‘ORIGINAL': Sadie Robertson–Dancing With God

sadie-robertson-300x249Originally posted at Clash Daily

The same week that Mrs. Kanye West was so hungry for media attention that she thought it was a good idea to grease up her derriere and expose it to hundreds of millions of people like a freshly baked loaf of challah bread, Duck Dynasty’s Sadie Robertson was preparing for her next appearance on Dancing With the Stars. Sadie spent the week working together with courteous dance partner Mark Ballas, figuring out how to replace what would typically be suggestive dance moves with decorum and age-appropriateness.

Miss Sadie is on a show renowned for sexy dance moves, twitching butts, hair flinging, and sensuous interaction between dance partners. At times, Dancing with the Stars can make even the most avid double-step pasodoble fan blush and look away from the TV screen.

However, Sadie’s presence on the show has made a bold statement on how unnecessary some of the popular dance show’s suggestiveness is. And as an added benefit, the Duck Dynasty sweetheart is also providing a stark contrast to the likes of Kim Kardashian’s 19 year-old half-sister Kendall Jenner and others like her, all of whom are the antithesis of everything the young Robertson represents.

Sadie Robertson is 17 years-old and epitomizes what a fresh-faced lass should be: lovely, vivacious, talented, and unabashed in her expression of love for God and her desire first and foremost to please Him.

At five years-old, Sadie was nicknamed “the Original” by her dad, Duck Commander CEO Willie Robertson. Sadie even titled her first book Live Original: How the Duck Dynasty Teen Keeps it Real and Stays True to Her Values. The deep-dimpled A&E star explains that the word “Original” in this case “means being the person who God made you to be and not trying to be anybody else.”

In other words, there’s no chance Sadie will ever emulate a Beyoncé pelvic thrust, or be caught lusting after Justin Bieber.

In fact, lights, glamour, and celebrity have not changed this girl in the slightest. Instead, Steadfast Sadie is committed to the philosophy of God and family. Seems Sadie takes after Grandpa Phil, a controversial figure who is unflinching in his adherence to the Word of God and his devotion to truth. Similarly, Miss Robertson adamantly insists on wearing modest costumes on the show, makes it clear when she’s uncomfortable with a dance move, and publicly references her relationship with God with forthrightness and pride.

On the “daddy-approved” costume issue, Sadie had this to say: “That annoys me when people say they’re ‘daddy-approved.’ It’s not that it’s a rule, it’s just out of respect – not just for my dad, but God.”

Imagine that — notwithstanding the opinion of her parents, Sadie is concerned with respecting God.

Back home in Louisiana Sadie keeps in touch with her 18 year-old churchgoing boyfriend Blake Coward, who agrees that sex is for marriage and who she says “is a great guy who really has a heart searching for God.” Miss Robertson doesn’t describe Blake as hot or mention his fashion sense or his hairstyle, because for Sadie, Blake’s kindness and having a heart for God is what impresses her.

What’s also surprising is the deference and respect Sadie receives from her dance partner Mark Ballas. In addition to Mark’s concern to not put Sadie in a position she’d feel uncomfortable with, the DWTS judges have repeatedly commended the teen for how her outstanding ability on the dance floor has never once compromised her strong religious convictions.

Recently, Sadie mentioned in an interview in the Boston Herald that “When I was little, I would pray and ask God to give me opportunities and a platform to be able to share my faith…I would never have imagined it would be this, but it’s been incredible.”

What’s incredible is a child’s being as bold as a lion in her faith and utterly unshakable in her devotion to what is right.

Clearly the Lord is using this young girl to make a statement about chastity, purity, and innocence, and in a world of what Sadie calls “hoochie mamas”, this 17 year-old is a rare and priceless gem to behold. Whether TV viewers realize it or not, God is sending a message to America by juxtaposing Sadie’s light against the dark idolatry and over-sexualized culture American children marinate in.

Face it – America is a nation inundated with Miley Cyruses and young divas like Kendall Jenner, who at 19 years-old lives in her own $1.4 million LA high-rise condo. Kendall, like half-sister Kim Kardashian, publicly bares her nipples on behalf of “fashion,” and as a beverage choice sips bubbly with Hollywood types and rock stars. And then there are the unsupervised, confused celebrity teenagers like Willow and Jaden Smith who, rather than glorify God, espouse Prana energy and “imprinting oneself on everything in this world.”

And then there is the rare and inspirational girl named Sadie twirling and pirouetting on Dancing with the Stars. This well-adjusted, family-oriented kid simply refuses to compromise her principles, respects herself enough to maintain her virginity, and is showing a jaded nation what a happy 17 year-old girl with a pure heart and a wholesome attitude really looks like.

Share
Tags: , , , , , ,

Time for Congress to Declare War on Obama

obama-2Originally posted at American Thinker

Article I, Section 8, Clause II of the U.S. Constitution states the following: “The Congress shall have Power to …declare war.” Currently, America is at war — not only with the ISIS types, but also with a president whose flagrant actions against our nation’s interests indicate that he is, in essence, at war with us.

Historically, when it comes to declaring war, presidents tend to defer to Congress. A declaration of war affects legalities and duties related to acts of aggression against America. Regrettably, right now we have a president who defers to absolutely no one and he’s the one guilty of committing those aggressive acts.

America’s Styrofoam-cup-saluting leader is supposed to be “repelling sudden attacks,” not coordinating them. That’s why, however unconventional it may sound, Congress should consider this illegal raid against our sovereign nation, regardless of who the alien army’s leader is, an act of war.

During the Constitutional Convention, framer James Madison wrote that Congress should be given the power not to “make war” but to “declare war.” If promoters of congressional power are correct, doesn’t Congress — whether they like it or not — then have a moral responsibility to “declare war” on any force that initiates hostilities against the United States?

In 1863, the Supreme Court argued the Prize Cases. At the time, the court determined that the president “has no power to initiate or declare a war,” and yet 150-plus years later it’s President Obama who has initiated and declared war. Unfortunately the war he’s declared is against America.

That’s right — the U.S. is grappling with a leader whose greatest achievement thus far is ruining the world’s finest healthcare system. Next on his agenda of destruction is to outdo himself by completely rejecting the clear midterm election message conveyed to him by the American people concerning immigration.

America has a Commander in Chief who’s gutting our armed forces, and although one aspect of the president’s stated powers is to repel invasions, this president is aiding and abetting an all-out invasion against our homeland. As a matter of fact, as each minute passes Barack Obama is adding numbers and manpower to an apostate force.

Barack Obama, “who is [Constitutionally] bound to resist by force” an invasion by land, sea, and air, has plans to ignore the will of the people and instead favors the desires of trespassers who continue to disrespect the laws of the land they’re in the process of illegally claiming as their own.

In other words, the very person with the “executive power” and the express commission to protect this nation from outside incursion is helping to incite what he was elected to prevent.

Maybe someone should remind the Enemy Within the Oval Office that the 2014 election resoundingly declared that the direction in which America is being pushed is not the path the people of this Constitutional republic want to take.

Meanwhile, a new Congress has been voted in whose unspoken charge is to thwart an army of invaders being guided by a renegade president planning to unilaterally grant amnesty to untold millions of illegal aliens, a formidable number of whom Americans know harbor ill will and/or carry with them infectious diseases.

Constitutionally, to prevent unbridled actions that veer dangerously close to treason, there are orthodox means for Congress to deal with loose-cannon presidents who refuse to submit to the balance of powers instituted by our Forefathers.

But in this case, the self-appointed Commander of Illegal Immigrant Forces has made it quite clear that as far as he’s concerned, for his purposes, America’s founding document has a “fundamental flaw” and is irrelevant. Therefore, although Congress declaring war on a president is not possible, based on Obama’s disregard for the fidelity of the Constitution, doing so seems like an acceptable option, however far-fetched.

Why? Because never in the history of the republic have we witnessed a leader who has commenced hostilities against his own nation with such vigor, determination, and pigheadedness. Moreover, right under our noses the person responsible for repelling invasions is exploiting one to create eclectic armies of individuals, some of whom have threatened to one day subjugate our nation’s citizens physically, economically, spiritually, and culturally.

By declaring war on a president who is clearly an adversary of America, the Congress can then exercise the legal power to round up, detain, and deport ISIS terrorists, MS-13 gang members, illegal alien criminals of every stripe, as well as the thousands of human time bombs harboring deadly diseases that have already sickened and killed scores of our people.

Based on his subversive actions, by definition Barack Obama is indeed making war against America, and it’s high time Congress responded by declaring their own war on a man who became a domestic enemy the day he violated his oath by refusing to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Under different circumstances, Barack Obama’s contempt for the very document that protects him would make him subject to a separate set of rules. As tempting a fantasy as it might be, we do know that Congress cannot literally declare war on a sitting president. But then again, Obama’s uncompromising refusal to defer to the U.S. Constitution does warrant a historic rebuke.

Either way, it is incumbent upon the new U.S. Congress to rise to the occasion and save this Republic. That’s why congressional consent is now needed for an entirely new purpose: to stop the one exercising the use of force against America from within. Congress must do whatever is necessary to deprive Barack Obama of the power to continue his ongoing attack against the nation he was elected to protect.

Share
Tags: , , , , , ,

Nancy Pelosi Should Quit and Follow Her Passions

imagesOriginally posted at American Thinker

Minority Leader Nancy “Nip/Tuck” Pelosi, the woman who strutted around Washington, D.C. with a king-sized gavel when Obamacare was passed into law, is 74 years old.  Now, in the aftermath of the trouncing the Democrats took during the midterm election, an obvious question has arisen as to whether the granny with the gavel should hang up her dream of another go-round as House minority leader.

So, at a Capitol News conference, in response to a question about the suggestion that the millionaire politician should either take her hefty pension and head home to the City by the Bay or at least pass the House minority leader position to someone younger, Nancy played the trusty sexism card and threw in a smidgeon of ageism accusations for good measure.

Dressed in a tailored soldier blue suit with an uncooperative collar lined in canary yellow, at one point, Nancy became so angry with reporters while trying to say, “As a woman, is there a message here?” that her top lip kept getting stuck on her caps.  In fact, judging by Pelosi’s bulging eyes and garbled speech, it was hard to tell whether her $20,000 necklace was strangling her, she had been hitting the Johnny Walker Red, or she was just majorly ticked off.

The very irate Mrs. Pelosi challenged the press, asking, “When was the day that any of you said to Mitch McConnell, when they lost the Senate three times in a row … ‘aren’t you getting a little old, Mitch?  Shouldn’t you step aside?’

“Have any of you ever asked him that question?

“So, I don’t understand why that question should even come up,” Pelosi said.

Maybe the question hasn’t come up because although soon-to-be Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is not the most vivacious person in Washington, D.C., at least when you put the man in front of a mic he doesn’t say ridiculous things like “Every week we don’t pass a stimulus package, 500 million Americans lose their jobs,” or “Unemployment benefits are creating jobs faster than practically any other program.”

Regardless of McConnell’s age or lack of charisma, he would be hard-pressed to outdo Pelosi’s pièce de résistance: “We have to pass the [health care] bill so you can find out what is in it.”

And that’s just scratching the surface.  Nancy has also provided fodder for jokes by saying that Republicans want to see “women dying on the floor,” that immigration laws are “un-American,” and that she believes natural gas is a cheap alternative to fossil fuel – which is natural gas.

All these things, plus the septuagenarian’s growing inability to express a point without twitching, flapping her hands, and/or stammering, indicate that regardless of whether or not she believes that the Democratic caucus still put their faith in her or that she still (God help us all) has a mission to accomplish, the truth is that Nancy Pelosi should absolutely step down.

Instead, as with all liberal women, Nancy’s response is to play “the war on women card.”  Then, after accusing those who thought she should think about retiring of being sexists, a flustered Nancy stressed that “[her] life and who [she is] is not dependent on being here” or on the cover of TIME magazine.

If that’s true, then why is the minority leader refusing to pass the baton?

Nancy also said, “I have the liberty…if you want me to be here, I’m happy to be here.  If you don’t, I’m proud of what we’ve done together.”

Huh?

Anyway, what Granny Pelosi said is true.  Thanks to a health care policy that has stripped millions of their insurance plans and their jobs, unlike the rest of us, pro-choice Nancy does have the liberty to make a choice most Americans are being denied.

Which raises the question: why is Mrs. Pelosi being a defensive “Negative Nancy”?  Especially since, when union leader James Hoffa, Jr. accused Obamacare of standing to “destroy the foundation of the 40-hour work week,” it was an optimistic Nancy Pelosi who told CNN’s “State of the Union” host Candy Crowley that joblessness ushers in “liberation.”

Doesn’t Nancy remember saying that losing a 40-hour work week frees up Americans to “pursue … happiness … [and] … follow passion?”

Why does Nancy view the suggestion that she should step down or scale back her working as sexism and ageism?  Wasn’t it Ms. Nancy who said that being unemployed is “about wellness … prevention … a healthy America?”

That’s why Leader Pelosi should apply her jobless theory to herself and embrace unemployment with the eager anticipation of someone on the cusp of finding newfound independence and contentment!

With her time freed up, think of all Nancy could do!  The former speaker/minority leader could spend afternoons stomping grapes in one of her Napa Valley vineyards, or she could string imitation Tahitian pearls, or maybe she could follow her true passion by volunteering to answer phones at her favorite plastic surgeon’s Botox clinic.

Nancy Pelosi ought to submit to her own counsel and willingly retire her minority leadership, take down her congressional shingle, and head back to Rice-a-Roniville.  Then maybe she’ll be able to identify with the 100 million Americans who, thanks to the stunning accomplishments of the party Nancy represents, are also now free to follow their passions.

Share
Tags: , , , , , , ,

OBAMA’S VETERAN’S DAY: Humiliating America in China

imagesOriginally posted at Clash Daily

For Veteran’s Day, “Economically Uncooperative” Barack Obama was in China for the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit. While there, he apparently felt it was the perfect time to weigh in on government oversight of the Internet. After all, to ensure that political protest would be held to a minimum, the Chinese have successfully banned social media like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram.

Now that’s an inspiration if ever there was one.

As Ted Cruz so rightly put it, if Obama has his way “Obamacare for the Internet” will “operate at the speed of government.” Cruz may be onto something, because after the midterms trouncing the Democrats took, Obama is probably hoping there will be a regulated, government-controlled Internet in time to influence the next election.

Meanwhile, back in China, in addition to taking direction on how to tamp down dissent on the Internet, Mr. Obama appears to be taking fashion advice from Chinese President Xi Jinping, who is apparently taking fashion advice from his wife, the fetching Peng Liyuan, by choosing Mao-style tunics for the “national costume” tradition started by Bill Clinton in 1993. And even though leaders could choose between purple, green, or brown tunics, Vladimir Putin, who usually prefers to spend his time shirtless, surprisingly chose the same purple version as Obama.

The purpose of the APEC getup is to take a group photo similar to the one where Obama blocked a dignitary’s face as he goofily waved at the camera. The hope is that the matching ensembles will promote an image of solidarity between world leaders, three of whose only commonality is enjoying dressing up like Mao.

With the Internet issue nailed down and the clothing conundrum worked out, there remains but one problem – Barack “You Can’t Take Him Anywhere” Obama seems incapable of comporting himself like a grown-up Communist.

In anticipation of the APEC summit in Beijing, the Communist Party initiated a “manners” campaign where residents of Beijing were given six months to learn how to act civilized. Now it seems as though they shouldn’t have bothered, because despite the purple silk shirt, Barack Obama was so ill-mannered that even people unfamiliar with etiquette were mortified.

It started when the president decided to ride around in the Beast, a Chevrolet Kodiak-based, Cadillac-badged limousine that is more like a tank. By doing so, Obama shunned the pride of the People’s Republic, the Hongqi, or “Red Flag,” a 55-year-old limousine resurrected as part of China’s effort to rescue the auto market share from foreign automakers.

Heck, Putin knew enough to leave his stallion in Russia. Moreover, how would Obama feel if Xi Jinping eschewed his offer to ride around Washington, DC in style and chose a rickshaw instead?

The other leaders graciously agreed to be transported, one-by-one, to the banquet, cultural show, and fireworks in a Hongqi. Ramping up the pageantry, China’s top state-run channel even televised all the other leaders of the 21 APEC member states arriving at the Water Cube, the Olympic swimming venue, in the iconic socialist limousines along red-lit avenues.

In China, where cigarette smoking is ubiquitous, especially among men, Obama then added insult to injury when he stepped out of his souped-up hot rod chewing Nicorette gum. Horrified Chinese Internet users branded the gum-chewing, purple-shirt wearing, American automobile-riding president as boorish and cavalier, calling him an “idler” and a “rapper.”

Yin Hong, a professor of journalism at Beijing’s Tsinghua University, said about the president, “We made this meeting so luxurious, with singing and dancing, but see Obama, stepping out of his car chewing gum like an idler.”

Now the Chinese know exactly how America feels. Hong should thank his lucky “five stars” that Michelle didn’t come along on the trip toting a hula-hoop.

Either way, when it comes to Communist ideology and government control of the Internet, at least in China, America’s “Idler” president is among like-minded comrades.

And just one week after sending a gracious note to Iran’s Ayatollah, the president, seeking out yet another new friend, told the president of China that he wants to “take the relationship to a new level.”

And although rude, crude Obama chews wads of nicotine-infused gum and rides around Beijing in his own version of a Sherman Tank, at least he was wise enough to avoid World War III by choosing not to feminize the purple blouse Putin is also wearing with a pair of Mom jeans.

Share
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Kaci Hickox: Ebola’s Sandra Fluke

Originally posted at American Thinkerindex

Two perfect examples of bleeding hearts choosing a cause and then demanding that the cost be exacted from the hides of others are two liberal women who have made national news despite caring little about the expense of their personal wants.

The first woman is Sandra Kay Fluke (pronounced fluck), an attorney and women’s rights activist who, in her last year of Georgetown University Law School, used polycystic ovary disease as a rationale to denounce the Catholic university’s refusal to comply with an Obamacare insurance mandate to provide women with free contraception and abortion.

Fluke was unabashed in her demands, citing $3,000 in birth control expenses as one of the reasons Americans should be forced to finance contraception for women who feel others should fund their sex lives.

After well-deserved criticism and much controversy, with the help of Democrat handlers, Sandra became the left’s spokeswoman in the fabricated “war on women” and was elevated to the status of patron saint of polycystic ovary disease awareness.  The epitome of liberal activism, Ms. Fluke made it quite clear that her desire for free birth control took precedence over the religious convictions of those she felt should be forced to foot the bill for her contraceptives.

In other words, Sandra Fluke was unwilling to sacrifice her own money, yet she had zero compunction about citing polycystic ovary disease as a way to force others to absorb the cost of her birth control pills.

In order to raise awareness about the “war on women,” Sandra was more than willing to  wage all-out war on religious liberty and oppress anyone who disagreed with her personal views.

Now we have Sierra Leone Ebola nurse Kaci Hickox.  While defying quarantine requirements instituted by the state of New Jersey and the CDC in her home state of Maine, Kaci, who seems unconcerned about the welfare of her friends and neighbors, was concerned enough about herself to don a bicycle helmet while out cycling with boyfriend Ted Wilbur.

In West Africa, Kaci was concerned about West Africans, but back home in America, Kaci is more concerned about Kaci than the safety of those she could expose to a fatal hemorrhagic fever.  So, unlike Sandra Fluke, Kaci Hickox’s message does not involve the “war on women”; rather, it focuses on the futility of a mandatory “self-quarantine” even though it is now being reported that her roommate in Africa is infected with Ebola.

Kaci Hickox cared so much for West African Ebola patients that she was willing to risk her life.  However, once home in the U.S., when asked to inconvenience herself for 21 days by participating in a cautionary self-quarantine, self-sacrificial Kaci refuses to comply.

Leaving aside arguments about the dangers and ramifications of asking a free people to submit to government-mandated quarantines, or whether the Ebola crisis is fabricated or not, there is a huge measure of hypocrisy that needs to be pointed out on Kaci Hickox’s part that is typical liberal modus operandi.

Liberals like Kaci love for government oversight to be enforced on everyone else, but when government tries to dictate something they would rather not do, like pay for their own contraceptives or stay indoors for 21 days, liberals cry the loudest.

Then, in a stunning example of stupidity trumping science, in a statement that encapsulates the negative impact that moral relevancy has had on America, Kaci’s boyfriend Ted said, “We don’t believe that we can get anyone sick.”  That’s because in Obama’s America, a regime Kaci and Ted both proudly identify with, declaring one’s belief places that belief on par with the truth, even if it’s false.

That’s why just like Sandra Fluke, Kaci Hickox may portray herself as altruistic, but as it turns out, her type of progressive philanthropy comes with a price.  Because when Kaci’s hypocrisy is factored into the equation, just like Sandra Fluke, she embodies the high cost of liberal double standards.

Share
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Racist Michelle Obama’s Insulting ‘Get out the Vote’ Message to African Americans

Presentation1First lady Michelle Obama sent a TV message to black voters.

On TV One, a station whose motto is: “Where Black Life Unfolds,” the first lady told “News One Daily” host  Roland Martin this:

And that’s my message to voters, this isn’t about Barack, it’s not about a person on that ballot– its about you. And for most of the people we are talking to, a Democratic ticket is the clear ticket that we should be voting on, regardless of who said what or did this– that shouldn’t even come into the equation.

Then Michelle Obama gave everyone who votes permission to eat, are you ready, fried chicken! I repeat, Michelle gave all black listeners dispensation to indulge in fried chicken as a reward for voting.

Roland asked the first lady: “So can we, if we go out to the polls, can we, say, we have a souls-to-polls on Sunday, can we do soul food after we vote?”

To which she responded:

Absolutely. I give everyone full permission to eat some fried chicken after they vote. Only after, if you haven’t voted… You make a good point. Because I am, I do talk about health. But I think that a good victory for Democrats on Tuesday, you know, should be rewarded with some fried chicken.

In the spirit of racist Michelle Obama pigeonholing all black people and using insulting stereotypical incentives to try to lure blacks to the polls to vote Democrat, the first lady should have just gone all the way with her ‘Get Out the Vote’ message and used every imaginable offensive stereotype by saying the following:

Hey all you lazy-ass, welfare-gettin’ mofos! You know who you are; you’re late all the time, so the first lady is telling all the baby Mamas and baby Daddies just once: “You have until 8:00 pm to get your lazy butts to the polls.”

Put down your weed and your Newports, get the 30 other ‘hood rats you live with to come too, and get it in gear.

And don’t even think about jacking a car to get there, there will be none of that. Tell all the basketball players in the ‘hood to carry you if you’re too tired or too fat to walk.

I’m Michelle Obama, and believe me, I’m well aware some of you can’t read the ballot, and that is a challenge for sure. So, do you at least know what the letter “D” looks like? Try hard to remember: “D” was the only letter on your report card until 6th grade when y’all dropped out of school.

So look for the “D” and just vote “D” all the way across, because if you do, “Yes We Can” Barack has a big surprise: Free fried chicken, watermelon, and a Trayvon Martin hoodie for all black voters.

This is important, because if you don’t vote, all those nasty white people are going to come down hard on your welfare benefits. White people are gonna come to the ghetto where y’all live and arrest all the drug dealers and cart away all the free stuff Barack gave you, like those free Obama phones.

Do you want that to happen?

You know that I know that you’re not the most trustworthy bunch, that’s a given. But if you’re tempted to stay home, stop and think about the fried chicken, the watermelon and the hoodies!

When you get to the polling place, try not to be too loud, too rude, or too aggressive. Leave that to the New Black Panthers. And please do not tell too many white people jokes while standing in line.

Watch my lips: Go into the booth, vote “D,” collect your chicken, and then get the hell out of there!

Don’t worry about what candidate did and said what; you’re black and blacks vote “D!” That’s all you need to know.

Do it for me and Barack because you are our peeps! And keep your eye on that fried chicken.

Special Message to New Black Panthers: If white people try to vote and you don’t have a billy club, just beat ‘em back with a drum stick.

If Michelle’s idea works, and blacks show up at the polls, maybe for the next election Rudy Giuliani can help get out the Italian vote by promising the paisanos some salami and provolone.

 

Share
Tags: , , , ,

Ebola Hugs and Other Peculiar Happenings

AP_obama_pham_kab_141024_16x9_992Originally posted at American Thinker Blog

As the Ebola crisis continues to swirl and the ineptitude of America’s president continues to be laid bare, certain oddities surrounding the situation are impossible to ignore.

For instance, why, after being administered the experimental drug Z-Mapp, did it take Kent Brantly and Nancy Writebol almost 30 days to recover from Ebola? Since Dr. Brantly’s recovery, other American healthcare workers, as well as freelance photojournalist Ashoka Mukpo, have contracted and then recuperated from the virus with lightning speed.

Meanwhile, the hale and hearty relatives of “patient zero,” Thomas Eric Duncan, who brought Ebola to Dallas via Liberia and subsequently succumbed to the sickness, despite having been fully exposed to Duncan’s virus-infected body fluids, emerged miraculously unscathed from a 21-day quarantine.

For some mysterious reason protective gear did not shield nurses who cared for the dying man in isolation, but Duncan’s family, who lived with him in a small, hot apartment where he vomited and lost control of his bowels, have all been issued a clean bill of health.

Adding color to the drama, now, one week prior to a midterm election that stands to handily trounce Barack Obama’s party, the president recreated his old Chris Christie-Hurricane Sandy bear-hug stunt. This time Obama has resorted to embracing an American Ebola victim who, after leaving the hospital, headed straight for the Oval Office to meet with the fellow responsible for her contracting the hemorrhagic fever in the first place.

The woman who did this is 26-year-old nurse Nina Pham. Nina is the Dallas Ebola survivor who, immediately following her release from isolation at the National Institutes of Health, hugged the miracle worker who astonished everyone when he got Gabby Giffords to open her eyes for the first time after her almost-fatal head wound in the Tucson, Arizona shooting.

The most recent visit was similar to the one where a feeble Kent Brantly rose from his sick bed and swiftly made his way to the Oval Office to meet with America’s Obamacare creator. Once there, Dr. Brantly beseeched boots on the ground in West Africa — boots that Obama refuses to send to Syria to fight a marauding band of ISIS fighters happily going about the business of beheading Americans.

After Nina Pham’s recovery, Barack Obama — who treats Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu as if he’s the one with end-stage Ebola — free of concern about contracting the virus, with minimal screening and full faith in America’s healthcare system, emulated Bill Clinton and leaned in for a face-to-face bear hug from a young nurse whose White House ensemble did not include a beret.

The message the president was undoubtedly hoping the visit would send to America was this: although medical personnel in full protective gear contracted Ebola and irresponsible doctors like Craig Spencer rode NYC subways and went E-bowling with a fever, the disease is not a danger to everyday Americans walking New York City’s High Line park, even if the guy strolling in front of them is coughing out Ebola-infested droplets from his diseased lungs.

Speaking of messages, by getting together with the man whose reckless plan to leave the borders open and insistence on continuing to grant travel visas to West Africans caused her to get Ebola, Nina Pham behaved sort of like the victim of a hit-and-run accident seeking out the driver at fault to go for a Sunday drive.

Actually, by meeting with the president, Pham probably did more harm than good.

The nurse squandered a perfect opportunity to condemn Obama’s refusal to do his job and protect American citizens. Quite frankly, as a type of public servant it was Nina’s duty to insist Obama close the border so that travelers like the late Thomas Eric Duncan would be barred from exposing health care workers to unnecessary risks.

Instead of speaking on behalf of an anxious nation, Pham pulled a Chris Christie and rushed to the White House to provide the president a pre-election day photo op by all but slow dancing with the man who hacked off her feet.

Asked whether there was any concern about putting the president so close to someone only recently recovered from Ebola, White House press secretary Josh ‘Not So’ Earnest shrugged that the president “[w]as not at all concerned about any risk that would be associated with him showing his gratitude… by hugging her.”

Isn’t it odd for Obama to want to “show gratitude” to a woman for surviving a deadly disease she contracted because he simply refuses to do his job?

Nonetheless, a sufferer of the president’s policies smiling and hugging the perpetrator of her pain is a perfect example of how well-meaning people repeatedly assist the world’s most renowned opportunistic user in his ongoing effort to ‘let no crisis go to waste.’ This is especially true since the guy Nina Pham clasped to her breast has made it quite clear that politics take precedence over the wellbeing of the people who came dangerously close to being sacrificial lambs on the altar where Obama currently ‘shares the health.’

Adding insult to injury, as part of the ruse, omitting only a canary yellow HAZMAT suit and a full-face protective mask the president recently upped the deception quotient by visiting a specialized Ebola treatment center at Emory University in Georgia.

Reminiscing about his momentous visit our intrepid president had this to say:

I want to use myself as an example just so that people have a sense of the science here. I shook hands with, hugged, and kissed, not the doctors, but a couple of the nurses at Emory because of the valiant work that they did in treating one of the patients. They followed the protocols. They knew what they were doing. And I felt perfectly safe doing so.

And so, despite the many recovery-related peculiarities and notwithstanding the soiled sheets and missed opportunities for Nina Pham to speak on behalf of those without a voice, even the Ebola epidemic has become about a man who uses hugs to convey reassuring messages to a nation victimized by his stupidity.

Share
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Does Obama plan to transfer Ebola to the U.S.?

imagesOriginally posted at American Thinker

As children all across America infected with an imported Enterovirus from Latin America struggle to breathe, rumor has it that Barack Obama has plans to continue “sharing the health” and “leveling the playing field.”

According to Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Barack Obama is so concerned for the health and well-being of the victims of the Ebola virus that he’s planning to shuttle the sick and dying from West Africa to the U.S. for hands-on management.

One of Goodlatte’s aides told Fox News that “someone in one of the agencies” contacted the congressman’s office, saying that Obama’s Ebola importation plan would apply to non-U.S. residents. Although no one said for sure, it’s highly likely that those whose tax monies regularly fund this president’s hare-brained ideas would probably be the same ones paying for the transport and treatment of patients who will in turn expose those footing the bill to the deadly disease.

An alarmed Goodlatte warned that expanding America’s supposed “at the source” Ebola policy to include importing the most deadly of all third-world diseases could put citizens already struggling with MDR-TB, swine flu, and Enterovirus D-68 at even more risk.

So concerned is Chairman Goodlatte that he wrote a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry asking for confirmation of the story.  Thus far, Goodlatte says he has yet to receive a response, which is a strong indication that Goodlatte’s feeling is well-founded.

And Goodlatte is not alone in his concerns. Conservative watchdog Judicial Watch concurs and claims that the administration that’s vigorously looking for ways to destroy America is doing so by “actively formulating” plans to ferry Ebola patients into the U.S. to treat them “within the first days of diagnosis” – which is when they are most highly contagious.

But not to worry, because ever since Barack Obama remodeled the health care system, although Americans with cancer and other fatal diseases have been kicked off their insurance plans and had their premiums skyrocket, the nation has never been better-equipped to take on the burden of a deadly virus that has the potential to wipe out 70% of the U.S. population.

Not only that, but as an added bonus, when renegade Obama grants amnesty to 34 million illegals, if the West African Ebola patients have not died or returned home, they and their large extended families will be in a great position to hit the U.S. citizenship jackpot!

On the irrationality of purposely seeding America with a lethal virus, Goodlatte pointed out:

This is simply a matter of common sense that if you are concerned about this problem spreading – and this is a deadly disease that we’re even concerned about the great health care workers when they come back not spreading it — we certainly shouldn’t be bringing in the patients.

Quite frankly, the congressman should keep those sorts of cautionary insights to himself, because that remark might cue Obama to put his yea and amen on the idea based purely on its potential to wreak holy havoc.

In the meantime, Goodlatte, the one sounding the alarm, is also the one who originally attempted to convince the president that a temporary ban on non-U.S. citizen travel to the United States from the three African countries hardest hit by Ebola would protect U.S. citizens.  From Goodlatte’s logic-based point of view, a travel ban would be “plain common sense … [and] … a practical way to stop this disease from spreading,” which is probably why President Obola has chosen to disregard Bob’s wise counsel.

Instead of “plain common sense” being applied to a treacherous problem, the president continues to maintain that travel bans are a bad idea because the most effective approach is to stop Ebola at its source in West Africa.  Then, quite predictably, he does the exact opposite by clandestinely planning to transfer the source of the problem to the U.S.

Share
Tags: , , , , , ,

LIVES LOST: The Blood on Barack Obama’s Hands

bloody-hand-300x180Originally posted at Clash Daily

Barack Obama’s hands are covered with quite a bit of blood. Actually, as harsh as it may seem to say, Americans are swimming in oceans of blood thanks to this president, and although he hasn’t been, he should be held fully accountable.

Time and again Obama has proven that when it comes to gun control, child safety arguments are powerful tools to assist him in his mission to dismantle the Second Amendment. However, bloodbaths are not nearly as disturbing to the president if guts and gore assist him in the advancement of the left-wing agenda.

That theory is confirmed by Obama’s lack of outrage, or even interest for that matter, in the deaths resulting from initiatives such as “Fast and Furious,” where his administration purposely put weapons in the hands of drug cartels. Obama’s failed gun-walking scandal resulted in the blood of Border Agent Brian Terry and ICE Agent Jaime Zapata being spilled, as well as hundreds of innocent Mexican citizens whose deaths can be tied directly to the U.S. government, which means the blood flows directly to the Oval Office and is the reason Barack Obama’s hands are stained ruby red.

Speaking of bloodletting, it’s common knowledge that Obama is a committed supporter of abortion, is enthusiastic about destroying partially-born infants, and is an unabashed fan of leaving babies born alive in botched abortions to die in hospital laundry rooms.

Those types of radical pro-choice beliefs are the reasons why the president also has the stagnant blood of unborn babies on his hands.

Barack Obama’s rationalization for such barbarism centers on his claim that he doesn’t want to undermine the original intent of an abortion, the primary goal of which is to have the procedure result in a dead baby. Therefore, if a baby is born alive, denying warmth, oxygen and hydration ensures the original intent is fulfilled.

As for the unfettered slaughter of 3,000-4,000 babies a day, the president, who is known to view the U.S. Constitution as a “flawed document”, would likely argue that despite the carnage, at least in this case, Roe v. Wade is settled law.

Then there’s Benghazi; Hillary Clinton’s outburst of “what difference does it make” exposes the indifference those liable for the murders of four Americans have toward the blood that spilt in Libya on September 11th, 2012. Why? Because if the details surrounding the loss of life were exposed in their entirety, the truth that would be revealed would undercut Obama’s real Middle East agenda and possibly put a damper on Hillary Clinton’s presidential aspirations.

That sort of indifference is deadly coming from an administration that refers to terrorist attacks that result in the death of thirteen troops as “workplace violence.”

Then there’s illegal immigration, which is causing Americans to die from imported viruses and resulting in Americans being killed or maimed by violent illegals who freely roam our nation’s streets with Barack Obama’s implicit approval.

Look around. The tide is rising higher each day. To avoid getting his pant cuffs stained with the blood he’s responsible for spilling, Barack Obama may have to shorten his pant legs by pulling his Mom jeans up tightly under his armpits.

Mom jeans and bloody hemorrhagic viruses aside, thus far, there is no argument that Enterovirus 68 is directly responsible for 796 Americans in 46 states being sickened. Some of Obama’s victims have suffered to the point of needing breathing tubes; some are paralyzed; and seven are now dead and buried. Absent from within the U.S. for 50 years, Enterovirus D68 originated in Latin America, and was delivered via minors who crossed the border accompanied only by a contagious virus that the U.S. government was well aware existed in Latin America since 2010.

So suffice it to say that despite the knowledge that unaccompanied minors could cause American children to fall ill, Barack Obama still encouraged the influx of illegal children and has plans to usher in thousands more who could be harboring a whole new breed of Third World diseases.

And, even more disturbingly, some of the blood on the president’s hands belongs to tiny infant Lancen Kendall, 4-year-old Eli Waller, 21-month-old Madeline Reid, and 10-year-old Emily Otrando, all of whom died from an Enterovirus they never should have been exposed to in the first place.

And all that bloodshed doesn’t even begin to broach what the release of hardened illegal criminals who are rapists, pedophiles, and murderers portends for America’s future.

In the coming months, Obama granting amnesty to 34 million illegals will not only make America unrecognizable, it will also contribute greatly to the deluge of blood to which we will all be subjected.

ISIS members will be granted amnesty, MS-13 gang members will be granted amnesty, and thousands of criminals who were let out of prison will be granted amnesty. All this despite the blood spillage that has resulted from illegal immigrants killing Americans, killings that include more recently two sheriff’s deputies in California being shot in the face by an illegal alien who was deported twice, had a long list of aliases and a drug conviction and who, if not arrested, after the midterm elections, would have been among the millions slated to be granted amnesty.

Scarier than diseases, murders, illegal criminals, open border permeation and much, much more are the “lone wolf” terrorists who, thanks to Obama, have crossed our border and could be wandering the highways and byways of America right now, looking for police and military to hatchet to death and unsuspecting grandmothers to behead in the name of Allah.

After all is said and done, there are many more examples of how, as a result of Obama’s diabolical quest to “fundamentally transform” the United States of America, innocent blood is being spilled.

That’s why, whether he recognizes his culpability or not, the river of blood currently drenching America flows directly toward the White House into both of Barack Obama’s hands.

Share
Tags: , , , , , , ,

SAY WHAT? Pro-Choice Obama Makes Women Feel ‘Unsafe’

Fear-of-the-Dark-and-insomnia-300x180Originally posted at Clash Daily

Women – a key Obama voting bloc – in a stunning admission are now saying that the man they elected mainly because of his assurance that if they wanted to they could kill their unborn babies, makes them feel “unsafe.”

On MSNBC’s Morning Joe, journalist Tina Brown discussed with Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski the president’s declining poll numbers, his enormous ego, and how, when it comes to Obama, women are now feeling insecure.

“I think [women are] feeling unsafe,” Brown said, “They feel unsafe economically. They’re feeling unsafe with regard to ISIS. What they feel unsafe about is the government response to different crises.”

Sorry to have to break it to the women of America, but when you elect a president whose claim to fame includes putting his approbation on partial-birth abortion and denying medical care to infants born alive in botched abortions – no one is truly safe.

Lest we forget, this is the man who told Jane Sturm that her 105-year-old mother, because of her advanced age and despite her zest for life, would be denied bypass surgery and given a pill.

Now here we are, six years after the Hope and Change Express pulled into the station, and lo and behold, women who wanted to be assured unfettered access to abortion are realizing that the guy who promised them that right is personally responsible for the deaths of children whose mothers wanted their children to live.

Little did American women know when they clamored for free contraceptives and government-funded feticide that Obama’s ideological quest to ”fundamentally transform the United States of America” would include killing dearly-loved children with deadly Third World diseases like Enterovirus 68, Ebola hemorrhagic fever, leprosy, MDR-TB and God knows what else.

But then again, when killing is essentially the motivating factor in voting for someone, it usually doesn’t take long for those who thought they’d be spared the horrific fate 3,000 unborn babies endure each day to find out that everyone’s life, born and unborn alike, has very little value to the man currently exercising his right to choose on a whole nation.

Want to talk “unsafe”? How about Obama’s blatant unwillingness, despite the public outcry, to ease up on the national makeover, which continues to expose 300 million people to everything from the potential to be publicly beheaded to the prospect of bleeding out of every orifice of a virus-riddled body?

Said Tina:

I think they’re beginning to feel a bit that Obama’s like that guy in the corner office, you know, who’s too cool for school, calls a meeting, says this has to change, doesn’t put anything in place to make sure it does change, then it goes wrong and he’s blaming everybody.
Unfortunately, it’s a little late for Ms. Brown and the large swathe of liberal women she speaks for to be figuring that one out.

Moreover, decrying Obama’s propensity to deflect blame is a strange sentiment coming from women who helped set the current tsunami of tragedy in motion – voting twice for the guy who was “too cool for school”, whose only real promise was to protect their right to kill their unborn children.

Share
Tags: , , , , , ,