Tag Archives: Bernie Sanders

Bernie Sanders disagrees with Jesus

Originally posted at American Thinker

In the Gospel of John, Chapter 3, verse 18, Jesus tells the Pharisee Nicodemus, “Whoever believes in [the Son] is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God.”

Former presidential candidate and junior senator from Vermont Bernie Sanders doesn’t share Jesus’s point of view and is peeved because Russell T. Vought, Donald Trump’s nominee for deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), does.

In a 2016 article entitled “Wheaton College and the Preservation of Theological Clarity,” Vought expressed the opinion that the Christian college was justified in firing their first female African-American tenured professor, Larycia Hawkins, for sympathizing with Islam and for posing on Facebook dressed in a hijab.

In defense of Wheaton’s decision, Vought wrote that “Muslims do not simply have a deficient theology. They do not know God because they have rejected Jesus Christ his Son, and they stand condemned.”

At Vought’s Senate Budget Committee confirmation hearing, during introductory remarks, a visibly annoyed Sanders directed his comments toward the nominee while pontificating about “[t]his country, since its inception, [having] struggled, sometimes with great pain, to overcome discrimination of all forms.”  Sanders stressed, “We must not go backward.”

Sorry, but Bernie the Socialist is the last person who should be sermonizing about the inception of a nation whose foundational philosophies are diametrically opposed to everything he espouses.

Moreover, rather than refer to Article VI, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution as his guide, which says that “no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States,” Bernie chose instead to “overcome… all forms of discrimination” by verbally scourging a Christian.

For denying that God is government and that salvation comes from the state, Vought probably comes off to intolerant Sanders as a political heretic.  Meanwhile, despite the Quran (3:56) saying, “As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter,” Bernie continues to support Minnesota Muslim Congressman Keith Ellison to head the DNC.

Sounding like Pontius Pilate interrogating Jesus, the liberal senator applied a religious litmus test to the president’s nominee by challenging Vought’s belief in basic Christian theology, asking:

I don’t know how many Muslims there are in America, I really don’t know, probably a couple million. Are you suggesting that all of those people stand condemned? What about Jews? Do they stand condemned too?

Sanders continued probing: “Do you believe that statement is Islamophobic?”  Vought replied, “Absolutely not, Senator.  I’m a Christian, and I believe in a Christian set of principles based on my faith.”

Bernie is a millionaire socialist who publicly embraces sharing the wealth while privately practicing the religion of Marxism by vacationing in a $600,000 summer home.  That’s why Vought’s unwavering adherence to a “set of principles” is hard for Bernie to grasp.

In an attempt to defend his position, Vought said, “As a Christian, I believe that all individuals are made in the image of God and are worthy of dignity and respect, regardless of their religious beliefs.”

The irony here is that Vought was explaining his belief to a pro-abortion advocate who demands a standard from Vought on behalf of Muslims that the religion of liberalism denies the unborn.

However, based on Bernie’s boorishness, apparently, liberals are certified to be disrespectful toward anyone who disagrees with progressivism.  That authorization may be why Sanders felt comfortable interrupting Vought to say, “And do you think your statement that you put in that publication… do you think that’s respectful of other religions?”

Vought answered that he wrote the post as an alumnus of Wheaton College, which “has a statement of faith that speaks clearly with regard to the centrality of Jesus Christ in salvation.”

In response, Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) chimed in and laid bare the left’s hypocrisy concerning truth being relative when he admonished Bernie by saying: “I hope that we are not questioning the faith of others, and how they interpret their faith to themselves.”

Then, by chastising Vought for being a biblical purist, versus a vacillator like himself, Democrat senator from Maryland Chris Van Hollen exposed the schizophrenic left’s truth-being-relative hypocrisy even more.  The Maryland senator attested that “I’m a Christian, but part of being a Christian, in my view, is recognizing that there are lots of ways that people can pursue their God.”

If what Chris “in my view” Van Hollen says is true, then Vought’s interpretation of the Bible, regardless of how repugnant it is to Mr. Sanders, shouldn’t be a problem – should it?

On behalf of the senator, following the contentious hearing, a spokesperson delivered the following statement:

In a democratic society, founded on the principle of religious freedom, we can all disagree over issues, but racism and bigotry – condemning an entire group of people because of their faith – cannot be part of any public policy.

The nomination of a candidate like Vought, “who has expressed such strong Islamaphobic language,” the statement said, “is simply unacceptable.”

Suffice it to say that our nation’s founding principle of religious freedom did not equate tolerance with acceptance of things like atheism, Native American shamanism, paganism, or “Mahometanism.”  In fact, in 1779, George Washington delivered a speech that expressed to Delaware Indian chiefs his theological convictions:

You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are. Congress will do everything they can to assist you in this wise intention.

Therefore, if George Washington were running for deputy director of the OMB, Bernie Sanders would accuse him of being a phobic-racist-bigot and then say, “I would simply say, Mr. Chairman, that this nominee is really not someone who is what this country is supposed to be about.  I will vote no.”

 

Liberal Feminist Refuses to ‘Vote with Her Vagina’ for Hillary… But Then Does THIS

CYM6APmWYAAcA2cOriginally posted at CLASH Daily

Susan Sarandon is the 69-year-old liberal actress who #feelsthebern so intensely that when weighing in on Hillary Clinton’s bid for the presidency tweeted “I don’t vote with my vagina.” No doubt a vagina voting is, indeed, a disturbing word-picture. However, when she said it, Susan was adamant about making clear that “It’s so insulting to women to think that you would follow a candidate JUST because she’s a woman.”

Now Susan has announced that when not dating men young enough to be her son, marching in pro-choice parades, speaking out to raise the minimum wage, or campaigning for that other erotic beast, Bernie Sanders, she wants to contribute to society by directing pornographic films aimed at female audiences.

For analytical purposes let’s leave aside the bawdy nature of Marlow Mae Marino’s grandmother wanting to direct, let alone watch, porn and focus instead on the hypocrisy of the liberal mindset.

Didn’t Susan say that it was insulting for people to think that she would “follow a candidate JUST because she’s a woman?”

If that’s true then how come at the Cannes Film Festival recently, at an event to promote women in film, sex expert Susan lamented that the pornography industry is too focused on men and is in dire need of a woman’s touch, so to speak.

In other words, according to Susan, in film, women can promote their gender but in politics, women cannot and sexy senior citizen Sarandon is the one who sets the rules.

Speaking of porn, when former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright found out some women weren’t voting for Hillary “Woman Card” Clinton, Albright told a New Hampshire audience that “there’s a special place in hell for women who don’t help each other.” Wonder whether Madeline believes there is a “special place in hell” for Granny’s who fornicate in retirement, exploit women in porn, or argue that the females have a better (ahem) eye for exploring sex on the screen?

Either way, fallen away Catholic Sarandon, who played Sister Helen Prejean in Dead Man Walking, told the British newspaper The Times, “I have threatened in my eighties to direct porn. I haven’t watched enough to know what the problems are.”

If I may? Isn’t it just like a promiscuous liberal to make a statement about wanting to fix something they admit they know nothing about?

Susan continued, “Most pornography is brutal and doesn’t look pleasurable from a female point of view. So I’ve been saying when I no longer want to act, I want to do that.” Again, for someone who supposedly doesn’t watch porn Ms. Sarandon sure has a strong opinion on the topic.

Not only that, but an 80-year-old directing porn is as terrifying as 87-year-old Dr. Ruth Westheimer doling out titillating sex advice to twenty-year-olds. Moreover, when Susan says: “When I no longer want to act, I want to do that,” what exactly is the “that” she wants to “do”?

For such a smart liberal, activist Sarandon, who has spoken out for women at risk, hasn’t made the connection that women at risk are the ones who typically get involved in porn?

Apparently not.

Either way, suffice it to say that besides playing characters like Louise Sawyer in Thelma and Louise, Sarandon’s prolific filmography includes Marmee March in Little Women, Randy Jammer in Ping Pong Summer and Beverly Farley in Mr. Woodcock, as well as a whole host of naked romps on and off screen.

[Susan] was the older, bolder woman who seduced a young widower played by James Spader in White Palace(1988). In Bull Durham (1990), she was a philosophical baseball groupie who bedded dim fireballer Tim Robbins. Atlantic City (1980) saw her slowly wiping down with a sponge while Burt Lancaster’s aging gangster peeps through her open window.

Of late, when not opining about women in sexually explicit filmmaking, Sarandon has also been criticized for parading around with her aging saggy breasts exposed at the aptly named SAG Awards.

A supporter of socialism worth $50-million, Susan also supports fornication because she gave birth to three children with men she never married. And when not lecturing on sex in the cinema, Sarandon grants interviews in magazines where she recommends old ladies have more sex to stay young looking.

In other words, the nana who wants to direct pornography at 80 is no prude:

Sarandon’s most famous erotic scene, though, is undoubtedly her tryst with Catherine Deneuve — the latter is a vampire attempting to swap blood, or “transfuse,” with Sarandon’s non-vamp — in Tony Scott’s 1983 horror flick The Hunger.

Can we all agree that this future porn director/Bernie Sanders supporter is a colorful character?

And here America thought Susan Sarandon, who keeps her vagina out of politics but reinserts it into discussions concerning women and porn, was just another big mouth hypocrite liberal sleaze bag with a crush on a cantankerous old socialist.

QUESTION: Do You Believe for ONE Second That Hillary Connects to the ‘Common Person’?

hillary-clinton-celebrates-new-york-primary-winOriginally posted at CLASH Daily

On the night of the New York State Democrat primary, after beating Bernie Sanders who was raised in a rent-stabilized apartment in the Midwood section of Brooklyn, Hillary Clinton’s pretentiousness was on full display.

Sporting an affectatious grin, Miss Hillary, with her usual dose of disingenuous corniness, told the doting flock of misguided sheeple, “Today you proved once again there’s no place like home!”

What became clear that night was that the room full of toadies cheering on Hillary were either unaware, or didn’t care, that the unscrupulous carpetbagger calling New York “home” is an Illinois-born, Connecticut schooled, Arkansas groomed, and ultimately, Washington DC bound — fake, phony, fraud.

In other words, in the claw to the top, Hillary misuses whole states like rungs on a ladder.

And, believe it or not, the fault lies with intellectually challenged folks in states like New York who feel that inducting a post-menopausal pair of ovaries into the White House is long overdue.

Therefore, with low stores of estrogen as the primary criteria, the sycophants wearing balloon hats and waving Hillary placards seem willing to overlook prevarications from a woman whose whole life has been a sham. Let’s not forget, when not coughing up a lung, Hillary feigns being married to a philanderer she hasn’t co-habited with for almost four decades.

It has to be that candidate Clinton is clever enough to know that for people with questionable character, to be accepted by voters afflicted with equally questionable character, a constant barrage of balderdash is an indispensable tool.

An attempt to barrage the unwashed masses must be why nouveau riche multimillionaire Hillary recently felt moved to malign billionaire Donald for having a fleet of golf carts stuffed to the gills with cash. The problem is that Hillary critiquing Donald for being rich is sort of like Madonna condemning Kim Kardashian for being an exhibitionist.

After all, in a little more than a decade, the Clinton machine has managed to bilk $153 million out of the coffers of Wall Street firms by giving speeches for $250K a pop. So, Hillary criticizing anyone’s affluence is a perfect example of how this well-practiced chameleon changes color to trick the easily duped.

According to the woman whose daughter lives in a 5,000 square foot, $10.5 million, Madison Avenue apartment, self-made billionaire Trump’s problem is that he jets into a campaign stop in the lap of luxury, then flies out to return to his opulent digs in Trump Towers.

Hillary, who never created a job in her whole miserable life, and has lived primarily off the largesse of the American taxpayer, criticized the businessman who created 34,000 jobs, because she said, he said, “wages are too high in America and [he] doesn’t support raising the minimum wage.”

Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton pays her female staff 28% less than her male staff.

The doyenne of The Clinton Foundation, a family organization whose logo features Clinton name, then offered guidance to a man whose surname adorns the Trump Towers, saying:

Come out of those towers named for yourself and actually talk and listen to people. At some point, if you want to be president of the United States, you have to get familiar with the United States; you have to spend time with Americans of all sorts and backgrounds in every part of our country.

Did Hillary say: “Americans of all sorts and backgrounds?” Wait! The woman admonishing Donald for lack of multicultural exposure is the same individual who teamed up with corrupt NYC mayor Bill de Blasio to crack “CP time” jokes.

Either way, maybe Mr. Trump should pay heed to Hillary when she says:

Don’t just fly that big jet in and land it and go give a big speech and insult everybody you can think of and then get on the big jet and go back to your country clubhouse in Florida or your penthouse in New York. I somehow don’t think that puts you in touch with what is going on.

After all, before flying exclusively in a $39 million, 16-passenger, Gulfstream G450 private jet, and after being chauffeured around for 36 years, Hillary did get “in touch with what is going on” by enduring the Scooby-Doo for a week, and riding in a Bronx subway for two stops.

And when not ignoring commoners in wheelchairs, it’s Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, who willingly braves the threat of E Coli to eat Chipotle like the little people.

However, there is one problem. “Crooked Hillary” did target Donald’s penthouse, but forgot about her own $3-million mansion in Chappaqua, New York, and her $3-million mansion in Washington DC as well as apartments in NYC and Little Rock.

Notwithstanding those and many other hypocrisies, when not tying up NYC traffic to get a $600 haircut at Bergdorf Goodman, or demanding a luxury presidential suite, this populist pretender, with her eye fixed like a laser on the White House, spends time on Listening Tours “talking and listening to people” she cares nothing about.

That’s why, despite Hillary’s history of deceitfulness and unbridled ambition, it’s astounding that there are still minions who support someone who left the White House in 2001 driving a U-Haul packed with stolen items, and who later claimed that, at the time, she was “dead broke.”

In the end, if fake Benghazi videos, dead Americans, and compromised email servers fail to shake up Clinton’s supporters, then, come November, not even a Trump Train will be able to stop Sir Edmund Hillary’s namesake from pulling off her greatest hoodwink.

Are Liberals Liable for Americans Dying?

Glock-Constitution-998x666Originally posted at American Thinker

Recently, Bernie Sanders blamed Donald Trump for his #FeelTheBern/”Free College but no Free Speech” crew acting up at Trump rallies.  That sort of lack of accountability is par for the course, because liberals, who never take the time to evaluate themselves, usually expend tons of energy pointing the finger of accusation at those less guilty.

A perfect example of that practice involves a Democrat in Congress who wants to overturn the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a bill the 109th Congress passed in 2005 that was instituted to protect the gun industry from frivolous lawsuits.

In hopes of reversing gun industry protections, Congressman Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) proposed H.R. 4399, the Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act.  To build support on Capitol Hill for the legislation, Schiffteamed up with Connecticut Democrat Senator Richard Blumenthal, who proposed repealing the 2005 bill.

The bottom line is that, besides demonizing the gun industry, liberals want to make firearm manufacturers, sellers, and trade associations answerable to anyone and everyone considered a victim of gun-related violence.

Schiff, who supports immunity for illegals, argues that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is unfair because, when it was approved,  “Congress passed a unique form of immunity for only one industry – and that is the gun industry.”

Schiff rationalizes that line of thinking in the following way:

If you’re a carmaker and your airbags kill someone, you’re potentially liable. If you’re a pharmaceutical company and sell faulty drugs, you can be held liable. If you’re a liquor store and sell alcohol to minors, you can be held liable.

“Why should it be any different for gun manufacturers?” he asked.

Here’s why: if a madman purposely drives a car into a crowd and kills three people, should the car manufacturer be held liable?  If an individual accidently poisons himself or herself with a prescription drug cocktail, should the pharmaceutical company be held liable?  How about if a tanked-up drunk smacks a bottle of vodka over someone’s head in a bar brawl?  Should the liquor company be held liable?

Of course not!

But logic has little impact on liberals, who believe that both gun manufacturers and dealers should be prosecuted if a weapon they made or sold causes someone harm.  Why not hold liable the manufacturer of the belt Robin Williams used to hang himself?

According to Schiff, H.R. 4399 is needed because it targets gun dealers who sell firearms to “straw purchasers,” the middlemen who mediate between dealers and criminals.  Sharing his “who needs that many” liberal philosophy, Schiff explains, “There are straw purchasers who will buy dozens of the same gun. It’s quite clear they’re not buying those guns for personal use. Who needs that many of the same gun?”

“If [gun manufacturers and dealers] are no longer immune,” Schiff added, “they’ll be more careful who they sell to.”

Wow!  If  “straw purchases” are the concern, is Schiff also planning to pursue litigation against Eric Holder and Barack Obama, the kingpins of the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scheme?  Will the Obama administration finally answerfor the hundreds of deaths, including that of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE agent Jaime Zapata, both killed with guns the president put into the hands of Mexican cartels?

This brings the discussion back around to liberals refusing to recognize how the reasoning they use to justify what they oppose is much more suitable if applied to things they support.

For example, to justify a weak argument, Schiff cited car manufacturers being liable for faulty airbags but didn’t mention the countless numbers of dead Americans who, besides being murdered, or infected with a third-world disease, have died in car crashes where illegal immigrants have been driving under the influence of alcohol or driving illegally.

In response to a congressional inquiry, Jessica M. Vaughan, the director of policy studies at the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), recently submitted the following findings:

The criminal aliens released by ICE [since 2010] – who had already been convicted of thousands of crimes — are responsible for a significant crime spree in American communities, including 124 new homicides. Inexplicably, ICE is choosing to release some criminal aliens multiple times.

In their own defense, ICE claim that 75% of those illegal criminals were released because of a court order, or because their country of origin refused to accept them back.

So in other words, while the left was busy trying to rout the Second Amendment, illegal immigrant criminals, released from jail with the approval of the Obama administration, have been killing and injuring innocent people.

So here’s a question: why do denouncers of the gun industry mandate Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence but not Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Illegal Immigrants?

The same politicians who aim and shoot irresponsible policy right through the heart of America have largely ignored the topic of  the five times deportedillegal felon who killed 32-year-old Kate Steinle in the liberal-approved sanctuary city of San Francisco.

Politicians like Schiff; Blumenthal; and, first and foremost, Barack Obama like to do battle over gun rights, but then, when an undocumented loose cannon like Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez murders an American with a stolen gun in broad daylight, they barely notice.

If Democrats want to punish the gun industry for making or selling a gun that causes injury or death, those same lawmakers should also be willing to accept responsibility when an undocumented immigrant they wanted set free takes a life.

That’s why zero weight should be given to Adam Schiff’s hypocritical bill. In its place, as recompense for each and every life destroyed by an illegal immigrant, Americans should demand a law that holds lax open-border politicians personally accountable.

Susan Sarandon’s minimum wage example

AP_Susan_Sarandon_Sanders_12x5_1600Originally posted at American Thinker

Sixty-nine-year-old part-time actress, full-time liberal activist, and all around rich Hollywood bigmouth (she’s worth $50 million) Susan Sarandon nearly broke out crying as she introduced a man who demonizes affluent people like herself.

In northern Iowa, on the campaign trail with presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Susan told a town hall crowd of about 1,000 that she was “feeling the Bern” because, unlike Hillary Clinton, who was for the Iraq war before she was against it, and against gay rights before she was for them, Sanders has never vacillated on either topic.

Dressed in a socialist uniform, Susan wore a newsboy hat, boots, and a lumber jacket.  After having manned the phones with Bernie’s doppelgänger, actor/comedian Larry David, at the “Night of Too Many Stars,” Susan prepared for the part to work a Bernie phone bank with scruffy millennials and old hippies, both of whom are eager to “share her wealth.”

Maybe Susan Sarandon doesn’t realize that, despite her proletarian getup, she’s among the “few” in whose hands, Bernie keeps saying, “all of the wealth rests.”

A few years ago, while talking to Oprah about her Catholic upbringing, the parochial schoolgirl said this: “I just didn’t understand why they would put babies in limbo just because they weren’t baptized… Or why they would say every other religion was bad.”

Wait!  Susan Sarandon is worried about unbaptized babies?

Sorry, but one can’t help but wonder where fiercely pro-choice Susan Sarandon believes the aborted babies she marched for the right to kill end up after being scraped out of the womb into a biohazard bag.

Either way, whatever it is Susan believes, the Louise half of Thelma and Louise has decided to exercise her right to choose by ditching girl power.  Why?  Because according to Sarandon, “gender is not what’s important.  Issues are what’s important.”

Criticizing the contender who should be indicted but probably won’t be, Susan said she prefers Sanders because she wants “a candidate who has the courage to stand to do the right thing when it is not popular.”

Not that Bernie does the right thing, either, but on that point, Susan Sarandon is somewhat correct.  Every chance she gets, Hillary escapes doing the right thing.

Speaking of Hillary Clinton, when not wearing fake cankles and accepting a huge salary for doing absolutely nothing, in addition to pacifism and concern for homosexuals, the actress wants someone in office who will solve income inequality.

Clearly, Susan is put off by Hillary’s unwillingness to take on the fight for a $15 minimum wage, saying, “That is not pragmatic; that’s just cynicism.  That’s giving up before you’ve even tried.”

Simply put, for Susan Sarandon, this time around, an old Jewish socialist with egg salad in the corner of his mouth is a better candidate for president than a Methodist grandmother with blood on her hands.

So how about Susan demonstrate her pragmatic lack of cynicism by donating 90% of her $50-million bankroll to Bernie Sanders?  Then, to drive home her staunch support of the Vermont socialist the Hollywood actress could shame Hillary Clinton by requesting a $15-per-hour salary to star in her next movie.

HILLARY AND BERNIE: The King and Queen of the Illogical and the Irrational

Screen-Shot-2015-10-29-at-9.45.09-PM-300x180Originally posted at CLASH Daily

Liberalism – although widely accepted by the illogical among us – continues to confuse the reasoned and rational. On most issues, liberals promote contradictory polices that when viewed in a coherent context make no sense whatsoever.

Let’s take the two leading presidential hopefuls for the Democrat party: Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. What we already know is that Hillary stands up for non-traditional gay marriage while remaining for 40 years in a sham of a traditional marriage. And Bernie, while glorifying the middle class, really views everyday workers as a “mass of hot dazed humanity heading uptown for the 9-5… [sentenced to endless days of]… moron[ic] … monotonous work” just aching to be taxed.

In like manner, a schmear of egg salad Bernie and “Orange is the new black” pantsuit Hillary make zero sense when proposing policy.

Take for instance Bern-Hill’s passionate albeit contradictory commitment to funding both abortion AND paid family leave.

Political opponents can’t win for losing. Which is it? Are we paying women to kill the unborn during the first three months of gestation or are we paying them to stay home for three months after giving birth to the same baby the liberal left would have happily aborted six months earlier?

How about taxing the rich, an economic status Hillary epitomizes. Hillary doesn’t seem to mind that she and Bill swindled $101.5 million from the American people, nor does she have any shame when talking about women’s pay inequity despite her daughter Chelsea, who lives in a $10 million NYC apartment, having earned $600K per year for an entry-level position at NBC.

Hillary apparently thinks there is plenty more where that came from and views the American people as a source of limitless cash from whence she can gather what she wants unto herself by projecting a level of remorse onto those who are duped by theatrics.

Hillary, like Bernie, exempts herself from the demonization of the uber rich and joins the Brooklyn native in shilling for things like free college educations for all. To accomplish their socialist utopia the Bern-Hill duo plan to take outrageous measures.

Take Bernie for instance – this guy is unabashed when talking about taxing the upper 10% of wage earners 90% of their income. But taxing the rich is not enough, so Bernie the maternity leave maven has also said that every taxpayer, both rich and middle class, will help finance things like paying pro-choice women to give birth and stay home for three months.

In a perverted sort of way, liberals like Bernie and Hillary are economic geniuses, and to gain more followers maybe they should explain how in the long run aborting 4,000 babies a day saves on future paid family and medical leave and free college.

The notion behind the Bern-Hill free-college proposal is the lofty idea that even the least among us should have a chance to succeed. The problem is that the inspiration to do so is impeded by the knowledge that after going to college and becoming financially prosperous, pit bulls Bern-Hill will come after your earnings as punishment for what they helped you achieve.

Talk about a brilliant motivator for success!

Although the truth is that the rich pay the largest share of taxes, Bern-Hill plan to punish the affluent even more by taking a bigger portion of what they earn and using free college, which they maintain is a stepping stone to economic achievement, as justification to do so.

So in other words, in addition to cultivating Americans for future 90% taxation, liberal fairness consists of depriving the well-heeled of the opportunity to spend the money they earned any way they want and allowing liberal politicians like Bernie and Hillary to spend the dough they’ve extorted from the rich in any socially justifiable way they see fit.

And yet despite the US federal government being the biggest, most corrupt filthy-rich corporation on the face of the earth there are still anti-corporate socialists who agree it’s a brilliant idea to enrich Corporate Entitlement Officiator Bernie Sanders’s business plan.

Here’s an idea: sort of like a long term investment, maybe Bernie Sanders supporters could lead the way to fairness and set a pre-election example by living off just 10% of their income and sending the other 90% to the Sanders campaign. That way, if Brooklyn Bernie is elected, the example of sustaining oneself on the barest minimum can be set forth as a laudable goal even Mrs. Marc Mezvinsky would want to achieve.

Then again, Bernie and Hillary followers are more about punishment than personal sacrifice!

Nonetheless, leaving aside climate change, illegal immigration, gun control and healthcare, a few obvious questions remain: Are Americans being asked to fund both abortion and postpartum vacations? Are the rich being asked to finance free college so that college grads can become rich and then be bilked for someone else’s free education? But most importantly, are all wealthy people intrinsically evil or only the well-off types who chose not to enrich themselves on the backs of American taxpayers?

America will have to wait for those answers. In the meantime, the scariest part of Bernie and Hillary’s popularity is that the contradictory messages these two send actually make perfect sense to a high percentage of the voting public.

Shady Senatorial Dealings

682px-Shady_Lady_Ranch_brothel,_Nye_County,_NevadaNevada is on fire with opportunity.  Prostitution has been legal in rural Nevada since the early seventies and now owner of the Shady Lady Ranch, Bobbi Davis hopes to hire Nevada’s first legal male prostitutes.  The female owner of the brothel claims now that Nevada state health officials have approved a method to test men for infectious diseases, male prostitutes could be hired within the month.

Politics and prostitution are similar, just ask Ben Nelson of (D-Neb) who believes “Change is never easy, but change is what’s necessary in America.” If Bobbi Davis manages to usher in change by making a dent in the male prostitution market, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid can direct the Nevadan Madame toward a large pool of accessible applicants.  In fact, Reid may even be able to recommend specific gentlemen experienced in the field that, as a result of an impending election, may be available for work.

Attempting to pass health care reform has brought morally unrestrained political libertines out of the woodwork en masse in Washington DC. While, politicians do not typically engage in ‘sex’ acts for money per se, accepting capital to agree to do things one would normally morally oppose can only be defined as prostitution. Thus, prostitution runs rampant on Capitol Hill because money has become the primary incentive for garnering votes.

Unfortunately for America, unbridled prostitution taking place on Capitol Hill and senators voting for health care reform presents a greater menace to national well being than HIV to streetwalkers.

Take for example, Ben Nelson of Nebraska who proudly identifies himself as one of four pro-life Democrats in the Senate.  Nelson held the moneybag for months threatening obstruction of health care reform based on the bill’s legislative language on the key issue of federal funding for abortion.  Nelson’s staunch stand against subsidizing abortion with tax dollars situated the Senator in the unique position to be offered and accept 30 pieces of silver in the form of federal aid for Nebraska. According to Senator John McCain, R-Arizona, “Nelson’s victory came at the expense of 49 states.” In other words, Nelson’s payoff betrayed American taxpayers and turned the nation over to be crucified.

Ben Nelson’s priority concerning the slaughtering of the unborn vanished when Nebraska secured permanent exemption from funding federal Medicaid expansion.  When presented with the choice to either obstruct abortion funding, or host a second Nebraskan Black Hills Gold Rush in the form of $45 million to state coffers– for Ben Nelson, a flush state treasury trumped saving babies. “Nebraska’s Republican Sen. Mike Johanns said he was “stunned and incredibly disappointed,” and called the compromise’s abortion language a “watered-down accounting gimmick that leads to Nebraska taxpayers subsidizing abortions in other states.”

Ben Nelson’s ‘cornhusker kickback/Nebraska windfall” makes the Senator a potential staff member at Bobbi’s sex ranch.  If the Madame is looking for male prostitutes Nelson  ‘kissing Jesus’ and then selling himself for a price makes the Senator a prime contender to secure one of the two plum positions for men at the brothel after the first of the year.

Davis said, “she wants to add two men to the three women she currently has living” at the bordello.  Who better to help the Madame identify candidates for the job than Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid who, like Bonni Davis, can recognize a penny-candy hustler a mile away?

Like a pimp, Monsieur Senator Reid employs, “psychological intimidation, manipulation and force” to coerce resistant Senators into signing onto the health care reform.  Harry Reid has successfully overseen a federal escort service where Senators receive sordid gain providing services, in the form of votes, to liberal political Johns on Capitol Hill whose intent is to ravage the nation’s freedom, security and economic stability.

Luckily for Bonni Davis, Reid has more than a few candidates who meet the cathouse criteria for employment. Wooly Mammoth Ben Nelson would be attractive to a small, but specific group of clientele, while the Bernie Sanders type might be alluring to those who typically prefer Ben and Jerry to Ben Nelson. The Senator from Nebraska providing a more conservative addition to Davis’ stable of male workers than the liberal Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont who proudly professes, “Yeah, I wouldn’t deny it. Not for one second. I’m a democratic socialist.”

Senator Bernie Sanders supports a single-payer system and a Medicare buy-in provision. Contrary, to Ben Nelson’s complaint, the Vermont Senator considers the legislation too conservative, or not liberal enough. Sanders said, “I’m struggling with this…as of this point, I’m not voting for the bill… my vote is not secure at this point.”

Mandatory requirements for liberal support have always been Medicare expansion and the public option. Harry Reid slashed both, while working the senate strip-attracting centrist votes from moderate senators like Louisianan fille de joie, Landrieu and the rent-boy from the Nutmeg State, Joe Lieberman. Bernie Sanders being “undecided” about the health care vote did not present a predicament for Monsieur Reid who is adept at initiating hesitant values virgins into prostituting principles with piggy payoffs.

Harry Reid wooed Democrat holdout, Bernie Sanders, by flashing a gold tooth and a fat money clip.  The Senate Majority Leader ushered a “…clearly more enthusiastic” Sanders toward a ‘sweetheart deal’ in the form of “$10 billion in new funding for community health centers.” Bernie Sanders, who vehemently opposed the bill a day prior, was gently initiated into a 60-vote quorum.  A tossle-headed Bernie emerged from negotiations breathless and disheveled unabashedly transitioning from a cabin of personal conviction in Vermont into Harry’s Washington DC house of joy.

Proprietor of the Shady Lady Ranch, Bonnie Davis, remains hopeful that men can start working at her brothel at the beginning of the New Year. Ms. Davis contends, the state of Nevada, like the Democrat run Senate has, “…worked hard for years to make the traditional brothel business…socially acceptable and something we can be proud of.”

Currently, Davis has five bedrooms to fill with male and female strumpets. $100 million dollar courtesan Mary Landrieu was recommended by Reid last month for one of the openings and is currently in the process of negotiating salary and seriously considering, if need be, accepting an offer to shift from a Senate seat into a niche in the iniquitous desert den. Clearly, bawdy harlots like Ben Nelson and Bernie Sanders would gladly join Mary and submit to selling services to anyone willing to pay the price.

Right now, Madame Bonnie Davis is in a unique position of being the recipient of Nevada State Senator Harry Reid, overseer of a senatorial House of Ill Repute providing his state’s Brothel Owners Association with two highly experienced male gigolos Ben Nelson and Bernie Sanders. Davis, anxious to bring both guys onboard, has just one last quandary to surmount regarding, “…how to structure the men’s pricing?” Bonni can count on Reid to help out in that area too, because if anybody knows how much to pay male prostitutes, Harry sure does.

%d bloggers like this: