth is that the same-sex family wasn’t exactly ‘kicked off’ the plane. Instead, the parents of the well-dressed child were politely escorted off the airline and offered a seat on the next flight to Palm Beach.

As a litigator, Daniel should have recognized the glaring inconsistency of balking over being kicked off the flight for ‘expressing his opinion’ while simultaneously demanding a woman be kicked off the flight because she didn’t share his opinion.

Moreover, notwithstanding the hysterical histrionics at play and the presence of horrified children, the last person that should be telling any woman what to do with her body, let alone if she should “fly private” or not, is a gay-liberal man.

After all, if Ivanka were at an abortion clinic, and not waiting to take off in an airplane, a liberal like Daniel Goldstein would be applauding her right to choose.

Therefore, based solely a person’s political inclination, Daniel Goldstein’s bias toward Ivanka Trump proves, once again, that liberals see themselves as authorized to selectively discriminate.

OSU ‘NIGHTMARES’: First Trump’s WIN Then Terror ATTACK

Originally posted at Clash Daily 

Recently, Ohio State University students participated in a group hug by taking part in a protest to give voice to their disappointment that Donald J. Trump was elected 45th president of the United States.

Two hundred students, faculty, and community activists came together in unity on the OSU Oval at an event organized by a college group that calls itself, Reclaim OSU. “We’re not here to get violent, we’re here to organize,” said Bilal El-Yousseph, a local activist who when not stirring up trouble on campus is posting “Free Palestine” and anti-police rants on his Facebook page.

Besides “F*ck Donald Trump”, “Grab democracy, not pussy”, and “Not my president” were some of the more creative signage paraded around the Oval. Always the gentleman, before initiating a “Fu*k Trump” chant, El-Yousseph, a devout Muslim, apologized for using obscenities that would surely displease Allah.

Among other things, the Down with Trump OSU angry post-election protestors marched for Democrat Party unity, to decry Trump’s proposal to ban Muslim immigrants, to stand with excluded individuals, and to denounce the new administration’s policies, which many rally participants view as racist and xenophobic.

Anti-capitalist lesbian activist Nicolette Yohn of the Multi-Partisan Coalition was part of the event.

Nicolette is a third-year political science and women’s, gender and sexuality studies student who shared, “Personally, I’m directly affected by the decisions of a Donald Trump administration, as a gay woman.”

Nicolette, who has a way with a bullhorn, didn’t exactly elaborate on how Donald Trump would negatively affect her life as a gay woman. However, despite lamenting the danger Trump posed to lesbians, Nicolette seemed totally at ease opposing the president-elect in the company of a Palestinian sympathizer whose religious inclination describes her sexual proclivities as “deviant.”

A few months ago, Ohio State University student activists also expressed their displeasure with law enforcement. By participating in the “March against racist police murder at OSU”, the OSU Coalition for Black Liberation (OSU4BL), and the OSU student organization, brought attention to the life of 13-year-old Tyre King who, after pulling a BB gun from his waistband, was tragically gunned down by Columbus, Ohio police officer.

Maryam Abidi, also a student of women’s, gender and sexuality studies and strategic communication, helped organize the police protest. Ms. Abidi told the OSU College paper, The Lantern that “We can’t just mourn and let it go…it’s important that we hold the cops mother-f—ing accountable.”

So, in addition to dropping “F”-bombs, the anti-cop event ended with a “die-in” where students simulated Tyre King’sdeath by lying lifeless for 13 minutes on the floor of the Ohio Union.

Apparently, there are a number of students at OSU who think that radicals journeying to the US from terrorist states are more tolerable than democratically elected patriots trying desperately to protect Americans from ISIS infiltrated refugees, and law enforcement personnel whose job is to rush into gun-free zones to save the lives of people who hate them.

Nonetheless, being distracted by nonsense could be why, as OSU activists were busy seeking social justice at “die-ins”, adjusting anti-Trump safety pins, and huddling in safe zones, no one noticed that an actual “marginalized” refugee from Somalia, inspired by ISIS, was plotting to mow down and stab those fighting to uphold inclusiveness.

While Nicolette worried about the impact a Trump administration would have on her same-sex lifestyle, Abdul Razak Ali Artan, who became a permanent U.S. citizen in 2014, was ranting on Facebook that he had reached a “boiling point”, referencing “lone wolf attacks”, and paying homage to radical cleric Anwar al-Awlaki.

It’s been reported that Abdul expressed concern about praying in public, but, perhaps, after the fact, open-minded OSU activists could thwart another hostile confrontation by holding open forum on whether or not The Campus Grind food court should integrate Somalian camel jerky into the snack section at Starbucks.

Either way, for lack of camel jerky, Ali Artan, a student who Nicolette and Bilal would likely view as a victim of Trump-style xenophobia carried out an attack by plowing a small gray car, sans a COEXIST bumper sticker, into a campus crowd, before stabbing a few people with a butcher knife that he had grabbed instead of “grabbing pussy”.

Unfortunately for Down with Trump OSU, the Ali Artan car-and-knife attack happened swiftly.

Ali Artan mowed down a dozen people so fast that those concerned about police brutalizing marginalized Muslims were unable to slow down the jihadist by jabbing the tires on his car with safety pins, or “shelter in place” at a campus safe zone.

Thank God for the quick thinking Alan Harujko, an armed police officer. Alan dared to shoot the frenzied jihadist dead with an actual gun, in a gun free zone, turning Ali Artan into a literal participant of a “die-in” by laying him flat out on the sidewalk awaiting a hearse for more than 13 minutes.

In the end, Palestinian activist El-Yousseph did make an apt observation when he said that the morning after the election some Ohio State University students have “been asleep and [have] woken up to a nightmare.” The difference is that the nightmare he and everyone else woke up to the morning Abdul Razak Ali Artan terrorized the OSU campus was not the same nightmare El-Yousseph and Yohn had envisioned the day after Donald Trump was elected.

HYPOCRITE: Obama Picks At A SPLINTER in Trump’s Eye But Has A SEQUOIA In His Own

Image result for plank in eyeOriginally posted at Clash Daily

Just a few days after a purportedly friendly meeting with Donald Trump at the White House, haughty, pompous, supercilious, know-it-all Barack Obama held a press conference, where, with a smile and an air of instructive concern, he proceeded to insult Donald Trump.

The event preceded an upcoming apology tour where the president has plans to explain to befuddled world leaders how “deplorable” voters who “cling to guns, religion, and xenophobia” managed to upset the American electoral process.

Let’s face it; Barack Obama is a quintessential liberal and the problem with liberals is that they are notorious for pointing out splinters while struggling with sequoias of their own.

Take for instance Obama warning that Trump’s “temperament” will undermine his progress unless he “corrects” it. This advice comes from a guy whose two-term vindictiveness includes this press conference and for eight-years, depending on the topic, has been continually on display.

Barack Obama warning Trump to correct his temperament is like Madonna advising post-menopausal women to act their age.

Lest we forget, America’s Nobel Peace Prize winner has spitefully retaliated against everyone who criticized him from the police to the Tea Party to Fox News to Bibi Netanyahu.

At the press conference, Obama attempted to provide a red-meat reality check by saying that Trump will not be able to fulfill his campaign pledges. The president said, “Whatever you bring to this office, this office has a habit of magnifying and pointing out. And hopefully, then you correct for it.”

Lacking self-awareness, clearly, Obama doesn’t realize that although the first part of his statement is 100% true, he never put the correction part into practice himself.

The president also pointed out that Trump is more “pragmatic” than “ideological,” which an ideologue like Obama probably doesn’t realize is a compliment, not an insult.

Although Barack Obama has a list of gaffes a mile long, that didn’t stop him from admonishing Trump for saying what Obama calls “inaccurate” things at rallies.

The president cautioned that “everybody is paying attention” and “markets move” when presidents speak. What Obama didn’t mention was how favorably the market has rebounded since Donald Trump was elected, nor did he cite examples of his own glaring inexactitude.

Take for instance when “Magical Mystery Tour” Barack, on the campaign trail in 2008 shared, “I’ve now been in 57 states — I think one left to go, not counting Alaska and Hawaii.”

Obama also forgot how he called a Navy corpsman a “corpse man”, signed a guest book in London’s Westminster Abbey, “24 May 2008,” when it was 2011, and how, after 12 people were killed by a Kansas twister, he lamented that, “Ten thousand people died [and] an entire town [was] destroyed.”

Instead, after praising President-Elect Donald Trump for pulling off “one of the biggest political upsets in history,” and doing it despite George Soros’s influence, and 3 million illegals voting, Barack Obama chose to couch his commendations in a series of snide, denigrating remarks.

Ignoring his own razor-thin resume, the former community organizer, whose race and charismatic speaking style catapulted him to the presidency, predicted that once Trump is in office, “reality [will have] a way of asserting itself.”

Ah! So, “reality asserting itself” must be what caused Obama to waste $800+ billion dollars on a failed stimulus package. And if that’s true, then “assertive realism” must also be what caused Obama to give hoards of illegal felons, unaccompanied minors, and ISIS sympathizers permission to invade the US.

Pesky ‘”assertive reality” is likely also the reason Obama left four Americans to die in Benghazi, destroyed the US healthcare system, swelled unemployment numbers to unprecedented proportions, and contributed to 35% of the US population ending up on welfare rolls.

And finally, “realistic assertion” can be blamed for instigating Barack Obama to foment racial violence, diss our ally Israel, anger Vladimir Putin, support the Arab Spring, hand a nuke to Iran, walk guns over the border to Mexican drug cartels, and pack a pallet with $400 million in cash and load it onto a US cargo plane and deliver it to a genocidal terrorist state.

Either way, the president took the opportunity to say that, notwithstanding “concerns” about turning the White House (which is the People’s House, not his house) over to a pushy Republican, he has confidence that once Trump is inaugurated the billionaire real estate mogul’s enthusiasm will be dampened.

When he warned that “the federal government and our democracy is not a speedboat, it’s an ocean liner,” those words paid homage to Michelle, the woman who managed to spend well over $100 million tax dollars on lavish “ocean liner”-like vacations.

And the hammering didn’t stop there.

Clearly disgruntled, America’s most infamous sound bite whore actually had the brazen effrontery to say this about some of the things Trump said on the campaign trail, “You know, there are certain things that made for good, good sound bites, but don’t always translate into good policy.”

Wait! Wasn’t it the “Hope and Change” merchant whose campaign sound bites promised that if he was elected “the rise of the oceans would slow and our planet heal”? Then, after all the “good sound bites”, blinded-by-a-beam Obama’s policies reeked havoc on America while simultaneously submerging the world in chaos and bloodshed.

In the end, Obama is well aware that Trump being elected is a full repudiation of his atrocious presidency, devastated political party, and detrimental ideology. Proving once again that, in an effort to regain credibility, liberal hypocrites like Barack Obama, to distract from their own sequoia, will focus on a splinter.

%d bloggers like this: