DIVERSITY: Feds Grant CITIZENSHIP to 800+ People from TERRORIST Nations

cs7mioeviaewb3yOriginally posted at CLASH Daily

One of the most inept mistakes the US federal government makes is to send billions of dollars to dead people in the form of welfare, farm subsidies, and social security. Although economically wasteful, those sorts of errors do not threaten lives. After all, deceased people can’t hurt anyone, and although they’ve been known to vote a time or two, “corpse men” usually don’t cash checks.

Meanwhile, from a government that promises to be good stewards of our money, oversee healthcare for 300+ million people, and properly vet 110,000 ISIS–infiltrated Syrian refugees, a problem exists for the living. It’s hard to believe but, according to Inspector General John Roth of the Homeland Security Department, the government that sends checks to dead people, mistakenly granted citizenship to 800+ living breathing immigrants with pending deportation orders from countries that threaten national security, or with high rates of immigration fraud.

The auditors reported that America’s newest citizens used fraud and aliases to apply for citizenship with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. Unfortunately for America, those incongruities weren’t caught because old records can’t be searched electronically, therefore immigrants from “special interest countries” didn’t have fingerprints on file in government databases.

This database gap occurred when obsolete fingerprint paper records were never added to the system that the defunct Immigration and Naturalization Service and the FBI created in the 1990s. In addition, until 2010, neither ICE nor the DHS, both of which were responsible for locating and deporting illegal immigrants, were diligent about adding fingerprint records to their databases.

Bottom line: If the fingerprints were missing and there were gaps in the records, citizenship should never be granted to anyone.

So, after being “mistakenly awarded” US citizenship, instead of being sent back to places like Iraq, Syria, or Afghanistan, nefarious characters, like three of the immigrants-turned-citizens who received aviation and transportation worker credentials used their US citizenship to receive security clearances where they had access to secure areas in air and seaports. In fact, the report states that a fourth person, whose lack of fingerprints did not deter his citizenship, is now a law enforcement officer, who didn’t, but could have, killed a lot of people with a gun hanging from his duty belt.

Since 2008, the year Barack Obama was elected, the government has specifically known about problems concerning 206 immigrants who applied for citizenship using aliases and discrepancies in biographical information. Yet despite the president’s massive push to flood America with immigrants, many of whom are coming from the Middle East, Customs and Border Protection did nothing to investigate or correct the “alias…discrepancy” problem or follow through on the 206 cases.

According to the Chicago Tribune:

Roth’s report noted that fingerprints are missing from federal databases for upwards of 315,000 immigrants with final deportation orders or who are fugitive criminals. Immigration and Customs Enforcement has not reviewed about 148,000 of those immigrants’ files to add fingerprints to the digital record.

ICE officials told the DHS that many of these cases have not been pursued because federal prosecutors “generally did not accept immigration benefits fraud cases.” ICE also stated that the DOJ did agree to investigate cases involving people who have acquired security clearances, jobs of public trust, or other security credentials. Good idea.

The Chicago Tribune also reported that:

Roth’s report said federal prosecutors have accepted two criminal cases that led to the immigrants being stripped of their citizenship. But prosecutors declined another 26 cases. ICE is investigating 32 other cases after closing 90 investigations.

Roth recommended that all of the outstanding cases be reviewed and fingerprints in those cases be added to the government’s database and that immigration enforcement officials create a system to evaluate each of the cases of immigrants who were improperly granted citizenship. DHS officials agreed with the recommendations and said the agency is working to implement the changes.

So, for future reference, if a terrorist from a “special interest country” seeks American citizenship, all he or she needs to do for an alias is attain a government check sent to a dead person and a falsified birth certificate from Hawaii signed by a registrar named Mr. Ukulele.

Meanwhile, immigrants who run Afghani fried chicken joints in New Jersey and Somalis who like to slash their way through Minnesota malls are free to come and go as they please.

That’s why the whole mistaken citizenship thing is suspect. After all, granting citizenship to 800+ disreputable, fraudulent, dangerous potential terrorists does provide those like Obama who apologize for Islam a larger pool of homegrown terrorists to blame the mayhem on.

Either way, in the end, sending checks to the deceased and granting citizenship to 800+ could-be terrorists may be slip-ups. However, much like erasing confidential emails from a server in a bathroom closet, the latter “mistake” appears too politically expedient to not be purposeful.

WOOF-WOOF! Is Hillary’s Barking Exposing Her Own Lies?

hillary-coughing-attacks-01Originally posted at CLASH Daily

On February 16, 2016, at a campaign event in Reno, Nevada, Hillary reminisced about an old political ad from Bill’s Arkansas days where a rural radio announcer talked about training dogs to bark whenever a politician tells a lie. Hillary said that, at the time, Arkansans went around for days barking at one and other.

To the delight of the audience, Hillary then suggested training dogs to follow around Republicans and when those on the right “with a straight face” say things like the Great Recession was caused by “too much regulation”, the lie-detecting dogs could respond by barking.

Hillary barked — and much to her own dismay — has been barking uncontrollably ever since.

That’s right; America is just two months shy of Election Day, and lo-and-behold there’s a “dog” in the fight that has been barking like crazy and that bloodhound is none other than the woman who came up with the idea to sniff out lies with a bark — Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As confirmed at the Benghazi hearings, Hillary is a serial liar. That’s why; every time the presidential hopeful speaks it’s like a barking dog returning to its own “vomit.” So, instead of siccing dogs on her political adversaries, it’s Hillary’s lies that are being exposed to a chronic cough that sounds like a dog’s yelp.

Of late, every time Hillary opens her lying mouth to speak, a dry hacking irrepressible woof issues forth stopping her dead in her tracks. Although she proposed employing barking dogs to keep Republicans honest, Hillary’s relentless hacking has become her own fact checker.
Recently in Cleveland, Ohio, a coughing Hillary blamed Trump for making her “allergic”! As soon as she uttered the words, the hacking and spewing overwhelmed her ability to continue.

Hillary made a valiant effort to suppress the cough but (thank the good Lord) could not speak. Every time the presidential hopeful attempted to press forward with her blather she was inconveniently overwhelmed by her own bark!

A little later in the day, aboard her spanking new campaign plane, Hillary tried to talk with reporters.

First, she made the suggestion that her opponent Donald Trump is aligned with Vladimir Putin. Then, she brought up Arkansas again by sharing a quaint image of a turtle on a fence post. Referring to a Trump/Putin alliance, Hillary said, “If you find a turtle on a fence post it didn’t get there by accident.”

Hillary should know. Like a turtle on a fence post, didn’t other people’s money, her emails, Whitewater files, and her husband’s wayward cigar end up somewhere they didn’t belong – and not “by accident”?

Either way, no sooner were the words “Trump has a bizarre attraction to dictators” out of Hillary’s mouth than a coughing fit that sounded strangely similar to a dog barking reared its ugly head.

For me, Hillary’s barking brings to mind a Scripture from Exodus 11:7. In that verse the Lord differentiates between Israel and Egypt when He tells Moses, “But against any of the sons of Israel a dog will not even bark… that you may understand how the LORD makes a distinction between Egypt and Israel.”

In other words, it was Hillary Clinton who originally advocated sniffing out Republican lies via dog trainnig. Now, after making that peculiar suggestion, it’s Lying Hillary that is being exposed by an affliction that has her drowning out her own words like a barking dog.

Is Putin Poking Hillary?

140605065920-newday-dnt-keilar-putin-hillary-clinton-00013325-story-topOriginally posted at American Thinker

By accusing Vladimir Putin of (believe it or not) rigging Russia’s 2012 election, then-secretary of state Hillary Clinton gave new meaning to the theory of psychological projection.

The potential problem for Hillary is that Putin is not as naïve as most Democrat voters, and when affronted, the Russian president usually finds a way to exact vengeance, or at least deliver what Peter Rutland, an expert on Russia at Wesleyan University, calls a Putin “poke in the eye.”

Putin eye-poking was on full display when Obama, the doyen of gay rights, acted the complete fool after finding out that, in Russia, White House LGBTQ restroom users would face jail time for public displays of “non-traditional sexual relationships.”  Obama expressed his displeasure with the Russian law by recruiting three openly gay athletes to join the U.S. delegation headed to the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi.

Putin, a man who doesn’t suffer fools gladly, responded to Obama’s insult by selecting Olympic figure skater Irina Rodnina to participate in Sochi’s opening ceremonies.  Obama flouted Russia’s tough stance on homosexuality, and Putin poked Obama in the eye by choosing a woman to light the Olympic flame who once tweeted a picture of Obama and his wife Michelle ogling a banana.

Get the picture?

Now rumor has it that Russian hackers may have gained access to the unsecured server full of confidential emails Hillary Clinton stored in a bathroom closet of  the Chappaqua home national-security-risk Bill (when not nodding off) shares with a mistress the Secret Service nicknamed “The Energizer Bunny.”

If the Russians really are in possession of Hillary’s emails, that means Vladimir Putin may be preparing to give Hillary Clinton the poke in the eye she deserves.

It also means the Russian president knows whether or not Hillary actually mastered the “destroyer of the universe” yoga pose, has specifics concerning the recipe for Chelsea’s $10K gluten-free wedding cake, and is aware of the particulars surrounding how the DNC mocked and subverted the political aspirations of a popular Jewish socialist.

Notwithstanding Hillary’s tall tales about her successes as secretary of state, Eugene Rumer, a former national intelligence officer for Russia and Eurasia at the National Intelligence Council, begs to differ.  According to Rumer, “I think there is good and credible evidence that there is no love lost in Moscow for Mrs. Clinton.”

It all started in 2011, when, after two terms as prime minister and after serving as Russia’s president from 2000 to 2008, Putin hoped to win the presidency again.  Prior to the March 2012 election, Secretary of State Clinton suggested that the Russian leader had “rigged” the system and sided with thousands of anti-Putin demonstrators, journalists, and political activists, all of whom believed that the process was flawed.  Furious, Putin accused Clinton of attempting to undermine his candidacy and of inciting street protesters.

Lest we forget, Saul Alinsky-trained community organizers Obama and Clinton have already proven to be well schooled in the tactics of how to advance an agenda via agitation on the street.

Wary of the “unacceptable” practice of “foreign money being pumped into election processes,” the Siberian Swimmer was wise to be suspicious of Obama and members of his “flexible” administration.

Putin asserted that by calling the elections “dishonest and unfair,” Hillary’s tone had sent a signal to groups opposed to his re-election. Putin alleged that the opposition recognized Hillary’s signal, and, in response to her attempt to impose negative influence, dutifully “launched active work with the U.S. State Department’s support.”

Granted, Vladimir Putin is no choir boy.  However, rather than “reset relations” with Russia, which was supposedly the goal, Secretary Clinton’s accusation that Russia’s  parliamentary election was “neither free nor fair” resulted only in provoking the bear.

Fast-forward five years.  America is currently in the throes of a contentious election of our own, and from where we currently sit, Putin’s suspicions that Hillary is trying to usher in Russian “regime change” don’t seem all that far-fetched.

Recently, the Obama international election machine did a similar thing in Israel, when the President’s operatives, funded by the State Department, attempted to disrupt Bibi Netanyahu’s 2015 bid to remain prime minister.

According to The Washington Times, in a bipartisan staff report, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations found that during the Israeli election, anti-Netanyahu group OneVoice received $465K in State Department grant monies to “build a voter database, train activists and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama’s campaign.”

Lo and behold, that same Senate subcommittee also found that State Department officials deleted emails containing information pertaining to Obama’s surreptitious campaign to oust Netanyahu.

So, within the last few years, two foreign leaders charged the U.S. State Department with being directly involved in two parliamentary elections.

In response to the original accusation Putin made in 2011, Hillary responded in the following way: “We value our relationship with Russia.  At the same time … we expressed concerns that we thought were well-founded about the conduct of the elections.”

Hillary, the bastion of election transparency and fairness, argued that “Russian voters deserve a full investigation of electoral fraud and manipulation” – something Bernie supporters, thus far, are being denied here at home.

“Regardless of where you live,” said the woman who, together with Debbie Wasserman Schultz, frustrated the will of 12 million voters, “citizenship requires holding your government accountable.”

Sorry, but Hillary Clinton expressing apprehension over voters’ voices not being heard or condemning conduct during an election or lamenting the lack of government accountability is like Angela Merkel questioning François  Hollande’s decision to continue to accept Syrian refugees.

For all intents and purposes, by accusing Putin of dirty doings, Hillary, the self-appointed successor to the American presidency, projected onto him the dark impulse that astute voters recognize as the force that drives Hillary Clinton’s insatiable appetite for power.

Either way, much like Barack Obama, Hillary miscalculated when she poked a Russkiy bear.  That’s why, in the end, if Russia exacts revenge by releasing Hillary’s 30,000 missing emails, a Putin poke may be the very thing that saves America.

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

CYM6APmWYAAcA2cOriginally posted at CLASH Daily

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Apparently not.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The DNC wall to guard Hillary’s Armani jacket collection

Hillary-Clinton-wears-pricey-jacket-1Originally posted at American Thinker

Before the first-historic-female-to-run-for-president-while-under-federal-investigation was against border security, Hillary Clinton was for it.  In 2006, the former first lady even called for “physical barriers … secure borders … tougher employer sanctions,” and deportation for illegals who have “committed transgression.”

Recently, Hillary evolved, and all that changed.  Now, the presumptuous presumptive Democratic nominee has altered her protectionist viewpoint and vowed that when she’s in charge, “[w]e’re going to be building bridges, not walls.”

You know what?  Hillary might be onto something with her bridge-not-wall idea.

A 100-yard footbridge over the Rio Grande would be a great way to do away with the rafts, jet skis, and blown out tire tubes.  If Hillary is elected, she can expand on Obama’s “shovel ready” jobs program by employing ISIS-infiltrated Syrian refugees to build bridges for Democrat voters to cross over from Mexico into the U.S.

But right now, it’s still 2016, and the Democratic National Convention is scheduled to take place on July 25-28 at Philadelphia’s Wells Fargo Center Xfinity Live!  Therefore, the bridges will have to wait.  Instead, to keep out rowdy protesters sporting well thought out man buns and bad attitudes, the City of Brotherly Love is taking Donald Trump’s advice and building a wall around the arena.

So a wall will be built around the location where Hillary will formally denounce the idea of Trump building a wall.

Put simply, Hillary Clinton does not condone walls that keep out illegal gangs, Mexican drug lords, felons, murderers, rapists, and undocumented child molesters.  However, if a barrier can keep out First Amendment types, Bernie supporters, and disgruntled vagina voters, Hillary believes in building walls.

In February, after winning the South Carolina Democratic primary, Hillary screeched out the following words:

 [W]e’re going to start by working together with more love and kindness in our hearts, and more respect for each other, even when we disagree. Despite what you hear, we don’t need to make America great. America has never stopped being great. But we do need to make America whole again. Instead of building walls, we need to be tearing down barriers.

This is the woman who once objected to Mexico “pushing migration north across our border.”  Now, in an effort that will involve lots of government agencies examining “infrastructure, transportation, security, and crowd management,” Hillary is standing by and allowing more than 20 subcommittees to erect a barrier around the amphitheater where the coronation she has slavered after for decades is about to be realized.

The question is, how can Mrs. Clinton renounce “no-scale fencing” to protect Americans from illegal invasion while simultaneously allowing the Secret Service to orchestrate the building of a wall to protect her and her wardrobe of $12,000 Armani jackets for three days?

Shouldn’t Hillary Clinton, the self-appointed champion of paths to citizenship and blanket amnesty be demanding that bridges of love span from the footpaths of Philadelphia right onto the floor of the sports arena?

Besides, how will illegal immigrants who’ve successfully made it over the border feel if they make it all the way to the City of Brotherly Love only to find out that the woman who beckoned them with promises of “love … kindness … [and] more respect” has excluded them from getting a donkey-shaped balloon and a free Philly cheesesteak sandwich?

By refusing to disavow the security perimeter being placed around the arena, Hillary, whose latest mantra is “comprehensive immigration reform with a path to full and equal citizenship,” is missing the chance to make a symbolic statement about how she differs from an opponent she believes is a wall-obsessed, xenophobic racist.

So instead of “tearing down barriers,” as she advocated in South Carolina, to keep out Americans who disagree in Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton is about to permit what Trump says we should construct on the border to be built around the Democratic National Convention.

Michelle Obama Lectures the World on Girl Power

196774_5_Originally posted at American Thinker

First lady Michelle Obama has wrapped up her six-day “Let Girls Learn” tour of Liberia, Morocco and Spain.  Together with her mother Marian and two daughters Sasha and Malia, the FLOTUS, under the guise of promoting access to education for 62 million girls worldwide, embarked on a multimillion-dollar excursion where she ate great food, wore great clothes, hung out with celebrities, and spent $600,000 for one night in Marrakesh.

In Madrid, while speaking to schoolgirls about equality, Michelle did what her husband Obama does in African nations that ban homosexuality; she interfered by making a comment about abortion that was better left unsaid.  Ignoring the fact that Spain is 68% Catholic, the wife of a man who boycotted Netanyahu for bringing a message to America he’d rather not hear, Michelle stressed that female equality is tied to aborting offspring.

In a clever way, Michelle shared her husband’s message that “If [girls] make a mistake,” they don’t need to be “punished with a baby.” Simply put, Mrs. Obama must believe that ‘letting girls learn’ sometimes means ‘letting girls die.’

Nonetheless, besides teaching her own daughters how to flaunt $4,000 outfits in the face of impoverished girls, Michelle clearly felt authorized to discuss how having children “If you choose to have them” impacts a girl’s future.

Joined by Spain’s fetching Queen Letizia Mrs. Obama had this to say about how childrearing positively impacts gender equity, “You can start with how you raise your own children. Maybe [that] means telling your sons that it’s OK to cry, and your daughters that it’s OK to be bossy.”

In gay-friendly Spain, Michelle could have just as easily said, “Maybe it means telling your sons that it’s OK to use the girl’s bathroom and your daughters that it’s OK to ask a girl to the prom.”

But she didn’t.

Instead, the Guru of Girl Power attempted to inspire her female audience to great heights by talking about the accomplishments of a certain Democratic presumptive presidential nominee whose husband, on a tarmac in Phoenix, in an effort to thwart an impending indictment, intimidated a female U.S. Attorney General on his wife’s behalf.

Then Mrs. Obama, who abandoned “Lets Move!” for a less food restrictive government-funded initiative, lamented young age girls around the world forsaking schooling for marriage. For such a supposedly bright individual, is Michelle unaware that in countries other than Spain and the U.S. encouraging girls to seek out an education could get them killed?

Nonetheless, while pushing “Let Girls Learn” the FLOTUS asked if “families and communities” who believe in things like underage marriage, and mutilating the genitals of young women, “think that girls are even worthy of an education in the first place?”

Yes, Michelle, girls are worthy of an education! However, in countries like Morocco and Liberia women are also worthy of being regularly subjected to beatings and rape by their husbands. And, on occasion, girls are even worthy of being forced into prostitution, and burnt alive. So, with so many other dangerous and more oppressive laws plaguing girls, why would Michelle Obama choose as her primary focus women being denied access to a classroom?

In Madrid, the first lady, a victim of catcalls herself, also reminded the spectators that education is “[a]bout whether girls are valued only for their bodies — for their labor, for their reproductive capacities — or … valued for their minds as well.” By telling girls in Spain that it was okay to choose education over an unborn life, Michelle Obama seemed to imply that “labor,” whether outside or inside a delivery room, may diminish opportunities for girls.

Either way, it’s hard to believe that these bitter sentiments continue to issue from the mouth of a woman who incessantly complains about gender bias and racial discrimination while enjoying the abundant fruit of a nation like America.

Moreover, Michelle’s ‘mind over body’ shtick calls into question why the first lady insists on showing off her beefy biceps.  In Madrid complete with a $2,000 price tag and a Delpozo designer label the first lady called attention to herself again by displaying arms that in the sunlight resembled two glistening rolls of bologna wrapped in a white, queen-sized bed sheet.

Nonetheless, without giving one solid example, Michelle, who hasn’t washed a dish, or scrubbed a toilet in 35-years, continued to bemoan that despite advancement for women in both the U.S. and Spain, “men and women are often held to very different standards.” Mrs. Obama reminded the girls that:

Changes in our laws haven’t always translated to changes in our cultures. And many of us still struggle with outdated norms and assumptions about the proper role for women, especially when it comes to our families and our workplaces.

And so, once again, it cost the U.S. taxpayer millions of tax dollars to transport the first lady to Liberia, Morocco, and Spain.  This time, under the banner of “Let Girls Learn,” America’s petulant FLOTUS, decked out in haute couture, represented our nation’s values by insulting cultural norms, complaining about male oppression, and peddling unrestricted abortion to Catholic schoolgirls.

Vacation Glutton Michelle’s June Jaunt

moa2Originally posted at American Thinker

Over the last 8 years, Michelle Obama has evolved into an exemplary world traveler.  Compliments of the struggling U.S. taxpayer, the FLOTUS consistently indulges in at least five or six multi-million dollar vacations per year.

In March, if things get boring, Michelle, mother Marian, and daughters Sasha and Malia, either fly solo or use Dad (if he’s not golfing) as an excuse to pamper their weary bones with an all expense paid “working vacation.”  Like clockwork, the girl gang jets off to destinations such as Cuba, China, Japan, Qatar, Argentina or Cambodia.

Predictably, there’s always a June pre-Martha’s Vineyard vacation where Michelle tours Paris, Spain, South Africa, London, and Italy.

In August, the Obamas take a Martha’s Vineyard breather for a few weeks. On the Vineyard, the Obama family and their large tag-along entourage, at a paltry cost of give-or-take $5-million or so, enjoy a well-deserved getaway.

That summer retreat is a crucial piece of the annual Obama vacation puzzle because two weeks of ice cream cones and body surfing help the first family prepare to spend $8-million vacationing in Hawaii at Christmas for 17 days.

And Michelle, for one, notoriously milks every vacation bone dry.

One year, she flew the family dog to Hawaii on a private plane.  Another year, for her 50th birthday, before repacking for a customary February date to ski in Aspen, Colorado, Michelle banished Barry and the kids from Hawaii and for another couple of days laid over with girlfriends at Oprah Winfrey’s Maui estate.

Recently, Michelle and her mother and daughters embarked on a “Let Girls Learn” jaunt to sub-Saharan and north Africa, as well as Europe.  This time, it was for six-days and, unlike 2011, did not include fried fat cakes.

Wait! Wasn’t it just last March that the Japanese let Michelle ‘You Go, Girl’ Obama learn to play the taiko drums in Kyoto? Now, one year later, the plan for this trip is for the FLOTUS’s Moroccan and Liberian stops to be recorded for a CNN “Let Girls Learn” documentary.

CNN Films must be so committed to propping up the Obama legacy, they paid for Academy Award-winning actress Meryl Streep, who recently mocked Donald Trump in a Park Public Theater Gala in New York, and “Slum Dog Millionaire” leading lady, Freida Pinto, to join the girly LGL globe-trotters.

In the end, chances are that Michelle’s expose on the educational inequity of culturally and politically oppressed girls will be rivaled only by HBO’s riveting Beyoncé biopic: “Life is But a Dream.”

On this trip, the FLOTUS has been focused on delivering a “Let Girls Learn” message to nations where most girls suffer from poverty, Ebola, gang rape, HIV-AIDs, premature death, murder for honor by dear old dad, and being forcibly married at age nine to old letches.

Resplendent in a $2,000 Peter Pilotto black silk dress, Michelle Obama travelled half way across the world to express to those worried about being genitally mutilated that it’s high time to “Let Girls Learn.”

Besides providing the FLOTUS with a way to justify spending oodles of taxpayer money on self-indulgent vacations, the U.S. government-wide “Let Girls Learn” initiative tacitly implies that getting 62-million unschooled girls into classrooms will be as easy as Obama getting transgenders into sex-specific bathrooms.

Last year, a generous Mrs. Obama pledged $70 million dollars, the equivalent of the cost of her first five years of vacation expenses, to Pakistan, a country where 74% of the people basically hate America.  This year, while struggling Americans scrimp and save to purchase groceries, Michelle upped the ante and pledged $100 million in U.S. foreign aid to 100,000 Moroccan students – 50,000 of whom are uneducated girls.

Which is why, after her visit with Nobel Peace Prize winner, President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf in Ebola-stricken Liberia, and in keeping with Barack’s Muslim-apologist theme, Michelle commissioned the Marrakesh Express to shuttle her to Morocco. Dressed in what closely resembled a $3,000 black and white tablecloth, Michelle, the woman who hasn’t missed one meal in eight years, broke the Ramadan fast at an Iftar dinner hosted by Moroccan Princess Lalla Salma.

Meanwhile, female students Malia, Sasha, and Grandma the Grifter, are quickly learning that sumptuous perks are in store for those who tag along on whirlwind vacations with Michelle.  For example, Malia, who also cares deeply about illiterate girls living in poverty, showed up to the Moroccan food fest wearing a $4,295 Burberry Prorsum dress.

Either way, rather than stay in the U.S. and address the problem of immigrants who refuse to learn English, Michelle chose instead to fly to Madrid, where, after being joined by Queen Letizia Ortiz Rocasolano, spoke in English to girls in Spain about ‘letting girls learn.’

In other words, after pushing away from the Moroccan buffet table, America’s wayfaring freeloader, who last visited Malaga and Mallorca in 2010 on $500Kprivate mother/daughter trip, seamlessly segued from Marrakesh to Madrid.

And if all this seems strange, lest anyone forget, it was female education-advocate Michelle Obama who just finished making the college-graduation-speaker-circuit, where, instead of praising America, exploited keynote speeches to stir up racial tension and to grumble about “driving while black.”

Which proves that the FLOTUS’s efforts overseas have nothing to do with ‘girls learning.’

Instead, under the guise of some global gender-sensitive educational initiative that she knows is impossible to enforce, Michelle Obama has again finagled for herself a holiday. By feigning concern for girls who live in countries where socio-economic and political challenges preclude them from accessing an education, America’s vacation-glutton, Michelle Obama, has found yet another vehicle that justifies her indulging in a June vacation.

An honorary degree recipient stupefies Rutgers

ap_16136622960899_custom-db7f47d1aceed49fb7ff597157b7c22a602997f2-s900-c85Originally posted at American Thinker

Barack Obama recently accepted an invitation to be the keynote speaker at Rutgers University’s commencement.  After gracing the podium with the usual perfunctory niceties, rather than exhibit sensitivity toward Muslim graduates, Barack Hussein exercised his comedic chops by joking about whether New Jersey breakfast meat should be called pork roll or “Taylor ham.”

Then, after sharing that he has  “soft spot” for “typical white” and 99-year-oldgrandmas in need of pacemakers, America’s classless president spent a great deal of time rebuking the Republican presumptive nominee.

In addition to admonishing Trump, President Obama used the commencement speech as a platform to lift up progressive ideology, put down political adversaries, and defend the last eight years. His remarks started with lauding the diversity of a graduating class that included a South Asian philosophy student and a “first-generation Latina student from Jersey City” who probably wouldn’t need a translator to understand Target’s new all Spanish ad campaign.

As an entrée to challenging the class to pursue social justice, Obama told them, “I’m fond of quoting Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who he believes once said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice.”  One small problem, MLK didn’t say it, the 19th-century Unitarian minister/abolitionist Theodore Parker did.

After Obama expunged Winston Churchill from the redecorated Oval Office, the president, who exploited the Rutgers discourse to ridicule his political adversaries for lack of brainpower, had the misquote emblazoned on the rug.

At Rutgers, the guy who just said he has a “soft spot” for grandmas also injected divisiveness by suggesting that the older Americans are full of  “fear… division and paralysis.”  Then he commended #feelthebern moochers for their “cooperation … innovation and hope.”

The president told the soon to be alumni, “So you’ve got the tools to lead us…you’ll look at things with fresher eyes, unencumbered by the biases and blind spots and inertia and general crankiness of your parents and grandparents and old heads like me.” In other words, anyone who doesn’t worship Barack Obama is biased, blind, inert, cranky and “longing for the ‘good old days’.”

That’s why, the president informed the graduates, “the ‘good old days’ weren’t that great.” He warned that all talk about the past should be taken “with a grain of salt,” because it comes from a generation that flourished when “America pretty much did whatever it wanted around the world.”

After belittling the elders, Obama praised himself when he said, “In fact, by almost every measure, America is better, and the world is better, than it was 50 years ago, or 30 years ago, or even eight years ago” – a comment that thrilled the clapping seals in mortarboards.

For good measure, the president also brought up slavery, Jim Crow, and the suppression of women’s rights.  Then he claimed that since 1983, the year his college transcripts went missing, crime, teenage pregnancy, and poverty rates have declined.

Obama chose not to quote statistics regarding illegal felons roaming our streets and threatening our children, 50+ million aborted American babies, and millions of unemployed people receiving government subsidies.

Nor did the equal pay advocate mention that in his own administration women still earn less than men.

Instead, Obama bedazzled spectators with bluster about jobs, Obamacare, clean energy, and marriage equality.  He even mentioned eliminating polio, and cutting infant mortality, but didn’t reference importing Third World diseases like MDR-TB, or Planned Parenthood peddling baby body parts.

Barack Obama is so clueless, that in an attempt to inspire his audience, the pro-choice president mentioned Alice Paul, who, besides being a “daughter of New Jersey” and a suffragette, was ardently pro-life.

After hearing the Rutgers University keynote commencement speech delivered by Barack Obama, it’s clear that the 44th president thinks he is the Bill Cosby of politics.  The difference is that unlike Cosby, who was accused of drugging women with Quaaludes, to stupefy his audience, Obama infuses his delusional rhetoric with Cosby-style humor.

Thanks to Obama, Rutgers graduates have much to fear; yet the president encouraged them not to fear the future.  That led him to a second point where he stressed globalism, which he defined as an “interconnected…world.”   Then, Obama hinted that he believes responsible border security is solving a problem “in isolation.”

This is Obama’s rationale:

When overseas states start falling apart, they become breeding grounds for terrorists …that ultimately can reach our shores.  When developing countries don’t have functioning health systems, epidemics like Zika or Ebola can spread and threaten Americans, too.

True, a wall won’t stop terrorism or disease. But, enforcing immigration law and refusing to import and resettle refugees that ISIS has vowed to infiltrate might help.

After hamstringing the U.S. military Obama then added:

But I worry if we think that the entire burden of our engagement with the world is up to the 1 percent who serve in our military, and the rest of us can just sit back and do nothing.  They can’t shoulder the entire burden.

Then, further along in the speech the keynote speaker contradicted that logic when he said, “We can close tax loopholes on hedge fund managers and take that money and give tax breaks to help families with child care or retirement.” Put simply, when it comes to “leveling the playing field,” the excuse Obama uses to demilitarize the armed forces, he then uses to justify forcing a small percentage of earners to support those who  “just sit back and do nothing.”

Lacking any quality input of his own, without uttering his name, Obama spent a lot of time taking Donald Trump to task.

After mocking Trump “building an endless wall,” Barack pulled out the “isolating and disparaging Muslims” card, the “betrayal of our values” card and the “important partners in the fight against violent extremism” card.

Oh, and right before some egghead in the audience yelled “Four more years!”, Obama insinuated Trump “blames [America’s] challenges on immigrants.”

From there, in an attempt to portray anyone who disagrees with his politics as uneducated, illogical, “anti-intellectual” and troglodyte in nature, Obama implied that those who contradict his views, namely Trump, lack “facts, evidence, reason, logic, [and] an understanding of science.” This from a guy who doesn’t believe partially born newborns are human and that greenhouse gasses are a bigger threat than ISIS teaching French boys how to kill.

With that in mind, maybe Obama should refrain from highlighting his own shortcomings by saying things like, “In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue.  It’s not cool to not know what you’re talking about. ”

After emphasizing that the “good old days” should be taken with a “grain of salt,” Obama painted a certain Republican presidential candidate as unenlightened by calling upon our  ‘enlightened’ limited government Founding Fathers, many of whom owned the slaves he alluded to when talking about disregarding our nation’s past.

Obama, who scorns rugged individualism and who once called our Constitution “deeply flawed” told his audience “rational thought and experimentation and the capacity of informed citizens to master our own fates…[is] embedded in our constitutional design.”

That was right before the man who thinks he’s “the smartest guy in the room” cited modern technology making us “more confident in our ignorance.” And, quite frankly, who better than Barack Obama to recognize that “a whole lot of folks who are book smart…have no common sense?”

Barack alluded to Donald when he mentioned leaders who have “a disdain for facts, when they’re not held accountable for repeating falsehoods.” Maybe, instead of expelling CO2 when talking climate change, Obama should take some time to self-reflect.

In a call to the citizenry that sounded more like a quote from Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto than a college commencement speech by an American president, Obama mentioned “collective decisions on behalf of a common good.”

Then, after implying that Donald Trump is a complete idiot, Obama, who clearly forgets what he’s reading off the Teleprompter, said progressive goals are reached through “advocacy… organizing… alliance-building, and deal-making, and …changing of public opinion.”  Obama claimed all this “happened because ordinary Americans who cared participated in the political process.”

A legend in his own mind, what’s clear is that Obama doesn’t realize that those are the very things that propelled the “Art of the Deal”-maker to the front of the pack.

In the end, Obama offered the Rutgers graduating Class of 2016 insights he’s never taken to heart himself. That’s why, when the president uttered the words, “your generation will feel the brunt of this catastrophe,” it sounded more like he was referring to his presidency than an issuing indictment on climate change denial or Donald Trump.

Update on Baby Jose and the state of Venezuela

13227764_10209241916227927_7742520625139512155_oOriginally posted at American Thinker

Three weeks ago my friend Jacqueline O, a retired government surgeon in Venezuela, mentioned that a child of a friend’s relative needed a procedure on his heart because he was born with one ventricle.

The baby’s name is Jose Manuel Villamizar Zambrano, and because of a birth defect, Jose requires a cardiac catheterization and almost surely will require follow-up heart surgery.

Jacqueline and I became online friends because she is so ardently anti-Marxist and attracted politically to people of like mind.  Jacqueline is an activist at heart and has a soft spot for suffering children, which may be why my big mouth and my politics piqued her interest.

For the last seventeen years, this brave woman has lamented the mayhem socialism is wreaking on her once beautiful country.  For eight of those years, she oftentimes would agree with my assessment of socialists or just ask for prayer.

Jacqueline found out and conveyed to me that Jose’s mother Evelyn took her son to the government-run free Venezuelan health care hospitals, where the baby, despite his oxygen-deprived blue lips, was turned away because the equipment was broken.

Naturally, when I heard about the baby’s plight, I asked my friend if there was something I could do to help.  Jacqueline again asked for prayer, because for the child to be treated at a private clinic, his mother would need what amounted to 10,000 American dollars.

Rather impulsively, and with not one iota of experience raising money, I ran headlong into starting a GoFundMe campaign, and within one week, I raised, by the grace of God, and the help of many generous people, $10,000.  There was even one selfless individual who said that if the campaign fell short of the goal, he, after donating quite generously to begin with, would provide the remainder.

GoFundMe was wonderful and vetted the campaign thoroughly.  The organization requested backup verification including documentation from Jose’s mother, pictures, medical records, official letters, and even a photo of her government ID.

Since all this happened, Jacqueline and I have been in almost constant contact, either online or by phone, and what was once a casual understanding of the plight these people suffer every day has become something quite different for me.

Since raising the money, there have been all sorts of obstacles and barriers.

Getting the funds converted and sent to Jose has also been a bit of a trial.

Thanks to GoFundMe, and the wonderful people that made this miracle happen, Jose, who lives in San Cristobal, estado Tachira, which is about 14 hours each way by bus to Caracas, will receive the initial part of his care at the private Clinica Santa Sofia, in Caracas.

In the meantime, the plight this baby and his mother are suffering has been verified by correspondence I’ve had with Jacqueline over the past few weeks.

One day, this woman spent four hours standing in line to buy a stick of butter!

In Venezuela, the shelves are empty, and things Americans take for granted are nowhere to be found.  When Venezuelans go to the market, there is no oil, butter, toilet paper, diapers, medicine, or baby formula.  In fact, this good woman respectfully asked if some of the donated money could be designated to buy Jose diapers and formula, both of which are in short supply.

My friend has expressed to me that she longs for the day when she will again enjoy a bowl of cornflakes and milk.  Right now, in Venezuela, there is no milk.

After posting an MSN article about embattled leftist Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro titled “Maduro in crackdown under Venezuela emergency decree,” in the best way she could express it in English, Jacqueline replied to the post, saying this:

You’re seeing only a piece what’s the reality. Maybe today we’ll get water, from last week and nada of water set. We have a médium water tank and 10 médium bottles potable water. From 4 bathroom we close 3. No bread. Ore arepa (our national food) have to paid more money for toilet papers, no butter, milk even for baby, Etc, etc.

That grim picture needs no translation.

So, with that in mind, I’m writing an update for two reasons.

First, I want to reassure all of you that gave money and prayed – we’re doing the right thing.  Just two weeks after the GoFundMe campaign was started by someone who never raised a dollar in her life – namely, me – the New York Times published an article titled “Dying Infants and No Medicine: Inside Venezuela’s Failing Hospitals.”

Here’s an excerpt from the piece:

Gloves and soap have vanished from some hospitals. Cancer medicines are often found only on the black market. There is so little electricity that the government works only two days a week to save what energy is left…  Late last fall, the aging pumps that supplied water to the University of the Andes Hospital exploded. They were not repaired for months.

So without water, gloves, soap or antibiotics, a group of surgeons prepared to remove an appendix that was about to burst, even though the operating room was still covered in other people’s blood.

A little farther along, the article says that because of the devastating conditions, President Maduro’s “opponents in the legislature declared a humanitarian crisis … [and] passed a law that would allow Venezuela to accept international aid to prop up the health care system.”

Mr. Maduro, who is Chávez’s successor, “[r]ejected the effort, describing the move as a bid to undermine him and privatize the hospital system.”  Delusional Maduro said this: “I doubt that anywhere in the world, except in Cuba, there exists a better health system than this one.”

Sound familiar?

This brings me to the second reason I chose to write all this.  I do it to warn anyone who thinks this couldn’t happen in America.  Seventeen years ago, Venezuela wasn’t what it is today.  The people of Venezuela embraced socialism because Hugo Chávez promised them that if they did, they would eat – today, if they don’t die, they get to stand on line for four hours for a stick of butter.

Update: David Paulin writes:

Hugo Chávez initially ran as a political outsider and had pledged to steer a “third-way” between socialism and capitalism. It wasn’t until well into his presidency (I think his second term) that he finally declared himself a socialist. In other words, the socialist take-over of Venezuela was a gigantic bait and switch. See my articles on this at AT and FPM.

That said, it might be said that Venezuela was on a slippery slope toward all of this — in light of a long-time political climate of bread-and-circuses populism fueled by its oil wealth.

 

Caitlyn Jenner Reportedly Sabotages Obama’s Bathroom Agenda

IMG_2205Originally posted at American Thinker

Sixty-six-year-old Caitlyn Jenner, or “Cait,” as his or her friends like to call him or her, singlehandedly brought sexual identification awareness to the forefront of American culture.  Now Kardashian family biographer, Ian Halperin, has claimed that sources tell him Caitlyn is unhappy as a woman and is thinking seriously “in the next couple of years” of  transitioning back to male.

Halperin alleges that while researching his book Kardashian Dynasty: The Controversial Rise of America’s Royal Family, insiders indicated that, unlike Pat SuzukiGlamour magazine’s “Woman of the Year,” is no longer singing “I enjoy being a girl,” and instead is considering re-embracing his or her original manhood.

That’s right; after fashion retailer H&M partnered with Cait and came out with transgender sportswear, Caitlyn, a purported victim of “sex change regret,” may be leaning away from jogging bras and toward men’s golfing duds.

Forget the clothing line, Caitlyn’s backpedaling is sure to unsettle Barack Obama.

Thanks in part to the capricious Caitlyn bringing the plight of transgenderism to the fore, Obama who chooses to ignore immigration law, has expended an inordinate amount of energy focusing on elimination law.

After Caitlyn raised awareness, the president, who barely notices when a U.S. Navy Seal is killed by ISIS in Iraq or makes nary a comment when a 90-year-old Minnesota farmer is murdered by illegals, has had plenty to say about frightened schoolchildren sucking it up and venturing into creepy gender-neutral restrooms.

The Obama administration has been so concerned about where transgenders relieve themselves they flexed their muscles and decreed that heterosexuals being uncomfortable about using a same-sex bathroom does not justify keeping men dressed like women out of the ladies’ room, or vice versa. In fact, Obama issued an edict that all public schools had better provide transgender access to restrooms, locker rooms, and shower facilities — or face the loss of federal funds.

That’s why, with blackmail on the table, now may not be the best time for news to come out that one of the reasons Caitlyn wants to transition away from estrogen back to testosterone is that he or she is still attracted to women.  The revelation is problematic because the left argues that gender-neutrality in the restroom is not a problem and that forcing little girls to shower with transgendered boys does not threaten privacy because boys who identify as girls aren’t attracted to girls.

Halperin says that Caitlyn feels otherwise.

And it gets weirder.

In 2015, with his junk tucked up in a silk teddy, Jenner was featured on the cover of Vanity Fair.  This summer, wearing nothing but an American flag and an Olympic gold medal as a fig leaf, Caitlyn plans to pose nude for Sports Illustrated.

Now, after ignoring Deuteronomy 22:5, which says, “A woman must not wear men’s clothing, nor a man wear women’s clothing, for the LORD your God detests anyone who does this,” Halperin asserts that Caitlyn’s devout Christianity has caused the transgendered cover girl angst.

Apparently, Caitlyn’s conflict arises from Scriptures that censure homosexual sex. So, for relationship reasons, Caitlyn is allegedly willing to drop being a lesbian, de-transition, find a female mate, and have heterosexual sex.  Then, instead of two “women exchanging the natural function for that which is unnatural,” as it says in Romans 1:26-27, Bruce will be free to fornicate with a totally clear conscience.

Meanwhile, in the wake of a father of ten/grandfather of five trying to decide whether to wear Spanx or a jock strap, Americans are left to deal with a president who publicly praised the former Olympiad for having the “courage to share his or her story.”

As a result of that inspiration, Obama’s nondiscriminatory bathroom edicts now demand that courageous feelings, rather than biology, should determine what Americans may have to endure whenever they venture into a public bathroom, shower, or college dorm.

Progressives understand that a transformational culture war will result in collateral damage. So, after terror takes place in the toilet, which it will, rest assured that Barack Obama will react to unfortunate bathroom catastrophes with the same emotionless shoulder shrug he exhibited when Kate Steinle was shot in the back by an un-deported illegal alien felon.

Therefore, after Barack Obama and Housing Secretary Julian Castro finish resettling our neighborhoods this fall, in addition to odd sightings in Target bathrooms, expect to see ISIS refugee infiltrators reapplying their lipstick in the public restroom at the local library.

That being said, lately, America feels like a 10,000-passenger cruise ship originally destined for the Virgin Islands. However, at the behest of merely 30 passengers, or 0.3%, who changed their minds and would rather sail to Cuba, for the last eight years, Captain Obama has steadily changed course.

The problem for the other 9,970 passengers is that, once again, the minority is steering the vessel.

With Caitlyn Jenner and others like him as poster children, Barack Obama preaches against intolerance.  But then, on a cruise to nowhere that the 99.7% didn’t sign on for, he forces the intolerable upon those averse to having their privacy subjected to sexual anomalies and theoretical gender distinctions.

So, regardless of what Barack Obama says, in the future, if a 6’ 2” woman who looks like Caitlyn Jenner enters the restroom wearing Christian Louboutin heels, just remember that he or she may be wearing sky-high pumps simply to have a clearer view over the top of your stall.

© 2009-2016 jeannie-ology All Rights Reserved

%d bloggers like this: