Tag Archives: Liberal hypocrisy

Red Hen bigotry, or ‘moral conviction’?

Image result for red hen lexington va

Originally posted at American Thinker

This nation is now at a place where those who have no “moral conviction” about the things that matter view unbridled bigotry directed at conservatives as “moral conviction.” Case in point, recently, a pink pussy hat-wearing restaurant owner in Lexington, Virginia decided to expose her narrow-mindedness by asking President Trump’s White House Press Secretary to leave a small chapel-like restaurant she calls the Red Hen.

According to the Washington Post, Stephanie Wilkinson, who loves to write, knit, community organize, and march in women’s rights parades, responded to an emergency phone call from the chef of her small veggies-from-Mexican-immigrant-run Rancho Calixto farm-to-table restaurant.

The cause for alarm was Sarah Huckabee Sanders and a small party of seven being seated and (OMG) snacking on “Cheese to You” cheese boards while waiting to be served dinner.  Wilkerson told the Washington Post that when Sanders showed up, the staff was “a little concerned,” asking her, “What should we do?”

Not for nothing – as they say in Brooklyn – “concerned” about what?

The ethical knitter, who was probably crafting her husband and son pink pussy hats, dropped her sustainable knitting needles and rushed down to E. Washington Street to save the day.

Sounding like Barack Obama weaving hate into flowery rhetoric and justifying stirring racial division by painting lofty word pictures, in an article entitled: The owner of the Red Hen explains why she asked Sarah Huckabee Sanders to leave, Avi Selk and Sarah Murray explain how while driving Stephanie mulled over the moral dilemma.

Like a Big Hen in the little Red Henhouse, Stephanie contemplated her community’s opinions on Confederate flags, and how Sarah worked in the service of an ‘inhumane and unethical’ administration, and “publicly defended” what Wilkinson viewed were “the president’s cruelest policies.”  In the brain of the social justice warrior, “that that could not stand.”

So, as Meryl Streep’s cousin neared the eatery, she decided a confrontation on behalf of Mexican farmers and flying fox farm duck eggs was in order.

Located in a town that voted against Trump, in a county that voted for Trump, Wilkinson told the Washington Post, “I’m not a huge fan of confrontation. I have a business, and I want the business to thrive.” Even still, Stephanie Wilkinson must have considered the chance to get in Sarah Sanders’s face a seminal “moment in our democracy.” So, rather than just sell Palmers Prairie Quail Eggs, Wilkinson decided to “make uncomfortable actions and decisions to uphold [her] morals.”

Fired up with righteous indignation, Wilkinson marched into the 26-seat restaurant, made a positive identification that the suspect was indeed Sarah Sanders, and decided that cheese board, or no cheese board, the White House Press Secretary deserved to be escorted out of the Red Hen. However, rather than rush in and rip the flatbread and pickled beets from Sanders’s hands, Wilkinson decided first to call an emergency summit with “concerned” employees.

Because Sanders defended Trump’s stance on transgenders in the military, Stephanie was uneasy for her gay employees. Meanwhile, as parsnip puree boiled over, the restaurant’s painfully misinformed employees discussed with Wilkinson how Sanders evaded questions and defended a Trump policy that they believed “caused migrant children to be separated from their parents.”

In other words, the staff at the Red Hen would have had no problem with the White House Press Secretary eating in the restaurant if, rather than concur with Trump, Sarah agreed with them that it is far better to place migrant children in the care of coyotes, human traffickers, and drug cartel members.

As the Sanders party munched on appetizers, a conflicted Wilkinson told the Washington Post that she inquired of the staff, “Tell me what you want me to do. I can ask her to leave?”   The staff agreed that Sanders should go.  So, after making sure Sarah was already served, Wilkinson approached the table and announced, “I’m the owner, I’d like you to come out to the patio with me for a word.”

Wilkinson shared that once outside, “I was babbling a little, but I got my point across in a polite and direct fashion.” Wilkinson then shared, “I explained that the restaurant has certain standards that I feel it has to uphold, such as honesty, and compassion, and cooperation. I’d like to ask you to leave.”

Stephanie Wilkinson and the staff of her “red diaper doper baby” Red Hen restaurant threw the White House Press Secretary out in the middle of appetizers and cited “honesty, compassion and cooperation” as the reason?

Even still, Wilkinson said that at the time she didn’t know how Sarah would react.

Stephanie, who was in attendance at the Women’s March on Washington when Madonna threatened to bomb the White House, didn’t see Sarah Sanders comport herself with dignity while being publicly ridiculed by low rent comic Michelle Wolf at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner.

Always the lady, Sanders’s response to being 86’ed by a pack of classless political activists was immediate. According to the Red Hen owner, Sarah said, “That’s fine. I’ll go.”

Wilkinson, who expressed that separating families on the border was immoral, mentioned that the rest of Sarah’s family was welcome to stay.  They didn’t.  Never getting a chance to dig into the Red Hen’s leftover gay wedding cake served by a transgender waitress, or given the courtesy of a chocolate meal finisher, the party gathered their things as concerned staff hurriedly fumigated the table.

Wasn’t it just a few months ago that two men loitering in a Starbucks, who happened to be black, asked to use the restroom and were arrested after they refused to free up space for paying customers?  Didn’t bias allegations and diversity training result from the incident?

Now, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, a paying customer, is refused service because of her religious and political convictions and bigotry is entertained as moral conviction?

Nonetheless, Red Hen proprietor, Stephanie Wilkinson did mention that although “They offered to pay,” in the spirit of munificent liberal kindness, she told the woman she refers to as “the mouthpiece of Trump,” that, “No. It’s on the house.”

Asked if she would do it again, the Red Hen owner said, “Absolutely, yes, I would have done the same thing again. We just felt there are moments in time when people need to live their convictions. This appeared to be one.”

Haven’t the Obamas Made Enough Money?

Image result for Rich ObamasOriginally posted at American Thinker

For a guy who said, “at some point, you’ve made enough money,” and a gal who said, “someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more” the Obamas sure rake in plenty of dough.

Unless installing an in-ground pool in the yard of an  $8.2-million home located in a fancy Washington, DC neighborhood  is considered spreading the wealth?  Since, leaving the White House the duo seems to be gathering, not “spreading, the wealth.”

Fresh out of the White House, Michelle and Barack began “leveling their playing field” with a joint book deal in excess of $65-million penned with Penguin Random House.  Let’s face it, $65-million is not a bad payday for people who earn oodles of capital reiterating the same hardscrabble story about impoverished childhoods, suffering racial injustice, and how understanding gender inequity and the plight of poor people is something only they can do.

The $65-million the Obamas will earn on their books will trickle into the couple’s bank accounts in dribs and drabs, first for Michelle, whose long-awaited memoir is due out in November and is entitled: “Becoming.”

While the Mrs. is busy showing up angry on book tours, hubby will be pleasantly giving speeches at $400,000 a pop where he can pontificate about community organizing and commiserate with the problems poverty-stricken Americans suffer.  And while payroll is processing Barack’s speaking stipend, the former president can continue to bide his time with extemporaneous musings about American prejudice, minority mistreatment, and how Trump-style capitalism is a global blight.

Just recently, the Obama $65-million+pie expanded, receiving a fresh infusion of cash from internet entertainment company Netflix.  Netflix is perfect for the Obamas because the network’s programming includes liberal topics that cover subjects such as sexual awareness in children and normalizing abortion.

It was a top Obama campaign contributor named Ted Sarandos that provided the Obamas the opportunity to community organize 125-million Netflix subscribers in 190 nations worldwide. Sarandos is the chief content officer and manager of the $8-billion Netflix budget who brokered a deal that industry sources say could be worth more than $50-million for Mr. and Mrs. “You Didn’t Build That.”

Any way you look at it, the Obama creative production deal with Netflix is an impressive promotion from the church basement on the Southside of Chicago where Barry Soetoro strategized Marxist troop formation on a chalkboard.

More importantly, at Netflix, the opportunities presented are endless for the Obamas to bring their unique brand of hostility to a much broader audience – which is always the pair’s underlying objective.

According to the multiyear contract, when not out inspiring dissatisfaction at live appearances and college commencement ceremonies, the twosome, will be called on “to produce a diverse mix of content, including the potential for scripted series, unscripted series, docu-series, documentaries and features.”

The whole thing works out beautifully because by signing on with Netflix, the Obamas get to assist their good friend George Soros in his quest to ‘slow the rising oceans’ of freedom and ‘heal the planet’ from the ravages of democracy.  Soros and the Soros Fund Management own about 71,500 shares of Netflix stock.

Barack Obama recently said that the original deal at Netflix provides an opportunity for him and his wife to communicate inspiring stories about individuals who’ve made a difference.  But, in reality, and based on what both Obamas consider inspirational difference making,  Netflix will most definitely double as a high-tech training ground to prepare legions of socialist-leaning youth to converge on democratic nations transforming the whole planet into one big Arab Spring.

Ted Sarandos had this to say about his friends, Barack and Michelle:

Barack and Michelle Obama are among the world’s most respected and highly recognized public figures and are uniquely positioned to discover and highlight stories of people who make a difference in their communities and strive to change the world for the better. We are incredibly proud they have chosen to make Netflix the home for their formidable storytelling abilities.

And so thanks to Netflix the community organizer and his sullen spouse are going global with their “formidable storytelling abilities,” or what is more accurately described as going global with the Obamas unique ability to twist the truth, incite discontent, and drive the naïve toward total ruin.

Rest assured, regardless of what Barack and Michelle say, the Obama Storytelling Show likely will be multiyear streaming of left-wing churlishness presented to the world on brightly colored sound stages complete with progressive guests, distorted tales of woe and radical rants.  Both Obamas will be front and center infusing the conversation with manipulative mind control tactics and jazzing it up with aerobic dance routines choreographed by Bruno Mars.

In addition to all that obnoxiousness, the Raconteurs probably will feature rhetoric interspersed with pleas for a more significant piece of the pie.   Likewise, there will also be admonishments that at some point enough money has been made, exhortations to spread the wealth around, and constant reminders that, regardless of what Americans think, “they didn’t build that.”

But most importantly, Barack and Michelle will have an international platform to counterpoint President Trump’s policies and do it from a $50-million podium where they will be paid handsomely to undermine Trump’s accomplishments with lies and distortions from the left.

EXCLUSIVE: Was Trump’s Congratulatory Call to Putin Wrong?

Originally posted at BLUNT FORCE TRUTH

Once again, politicians and pundits have short memories.  It’s as if those who dislike Donald Trump forgot what Washington D.C. overlooked when Obama occupied the White House. For instance, in March 2012, Russia’s Vladimir Putin won an election that, at the time, the New York Times implied was rigged:

A day after claiming an overwhelming victory in Russia’s presidential election, Vladimir V. Putin … faced a range of challenges to his legitimacy, including charges of fraud from international observers and a defiant opposition that vowed to keep him from serving his full six-year term.

On the day of the Russian election, the U.S. State Department, headed by Hillary ‘Uranium One’ Clinton, congratulated the people of Russia in a statement that said the United States “looks forward to working with the president-elect after the results are certified and he is sworn in.”

The following day, a supplemental State Department press release cited the concerns of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE).  The organization’s suspicions included, “conditions under which the [Russian] campaign was conducted, the partisan use of government resources, and procedural irregularities on election day, among other issues.” On behalf of the OSCE, the State Department went on to “urge Russian authorities… to ensure that the procedures for future elections …be more transparent.”

It’s uncanny how similar that is when compared to some of the election antics Democrats employ.

Nonetheless, the election glitches as well as Russia’s failing record on democracy, the rule of law, and human rights, didn’t stop Nobel Peace Prize winner/negotiator extraordinaire, Barack Obama from dialing up Vlad to commend the president-elect on his victory.

Rather than broach State Department and OSCE concerns, according to the White House:

President Obama highlighted achievements in U.S.-Russia relations over the past three years with President Medvedev, including cooperation on Afghanistan, the conclusion and ratification of the START agreement, Russia’s recent invitation to join the World Trade Organization (WTO) and cooperation on Iran. President Obama and President-Elect Putin agreed that the successful reset in relations should be built upon during the coming years.

Obama also told Putin that he looked forward to the G-8 summit at Camp David and  “…agreed to continue discussions on areas where the United States and Russia have differed, including Syria and missile defense…[and to]…continue…efforts to find common ground and remove obstacles to better relations.”

Evidently, 2012 Barack remained indifferent toward Russian threats because at the end of March, at the Nuclear Security Summit in Seoul, South Korea, Obama reaffirmed the tone of his post-election telephone call during a hush-hush chat with Russian President Medvedev.  During that live mic dispatch, Obama asked Dmitry to convey to Vladimir that after the 2012 election Barack would be more “flexible.”

Then, during the October 2012 debate when his Republican opponent Mitt Romney, suggested Russia was the most significant “geopolitical threat facing America,” the former president reestablished his lack of trepidation concerning Russia yet again.  In response to Romney’s assertion, the soon-to-be “flexible” Obama mockingly quipped back, “And, the 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back, because, the Cold War’s been over for 20 years.”

Fast-forward to March 2018 and Vladimir Putin has won re-election.

In response to Russia’s selection, the OSCE reiterated its 2012 concerns surrounding Russian “Restrictions on the fundamental freedoms of assembly, association and expression, as well as on candidate registration, …[and the] limited the space for political engagement [which] resulted in a lack of genuine competition.”

Notwithstanding these and other concerns, President Trump followed Obama’s lead and phoned Putin. The President offered his congratulations and refrained from discussing things like Russia’s meddling in U.S. elections, nerve agent attacks on former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia, and the sanctions the U.S. recently imposed on Russia for “malicious cyber attacks.

Just like Obama in 2012, Trump chose to limit the call to discuss “shared interests” and a prosed plan to meet with Putin in the future. The only difference between 2012 and 2018 in that unlike Barack Obama, Donald Trump’s call to Vladimir has garnered disapproval from the left and criticism from some on the right.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) had this to say: “When I look at a Russian election, what I see is a lack of credibility in tallying the results. Calling him wouldn’t have been high on my list.”  Dependable Trump faultfinder, Senator John McCain (R-AZ) chimed in, saying:

An American president does not lead the free world by congratulating dictators on winning sham elections. And by doing so with Vladimir Putin, President Trump insulted every Russian citizen who was denied the right to vote in a free and fair election to determine their country’s future, including the countless Russian patriots who have risked so much to protest and resist Putin’s regime.

With friends like McConnell and McCain, who needs Democrat adversaries like Virginia’s Democratic Senator Tim Kaine, who once said that Trump is a “president who acts like he’s Vladimir Putin’s defense lawyer.”

In fact, the reaction to Trump’s Russian election telephone call dredges up memories of Mrs. Obama, who, after bringing Laura Bush a boxed gift on Inauguration Day 2010, mocked first lady Melania Trump for presenting her with a boxed gift on Inauguration Day 2016.

Duplicity is how the Washington D.C. rolls, especially when it comes to all things Trump. In the end, that duplicity is evidenced by double-dealing politicians and pundits alike, most of whom withheld criticism when Obama called Russia’s newly elected president in 2012, but who now condemn Donald Trump for doing and saying the same thing.

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.

Joe Biden Cops a Holly Jolly Feel

Joe Biden

Originally posted at The Blacksphere

Joe Biden is at it again! Recently, while taking a photo in front of a Christmas tree and probably after dipping his ladle into the spiked egg nog one too many times, the randy VP put the squeeze on yet another poor defenseless woman.

As luck would have it, like The Letch who Copped a Feel for Christmas, Joe found himself flush up against a young female reporter in a holiday ‘grope’ photo.

Joe must have felt that in lieu of a grab bag, he’d get his holiday goodies by trapping The Hill’s White House Correspondent/Democrat Michelle Obama flack Amie Parnes with a firm grip uncomfortably positioned right below Parnes’ girls.

All in the spirit of innocent good cheer of course, Biden clutched Parnes from behind with his huge, leering grin. Joe then forced the clearly uncomfortable reporter to try to control his wandering hands from inching up from her tummy to her breasts, which is where his lecherous paws appeared to be ‘accidentally’ migrating.

Joe is so good at fumbling for a feel that he’s clever enough to get his jollies in front of the woman’s male companion and oftentimes while standing arm’s length from a clueless Mrs. Biden.

The vice president seems to be immune from criticism, because when he’s not in a boozy state of Christmas cheer, Joe Biden passionately speaks out on behalf of ending rape and sexual violence.

Back in 2011, at the University of New Hampshire, hands-off Biden told male students this:

Look guys – all you guys in the audience – no matter what a girl does, no matter how she’s dressed, no matter how much she’s had to drink – it’s never, never, never, never, never okay to touch her without her consent. This doesn’t make you a man – it makes you a coward. A flat-out coward.

The problem is that Joe doesn’t take his own advice.

In his case it doesn’t matter what he does or how much he’s had to drink, it’s always okay to rub himself against a woman without her consent. And from the looks of things, Joe couldn’t care less how the woman is dressed when he does it.

Joe catches the ladies off-guard, swoops in for a quick feel in such a way that it could easily be interpreted as over-exuberance and affectionate warmth.

That’s what happened to Maine Senator Angus King’s wife, Mary Herman, at a White House ceremonial swearing-in.  Right in front of the woman’s husband, the Veep refused to release Herman from his  grip while she uncomfortably giggled and struggled to break free.

Another time, while on the campaign trail, Joe certainly behaved as if he had been sipping from his flask before stopping in at a diner in Seaman, Ohio, where he was photographed with a female biker perched on what appeared to be his lap. Excluding the two visibly displeased male bikers to his right and his left, Joe leaned in, hands on the female biker’s shoulders, looking like he was whispering off-color jokes in her ear.

Afterwards back out on the campaign trail, it was reported that Joe swooped in and kissed a less-than-glamorous woman on the lips, proving good ole’ Joe isn’t a man that hurts a girl’s feelings by discriminating against a woman based on her age or looks.

Here’s the problem; a six-year-old boy was recently accused of sexual harassment, but an oversexed, over-the-hill pervert ambushes and fondles women and liberals say nothing?

Thus, liberal double standards rear their predictable head.

And here’s the message: despite bad hair plugs and too much Botox, if a sexual harasser is a powerful Democrat and he’s got a high NARAL score, pro-choice females will gladly endure being felt up.

Even if the Vice President takes things way too far, as long as he assures his victim that after he’s done having his way with them they can always have an abortion if necessary, then Joe Biden is free to fondle any liberal woman he can get his mitts on!

%d bloggers like this: