Tag Archives: Chelsea Clinton

CHELSEA CLINTON: How She’s Carrying the ‘Right-Wing Conspiracy’ Torch for Mom

GettyImages-455973972-e1455153565692Originally posted at CLASH Daily

Lest we forget, Chelsea Clinton Mezvinsky is the daughter of a presidential candidate who, while cheering women toward the abortion clinic, simultaneously claims to also be a devout Christian. Unlike her life-long Methodist mother, Chelsea, who is pregnant with her second child, claims she left the Baptist Church at the tender age of six because of the church’s anti-abortion stance.

If you believe that one, how about two free tickets to a Matrimonial Faithfulness seminar featuring Bill Clinton as the keynote speaker?

Either way, based on the six-year-old abortion activist story and some of the other tall tales Chelsea has come out with lately, it’s undeniably clear that the Clinton daughter has inherited her parent’s lying gene.

Now, on behalf of Sir Edmund Hillary’s namesake, Chelsea is exercising that genetic propensity by picking up the “right-wing conspiracy” torch her mother lit when dad got caught using cigar tubes for something other then storing cigars.

While Donald Trump was somewhere in America speaking to a crowd of thousands, and after netting $600,000 (equal pay for equal work) as an entry-level salary at NBC, the Hillary campaign asked Mrs. Mezvinsky to speak to a rousing crowd of 75 toadies.

On the campaign trail mom, Hillary, denounces Republicans by mentioning things like immigrants being dragged from their homes in the dead of night and deported. The woman in the “Orange is the New Black” pantsuit also implies the opposition party does nothing about minority children being shot because of the color of their skin. All that, and much more, happens when the woman who points to non-existent people in the audience isn’t emphatically stating that the GOP is responsible for LGBT couples being fired from their jobs “because of who they are and who they love.”

None of which, by the way, is true.

Now, before throwing red meat to the ravenous mini-crowd of mostly senior citizen women, Chelsea, following in Mommy’s footsteps, reminded Hillary fans at the pre-caucus gathering in Minnesota that this election is the most important one of her lifetime – which is what Chelsea also said in 2008.

From there, the former first daughter downshifted into the type of “vast right-wing conspiracy” rhetoric that would make her hyper-partisan mother proud. After claiming at another campaign stop that she was an abortion activist at the age of six, Chelsea had zero trouble accusing Republicans of bigotry, homophobia, and chauvinism.

On behalf of mom, Chelsea said this:

While it’s important to have a president who knows when to stand her ground and give no purchase to the racist, homophobic, sexist rhetoric and policy ideas that are coming out of the Republican side, it’s also important to have a president who knows how to find common ground.

With that in mind, here are three questions for Chelsea:

First of all, we already know mom can’t, but can you provide examples of Republican “racist, homophobic, [and/or] sexist rhetoric”?

As for “common ground”, is that what you sought at the age of six when your Sunday School teacher pointed out to you that slaughtering unborn babies in the womb contradicts the Bible?

And, finally, what kind of far fetched story will you and your mother come up with when America “gives no purchase” to Hillary’s unrelenting pursuit to become America’s first female president?

Future White House Intern: Charlotte Clinton Mezvinsky

chelsea-clinton-babyOriginally posted at American Thinker

At Lenox Hill Hospital on the Upper East Side of Manhattan, adored child and compelling television journalist Chelsea Clinton bore a daughter named Charlotte and sycophant Democrats are behaving as if the royal family has a new member.

Surely if the heir to the Clinton throne were male he would have been named after Mt. Everest climber Sir Edmund Hillary like his grandmother, who sometimes tends to embellish the truth. Instead, could it be that the sure-to-be politically correct little Clinton-Mevinsky heir was named after Queen Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, believed to have been England’s first black queen?

Regardless of her namesake, following the birth of the baby, America’s “first black president” Bill and his publicity-hound phony wife rushed to Chelsea’s bedside. The whole baby thing is perfect for the Clintons, who could use a fresh new prop as they get Ready for Hillary 2016.

What could be better than a curly-haired, chubby-legged cherub to steal the hearts of fence-sitting voters?

For those of us more familiar with reality, after breathing a sigh of relief that another innocent baby has cheated the scourge of the abortionist, a few thoughts come to mind concerning Charlotte Clinton-Mezvinsky’s grandparents.

For starters, the photo Hillary tweeted with Bill leaning over Grandma tickling the baby’s chin with his long, spindly, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” pointing finger, sporting that fake wedding band, was a tad creepy.

What else did grandpa do, hand out “It’s a Girl!” cigars?

Then there’s pro-choice Hillary. It’s a little unsettling seeing an abortion advocate staring lovingly into the face of the little munchkin in the pink skullcap, especially knowing that with Grandma’s approval, 3,000 unborn babies per day have been aborted since Charlotte was conceived.

Despite pretending to grill precooked steaks in Iowa, Hillary Clinton has tried to convince everyone that she is postponing making a decision about whether to run for president until after she first enjoys time being a grandmother.

Bill Clinton, who wouldn’t know the truth if it smacked him upside the head, helped reinforce that lie in 2011 when he told reporters, “I would like to have a happy wife, and she won’t be unless she’s a grandmother…It’s something she wants more than she wanted to be president.”

Earth to Bill: Grandma Hillary might have been a happier wife if you had cooled it with all the skirt-chasing.

As for the ‘Hillary wants to be a grandmother…more than she wants to be president’ codswallop, if you believe that one there’s a couple of high-end cigars recently found in Grandpa’s White House humidor for sale.

Ironically, like her newborn granddaughter, Hillary’s muse Eleanor Roosevelt was also a Libra. So, during her next necromancy session, maybe the presidential jobseeker should check in with the grandmother of 13 for advice on whether she should take on a Republican opponent in the 2016 election.

Whatever her decision, September 26th , the day of Charlotte’s birth, which happens to coincide with the day in 1934 that the RMS Queen Mary was launched, would be a seminal date for another ‘relatable grandmother’ to decide to launch her White House bid.

Let’s face it – possessing a campaign nickname like “Nana” can only enhance an already-impressive resume that includes accomplishments such as: savvy cattle futures investor; child-rapist defender; right-wing conspiracy-exposer; Rose Law Firm file finder; healthcare reform engineer; and carpet-bagging senator.

Furthermore, Hillary Clinton also bears the title of being, hands down, the “smartest woman in the world,” and besides being the proud mother of a daughter who jogged around the World Trade Center on 9/11, she has successfully dodged sniper fire and singlehandedly came up with the now-famous Benghazi slogan, “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

As for baby Clinton-Mezvinsky’s eclectic parents, they hope to raise their daughter both Methodist and Jewish. In addition, instead of Democrat donkeys, the plan is to decorate Charlotte’s nursery with elephants. Eager to save African pachyderms, Mrs. Mevinsky said she lives in fear her child will “grow up in a planet without elephants,” while the rest of America lives in fear of living on a planet run by Democrat asses.

Take Hillary Clinton, for instance. Hillary admires Margaret Sanger while advocating for children, and is chockfull of childrearing advice.

That’s why Grandma is the perfect person to tackle the Jewish/Methodist elephant/donkey confusion. On second thought, maybe before readying her pantsuit collection and climbing aboard the ‘Ready for Hillary 2016’ tour bus, which has been gassed up since the 1960s, Mrs. Clinton should just recommend that Chelsea and Mark hand the baby over to the child-raising ‘village’ as soon as possible.

Either way, Hillary is still the go-to person for parenting advice, even if Mr. and Mrs. Mezvinsky hold off for a while on ‘The Village’ idea and choose to take Charlotte home to their humble $10 million Madison Avenue abode.
Hillary believes that parents should “resist the impulse to ‘prove’ their love by showering children with things they do not need and give them precious time and attention instead.” Before showering Chelsea with a $3-5 million wedding, that’s exactly how Mom, who spent 40 years clawing her way to the top of the political heap, and Dad, who spent most of his time groping women in White House hallways, raised their little girl.

So now, after doing the obligatory goo-goo ga-ga thing and making sure to tweet out the ‘look at me I’m playing grandma’ photo, Hillary can finally hit the campaign trail claiming she’s doing so merely out of concern for her grandchild’s future.

Whether Hillary runs or not, Bill said that “Charlotte’s life is off to a good start.” The buzz is that (God help us all) the newborn could run for president by 2052.

In the meantime, with her enviable Washington D.C. connections, maybe Grandpa could start pulling some strings so Charlotte can commence her political career early with a gig as a White House intern.

Hillary’s Children are ‘Too Small to Fail’

HCtstfOriginally posted at American Thinker

It’s not news that shameless, self-promoting know-it-all Hillary Clinton has been champing at the bit for 40 years to assume the role of Big Kahuna.  After failing miserably as Barack Obama’s secretary of state, now Ms. Hill is gearing up for another presidential run in 2016, when, instead of explaining what happened in Benghazi, she plans to divert attention by feigning concern for small children.

That’s right, Hillary is for the children!  The pro-choice former secretary of state’s disingenuous 2016 presidential efforts will begin by exploiting children ages 0-5.

It’s basically common knowledge that Hillary is a quintessential liberal, and as Barack Obama has proven, left-wingers especially love to use children, dead and/or alive, as political ploys.  For Democrats, supporting the right to abortion, partial-birth abortion, late-term abortion, and, if need be, post-birth non-medical-intervention-abortion is a surefire way to garner political points.

Then there’s the tactic of dragging a group of children out after every major tragedy in order to do things like further suppress the Second Amendment.  And let’s not forget the old Hillary standby of advising parents that children are best raised in the village that Mrs. Clinton claims has recently gone global — that and turning the public school system into a place where kids are schooled to be more sexual than cerebral are what’s advanced progressives as having the kids’ best interest at heart.

That’s why, in preparation for receiving the Democrat nomination for president, it’s no surprise that Clinton is partnering with Global Motherhood and Next Generation, a nonpartisan group that endorses scientific examination of early childhood development, on an early childhood intervention initiative called “Too Small to Fail.”

Isn’t it interesting how global mother Hillary is suddenly so concerned about the early childhood development of 0- to 5-year-olds who, if they were still in the womb, she’d heartily support aborting (safely, legally, and rarely, of course)?

Nevertheless, in her four-minute “Too Small to Fail” video, Hillary, the consummate queen of didacticism, preaches at her audience in a hypnotic voice about how she plans to misuse children for political gain.  She begins by saying things like “Our country’s future depends on healthy kids and loving families.  They’re the building blocks of a strong and prosperous society.”

Besides the fact that our country has no future as long as liberals are in power, this is a woman who comes from the most infamous of all dysfunctional marriages — and she’s preaching to us about “loving families”?

Not to mention her daughter, Chelsea, recently bemoaning the lack of abortion services available when her grandmother Dorothy Howell Rodham was born out of wedlock.  If Hillary’s sham marriage and her daughter’s inability to recognize the impact on her own existence had her grandmother never been born is the type of society Hillary is selling, America had better not be buying.

Yet Hillary the expert stresses that “raising a family is hard work and it’s important to know that you are not alone.  We’re all in this together.”  That gobbledygook means that the goal of organizations like “Too Small to Fail” is to further inject communal influence into the nuclear family and instruct parents on how to parent liberal-style.  After all, Bill and Hill made such great choices.  Never mind that Bill couldn’t have cared less about the psychological effect his adulterous improprieties might have had on his impressionable daughter’s developing psyche.

Liberals need not worry, though; the “Too Small to Fail” collaboration is not called “Too Small to Abort.”  So although pro-choice Clinton is currently focused on the children, those efforts will not impose on liberals’ beloved right to kill the child who, if he or she were to somehow miraculously make it out of the womb alive, would then be promoted to the status of “Too Small to Fail.”

Maybe while Hillary’s at it, she can back that “children’s brain development” study up a few months to find out whether babies feel pain in utero and then report back to Barack Obama who, unbearable pain or not, supports abortion all the way up to the ninth month.

Either way, in the run-up to 2016, abortion fan Hillary must feel that she’ll gain political points if she reminds parents — as if they forgot — that “[o]ne of the best investments we can make is to give our kids the ingredients they need to develop in the first five years of life.”

No, Hillary, “one of the best investments we can make is to give our kids” the gift of life from the moment of conception, and to inculcate them with the belief that all life is sacred.  Clearly, that concept is something you and your liberal cohorts have no respect for as you shamelessly attempt to garner political support by displaying fake concern for the little ones.

Once and for all, Hillary Clinton should do America a gigantic favor and pack up her worn-out carpetbag, retire to that village she’s constantly selling, and leave the welfare of America’s children to those who truly care.

 

Chelsea Clinton’s Death Wish?

hillary-bill-clinton-chelsea-1980

Originally posted at The Blacksphere

It’s official.  Either Chelsea Clinton has a latent death wish, or the sole progeny of the supposed “smartest woman in the world” isn’t all that bright.

A little background:  Ivy League-educated Chelsea Clinton attended Stanford University, NYU, and Columbia University, and even the University of Oxford. Yet, despite the hundreds of thousands of dollars in elite education, it appears that Bill Clinton’s little girl who grew up to be Marc Mezvinsky’s wife doesn’t have the brainpower of a pea.

Speaking at the recent Women Deliver conference, which should have been called the Women Please Don’t Deliver conference, abortion advocate Chelsea Clinton was pontificating on the tragedy of her great grandmother Della Murray delivering her maternal grandmother Dorothy Howell Rodham out of wedlock.

Chelsea told her rapt audience of equally intellectually-challenged liberals, who probably applauded wildly at her deep insights on disposing of unborn babies, that her great grandparents Edwin and Della “did not have access to services that are so crucial that Planned Parenthood helps provide.”

In other words, two generations later, Chelsea Clinton regrets that in 1919 Great Grandma Howell didn’t have access to a clinic that would have eliminated little Dorothy.  Apparently Chelsea is upset that the late Dorothy was born, grew up and eventually gave birth to Chelsea’s beloved mother Hillary who then, in turn, gave birth to Chelsea.

Yoo hoo, Chelsea!  Della + Dorothy = Hillary = Chelsea. Della – Dorothy = Hillary & Chelsea.

 

Barack Obama’s Daughters Won’t be ‘Punished’ with a Tattoo

MH900064903Liberals are amazingly hypocritical. Take Barack Obama, please…I mean, for example. This is the man who publicly declared that he supports abortion because if one of his 14- and 11-year-old daughters “made a mistake,” he wouldn’t want them “punished with a baby.” Yet, when it comes to getting a tattoo, the president told NBC’s Today show that both he and Michelle really discourage Sasha and Malia from doing so. That’s surprising not because the president disapproves of permanent skin art, but because one would think Obama would like to have his wife and daughters emblazon his historic visage somewhere on their person.

Guess that isn’t the case, because the president and first lady warned the two girls that while abortions are more than acceptable, tattoos are not. Obama threatened Sasha and Malia by telling them that if they ever decide to get a “tattoo then “mommy and me” will get the same tattoo in the same place on their bodies and show it off on YouTube as a “family tattoo”.” Please note: the president did not include Grandma Marion Robinson in that particular ‘”family tattoo” threat.

With or without Grandma being in on the tattoo action, it’s clear that the president is convinced that millions would breathlessly tune into YouTube to catch a gander of the Obama family tattoo. And while it’s improbable that a close-up of Obama’s tattoo would go viral, what’s highly probable is that Barack has not thought this tattoo thing all the way through.

Take for instance a scenario where Sasha and Malia are fans of Rihanna and want a reproduction of her “under boob” tattoo. Although some think their father is a boob, in that particular case, unless there’s something we don’t know, he couldn’t be the fourth party to that particular YouTube posting. Moreover, based on his non-affinity for Jesus – on or off the cross – matching crucifixes, or worse yet, a red, white, and blue GOP elephant tattoo, might cause Obama to renege on the warning.

Jokes about tattoos aside, for those who abhor both abortion and voluntary bodily desecration, if given a choice between destroying human life, putting a ring through an ear lobe, or adorning a shoulder with a Celtic cross, permanent ink and body piercing wins out. The real issue here is not whether Barack Obama approves of his daughters getting tattoos or not, it’s about abortion advocates balking at tattoos and pierced ears on their own children while promoting, funding, and arguing on behalf of abortions on ours.

This type of absurd emphasis on forbidding the relatively innocuous for their children while promoting the life-threatening for ours is not exclusive to Mr. Obama. NARAL 100-percenter Hillary Clinton voted “No” on “prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion,” and then wouldn’t give Chelsea permission to pierce her ears for her 13th birthday. In other words, if somebody else’s 13-year-old daughter wanted an abortion, Hillary supported allowing a doctor to probe a girl with saline, suction, or a scalpel without parental knowledge. But, if someone had dared to put a piercing gun near Chelsea’s ear at age 13 there would have been hill, I mean hell, to pay.

If Barack Obama and his liberal cohorts refuse to let their own daughters get tattooed or pierced, maybe they should keep their right-to-choose paws off of our daughters.

Furthermore, the president should just forget about embarrassing Sasha and Malia with some phantom “family tattoo” YouTube video threat. Instead, if he really wants to mortify Sasha and Malia, he should show them the clip of himself cynically using them as an example in that famous “punished with a baby” statement he made in 2008 in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.

The Gilded Age of Clinton

I have to preface what I’m about to say with, “I don’t care how much the Clinton’s paid for Chelsea’s custom invitations, even if they were $150.00 apiece.”  Really, I don’t care if the wedding of the century costs $10 million dollars instead of the reported $3 to 6 million.

To Mr. and Mrs. Mark Mezvinsky a heartfelt “Mazel Tov.”

The problem with the gala affair is the ongoing hypocrisy that permeates the air around liberal purveyors of social justice who continue to foster class warfare and stir up jealousy between rich, middle-class and poverty-stricken people. When it comes to how advocates for the underclass comport their personal lives, the most ardent defenders on the left of the underprivileged seem to rival Aristotle Onassis in lifestyle.

Take for example Chelsea Clinton’s upcoming wedding where $675,000 dollars worth of air conditioned glass tents will face the river on the $12 million dollar, gilded age Astor Estate.

Yet, a Clintons blood relative Macy Clinton, who lives on food stamps, will not be attending. Much to their dismay, many of Friends of Bill, better known as F.O.B who donated millions in money and time, didn’t make the cut to what the Clintons are calling an “intimate affair.”

Instead, Hill and Bill will host tony friends like Oprah Winfrey, Barbra Streisand, Steven Spielberg and Ted Turner and influential dignitaries like British Prime Minister John Major and historian Doris Kearns Goodwin.

Amidst the glitz, glamour and champagne toasts one can’t help but recall Hillary lecturing America on the inequity of the widening gap between the rich and the poor, while expressing “her vision of the Western Hemisphere becoming “a model” for cooperation…for its long-term commitment to closing wide economic inequalities.”

One way to relieve economic burden off the lower and middle class is for politicians like Bill and Hillary Clinton to pay their own way. It remains questionable whether the brides mother and father, who have largely earned hundreds of millions of dollars off the backs of taxpayers and political devotees, are actually paying the tab for 500 close friends at $6,000.00 a head for catering alone.

Bill claims to be footing the bill, but history tells us William Jefferson is not exactly a bastion of veracity.

One sign that the Clinton’s may be the recipient of political perquisites is the news that the power couple won’t be paying for extra safety measures. Instead, the expense will be a coerced wedding gift from the taxpayers of Rhineback, NY to the Mezvinskys.  The economic-equity-Clintons are shamelessly passing a collection plate and 8,000 residents of the town where Chelsea and Mark’s wedding is being held are being forced to contribute $.31 cents apiece to ensure the lavish affair is safe.

The Secretary of State chides the affluent for not contributing enough and laments that the “rich are getting richer,” all while living the life of a billionaire elite. A quarter of a million dollars in floral arrangements and a potential Oscar de la Renta wedding gown in no way displays a way of life sensitive the widening gap between the upper and lower classes.

Instead, Hillary Clinton frivolously spends millions on a one-day event, while lecturing America about equity and giving more. How long will the proletariat be subjected to standing on the side lines as gilded horse drawn carriages pass by ferrying charlatans like Bill and Hillary Clinton, a corporation in their own right, on their way to a multi-million dollar wedding after lecturing the nation about the evils of wealth?

%d bloggers like this: