Since Obama is tripling-down on his smears, lies, and outright bigotry, I suppose that I can double-down with what I've previously written.
Contrary
to Obama's vile, crass, and, frankly, un-American assertion that, if one
objects to his beautiful deal (that rests almost exclusively on the bet that,
in a decade, the Iranian government will have moderated), s/he is making
'common cause' with the hardliners in Iran, it is precisely the opposite. I
hate to break it to you, Mr President, but the hardliners in Iran ARE
the 'Supreme Leader' (as you insist on calling him) and the government. The
moderates - those with whom many of us, who oppose the Iranian deal, stood -
were the ones getting shot in the street in 2009 during the Green Revolution. You,
Mr President, turned your back on the 'moderates' then. Out
of ideology, a personal preference for dictators over democrats, or political
expediency (‘I cannot p*ss off the hardliners 'cuz...my legacy!), who knows?
Only
days before this 'historic agreement' was announced, the Ayatollah Khamenei, as
he has done for decades, led a frenzied crowd in chanting 'Death to America!
Death to Israel!' while holding a Kalashnikov. And, the supposedly 'moderate'
President of Iran, Hassan Rouhani, has explicitly stated in the past that he
and his co-religionists would be willing to sacrifice TWENTY MILLION of
their OWN countrymen in a nuclear exchange with Israel if such
resulted in the destruction of the Jewish State and its 6 million Jews (and 2
million Arabs).
As
Senator Chuck Schumer said in his eloquent essay on why he is voting against
Obama’s nuclear sell-out ‘agreement’, this deal is premised on the idea and
ideal that treating Iran as an equal, letting it back into the ‘community of
nations’, and introducing Western ideas into Iranian society through an opening
of markets will result in either moderation or regime change is a bet that is
almost certainly not going to pay off. I’m paraphrasing him here, but as hard
as it is to say, when he is right, he is right.
It
is really indisputable – except to ideologues, sycophants, and antiwar
organisations like Code Pink, who do, in fact, constantly make ‘common cause’
with the anti-Semitic, anti-American, Holocaust-denying regime in Iran – that
the moderates and real democrats in that country are the very ones that had as
much input in this ‘historic accord’ as did Israel, which is to say, NONE.
Sixty
– SIXTY! – percent (60%) of
Iran’s population of 73 million is under the age of 30. They have made it clear
that they do not want to live under theocratic rule. They are the people that
should be encouraged and enabled. Providing a path to nukes to the country’s
nutters in government doesn’t just present an existential threat to Israel and
the world, it crushes the moderates further under the iron fist of the Twelvers,
who want nothing more than to impose Islam on the entire world and to bring
about the return of the Mahdi through bloodshed and chaos. Don’t take my word
for it. Go read the ‘Supreme Leader’s’ book that was published days after
President Obama’s 'great gift to America, Israel and the freedom-loving world.'
If
you think that I am unduly pessimistic, ‘extremist’, ‘warmongering’, and
‘partisan’ in my contempt for the Iranian nuclear deal, then let me disabuse
you of that notion summarily and forthwith. I need only one example to prove to
how naïve and delusional that President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and all of their
colleagues and supporters are. While President Obama grudgingly was forced to
admit that Iran ‘might’ use some of the billions of dollars gained as a result
of sanctions’ relief, he asserted that the Iranian government will definitely
use most of the money on ‘paying government pensions and repairing crumbling
infrastructure.’ I. Am. Not. Kidding.
Do
you know what happened immediately after the deal was announced?
General
Soleimani, the Commander of Iran’s elite, ruthless Quds Force, defied the
sanctions and flew to Moscow.
Did
the good General Soleimani travel to Russia to get advice on pension funding
and infrastructure remediation from Vladimir Putin?
LOLZ.
No,
of course not. He was sent at the behest
of the ‘Supreme Leader’ to secure several arms deals.
So,
just exactly whom is the delusional,
naïve, extreme, reckless, 'hardliner' and 'enemy of America' here?
Listen,
I have no use for Donald Trump, but, frankly, I'm unimpressed with the idea of
pledging loyalty to the GOP absolutely, under any circumstances, forever, etc.
My problem, you see, is this sort of thing only goes one way. It is easy to get
upset with Trump for not pledging his fealty to the Republican Party. Why? It
is said that, if one is a Republican, Then. S/he. Must. Support. The. And.
Vote. For. The. Party's. Nominee. Period.
But,
how does that work when the loyalty shoe is put on the GOPe's foot? Must I really
cite the myriad of examples or can I just offer up the Party's 2008
presidential nominee as wholly and clearly illustrative?
In
July of 2013, the aging, bombastic, insulting, insincere, go-along-to-get-along
a/k/a 'crossing the aisle' a/k/a complete surrender and capitulation to the
Democrats Senator from the Great State of Arizona, one John Sidney McCain III,
was asked by the lefty mag, The New
Republic, for whom would he vote in 2016 if the presidential contest was
between Hillary Clinton and Rand Paul.
And,
what did the alleged 'Reagan Republican' stalwart and one of the so-called
leaders of the GOP in Washington say in response?
'It’s gonna be a tough choice.'
Wait. Wut??? Where's the loyalty? If one is a
true Republican - in fact so much a Republican that he was given the Republican
nomination for President - how could one ever contemplate voting for the
disingenuous, corrupt, 'bimbo'-bashing (#WarOnWomen, indeed), achievement-less,
disastrous Progressive, Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was to the left of Barack
Obama on many issues while in the Senate?
If
the establishment believes that all candidates must pledge all-encompassing loyalty
to the party and 'get behind' the eventual nominee, then why does that only
seem to apply to upstarts like (the buffoonish) Trump and (the brilliant) Cruz?
In other words, why shouldn't Senator McCain be forced to pledge to support the
eventual nominee? No. Matter. What.
I
admit that I am not now nor have I ever been a Republican (but I am certainly
not a Democrat, Liberal or Progressive, but I repeat myself). The Party has the
absolute right to set its own rules and demands, but shouldn't those, in the
very least, be consistent?
I
am not a Trump supporter although I do like people who take it to the
Establishment. This whole loyalty oath brouhaha is emblematic of one of the
Republican Party's core problems: You will vote for our moderate candidate, who
will always choose pale pastels over bold colours. You will continue to support
us when we betray you. (Remember our promises to limit the size and scope of
government, cut taxes, reduce regulation, defund Obamacare and never fund
'President Obama's illegal and unconstitutional amnesty'? Well, never mind.
Keep cutting those cheques!)
And,
that is exactly how we wind up with people like McCain, McConnell, Boehner,
etc. All hat and no cattle. Seriously, the bloody Iranians are better
negotiators than Boehner and Putin has a spine where the Majority Leader is
just another spineless, chinless, DC Corruptocrat, who buckles under as soon as
the bullies, Obama and Reid, hurl their opening salvos. They are weak and,
frankly, very different from their bases. They love Big Government...especially
when they supposedly control the levers of power...and even as they cede more
and more of that power to the Executive Branch...and the fourth branch of
government, The Regulatory State.
Recently,
I heard a clip from a hearing of the Senate Armed Services Committee wherein
Senator Ted Cruz, in my opinion, completely eviscerated Secretary of State John
Kerry, Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, and Secretary of Defence Ashton Carter
over President Obama's insanely reckless and delusional nuclear agreement with
the Iranian government, who are fanatical and apocalyptic.
Contrary
to Obama's vile, crass, and, frankly, un-American assertion that, if one
objects to his beautiful deal (that rests almost exclusively on the bet that, in
a decade, the Iranian government will have moderated), s/he is making 'common
cause' with the hardliners in Iran, it is precisely the opposite.I hate to
break it to you, Mr President, but the hardliners in Iran ARE the 'Supreme
Leader' (as you insist on calling him) and the government. The moderates -
those with whom many of us, who oppose the Iranian deal, stood - were the ones
getting shot in the street in 2009 during the Green Revolution. President Obama
turned his back on the 'moderates' then.Out of ideology, a personal preference
for dictators over democrats, or political expediency (‘I cannot piss off the
hardliners 'cuz...my legacy!), who knows?
Anyhoo,
during this colloquy, Kerry asserted that he has never seen anything from
either the 'Supreme Leader' or the Iranian government that indicates a real
desire to 'wipe Israel off the map or destroy the United States'. Seriously.
Only
days before, the Ayatollah Khamenei, as he has done for decades, led a frenzied
crowd in chanting'Death to America! Death to Israel!'while holding a
Kalashnikov. And, the supposedly 'moderate' President of Iran, Hassan Rouhani,
has explicitly stated in the past that he and his co-religionists would be
willing to sacrifice TWENTY MILLIONof theirOWNcountrymen in a nuclear exchange with Israel if such resulted in
the destruction of the Jewish State and its 6 million Jews (and 2 million
Arabs). As Senator Chuck Schumer said in
his eloquent essay on why he is voting against Obama’s nuclear sell-out ‘agreement’,
this deal is premised on the idea and ideal that treating Iran as an equal,
letting it back into the ‘community of nations’, and introducing Western ideas
into Iranian society through an opening of markets will result in either
moderation or regime change is a bet that is almost certainly not going to pay
off. I’m paraphrasing him here, but as
hard as it is to say, when he is right, he is right.
It is really indisputable – except to
ideologues, sycophants, and antiwar organisations like Code Pink, who do, in
fact, constantly make ‘common cause’ with the anti-Semitic, anti-American,
Holocaust-denying regime in Iran – that the moderates and real democrats in
that country are the very ones that had as much input into this ‘historic
accord’ as did Israel, which is to say,NONE.
Sixty – SIXTY! – percent (60%) of Iran’s population of 73 million is
under the age of 30.They have made it
clear that they do not want to live under theocratic rule.They are the people that should be encouraged
and enabled. Providing a path to nukes to the country’s nutters in government
doesn’t just present an existential threat to Israel and the world, it crushes
the moderates further under the iron fist of the 12th’ers, who want
nothing more than to impose Islam on the entire world and to bring about the
return of the Mahdi through bloodshed and chaos.Don’t take my word for it.Go read the ‘Supreme Leader’s’ book that was
published days after President Obama’s 'great gift to America, Israel and the
freedom-loving world.'
So,
in light of the quite obvious reality with regard to Iran, the nuclear deal,
and his own hawkish national security positions, one would believe that Senator
McCain would have been silently cheering on Senator Ted Cruz as he deftly and
expertly interrogated Kerry, Carter, and Muniz. (There's a reason that the
liberal Alan Dershowitz has said that Cruz was his most brilliant student in 50
years and why he won 9 cases before the Supreme Court). But, of course, we are
talking about John McCain. So, instead of supporting or, at least, remaining
silent during Cruz's time, the self-proclaimed 'Reagan Republican', John
McCain, came to the rescue of his old buddy, Lurch Kerry, and cut off Cruz.
This isEXACTLYwhat you get when your party requires
absolute loyalty under any circumstance, but refuses to be loyal to you, their
constituents. With the GOP, there's always another hill to die on...Obamacare,
immigration, the IRS, the budget, debt/deficits, taxes, regulations, and even
the funding of Planned Butcherhood is just not that hill. Impeachment and using
the power of the purse have been taken off the table so the Republicans have no
leverage. If the country's Constitution, sovereignty, national defence, and unborn
aren't 'hills to die on', then, perhaps, the Republican Party just isn't that
in to you. Further, I would suggest, that you not continue to submit to the GOP
Establishment's loyalty demands. 'I didn't leave the Democratic Party. The Democratic Party left me,' Ronald Reagan once said. Perhaps, it is time for the 'Hobbits and Whacko-Birds' of the Republican Party to tell the Establishment, loudly, clearly, and once and for all, that:
'It's not me. It's YOU.'
If not now, when? After another Bush loses to another Clinton and cements permanently the 'fundamental transformation' of the United States of America into something that would have, in generations past, resulted in citizens taking up arms against their elitist rulers? We owe ourselves, our children, and generations unborn a better country led by better leaders. Trump isn't that guy, but neither is any spawn of the Bush-Dole-Romney wing of the Republican Party and the Washington Cartel.
PS: If you think
that I am unduly pessimistic, ‘extremist’, ‘warmongering’, and ‘partisan’ in my
contempt for the Iranian nuclear deal, then let me disabuse you of that notion
summarily and forthwith. I need only one
example to prove to how naïve and delusional that President Obama, Secretary
Kerry, and all of their colleagues and supporters. While President Obama grudgingly
was forced to admit that Iran ‘might’ use some of the billions of dollars
gained as a result of sanctions’ relief, he asserted that the Iranian
government will definitely use most of the money on ‘paying government pensions
and repairing crumbling infrastructure.’
I. Am. Not. Kidding.
Do you know what
happened immediately after the deal was announced?
General Soleimani,
the Commander of Iran’s elite, ruthless Quds Force, defied the sanctions and
flew to Moscow.
Did Soleimani
travel to Russia to get advice on pension funding and infrastructure
remediation from Vladimir Putin?
LOLZ.
No, he was sent at
the behest of the ‘Supreme Leader’ to secure an arms deal.
So, just exactly
who is the delusional, naïve, extreme, and reckless one here?
Santorum: 'Suppose during this
procedure the baby slips entirely from the mother’s birth canal. You agree,
once a child is born, is separated from the mother, that that child is
protected by the Constitution and cannot be killed? Do you agree with that?'
Boxer:'I think
when you bring your baby home, when your baby is born … the baby belongs to
your family and has all the rights.'
Santorum persisted: 'Obviously,
you don’t mean they have to take the baby out of the hospital for it to be
protected by the Constitution. Once the baby is separated from the mother, you
would agree—completely separated from the mother—you would agree that the baby
is entitled to constitutional protection?”'
Barbara Boxer would not say 'yes.' Instead, she
said, understandably:
Boxer:'I don’t want
to engage in this.'
See for yourselves:
Roberta Durán Boxer
Honestly, who could blame her for saying 'no mas'?
The pro-abortion rights movement's illogical arguments are hard to
maintain and, needless to say, demand a 'willing suspension of disbelief'.
Actually, they require something even more rigourous, deeper,
obstinate, extreme, and fanatical: It demands an absolute willful blindness and
the dehuminisation of both the pro-abortioner and the 'foetus' that it claims
is nothing more than 'a clump of cells', ''similar to a wart', or the more
clinical term, 'tissue'.
In order to maintain the argument that abortion is not murder and
a woman has the right to have a foetus removed from her body, at any time and
up until the moment of birth just as she has the sovereignty over her body to
decide to have a wart or tumour removed ordemand a tattoo artist ink her
child's name in a large font around her neck. As an aside, I
wonder if I should have the right to demand this 'artist':
'Rape victim' Emma Sulkowicz
...do some 'performance art' for me of the in utero dismemberment
of an unborn child, sorry 'trigger warning' demanders, a 'foetus'. For
the record,'foetus' in original Latin
means:1. 'bearing young'; 2. 'breeding'; 3. 'conception'; 4.
'laying (egg) |birth/bringing forth young'; 5. 'brood/litter'; 6. 'children (of
a parent);' and 7. offspring/young (animals). One must fast forward to
the 16th century before 'foetus' becomes 1. embryo (Cal) and 2.
fetus/fetus, young while still in the womb.
Returning to the disconnection, pro-abortionists 'believe'
(actually, I don't really think that they believe this. They know what a
'foetus' is and do not care because sexual and women's liberation, as well as
never having to pay the consequences of one's actions because, after all, it is
always someone else's fault: Conservatives, Libertarians, Capitalism, the
'rich, white, racist' Founding Fathers, the greedy CEOs, the bourgeoisie,
the evil bankers, climate change, the Koch brothers, white people in the
suburbs, small government advocates, the Tea Party, 'Jesusland' a/k/a 'The South'(which
is holding America and 'Progress' back), and, last, but definitely not least
(in fact, the top of the charts in a lot of cases) THE
JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS!!!
If it's not
the stupid-racist-sexist-homophobic-Islamophobic-xenophobic-home-schooled-dirt-eating-snake-handling-brother-marrying-deer-shooting-squirrel-eating-hick-n-hustering-trailer-park-living-moonshine-running-meth-cooking-one-tooth-brushing-single-hair-comb-overing-blue-plate-'n-light-special-luvin'-stand-at-attention-WalMart-shopping-ignorant-untravelled-flag-waving-cry-in-my-beers-with-Lee-Greenwood-Teabag-waving-guns-n-Bibles-bitter-clinging
Neanderthals that spread a woman's legs, then it is the same people who
'instituted a coup against the United States' by assassinating President John F
Kennedy: The CIA, J Edgar Hoovers, da Booooooshes, Neo-Cons, Israel-Firsters,
Bilderbergers, Fascists, Birchers, NWOers, Tri-Lateralists, CFRers, chemtrail
pilots, vaccine scientists, secret water fluorinators, black helicopter pilots,
false-flag planners, MK-ULTRA practitioners, paid propagandists, Richard Nixon,
Elvis (He was later 'deputised' by
President Richard
Nixon, so there), the ghosts of such figures as Lee Harvey 'The Stooge'
Oswald, Jacob Leon Rubenstein a/k/a 'Jack Ruby' (He was a JOOOOOOOOOO,
doncha know?), Idi Amin, Henry VIII, and a spirit that bears a
remarkable resemblance and is 'reminiscent of Gain-gus Khan',MI6 agents,
Q, DGSE infiltrators, the Mossad (Da JOOOOOOOOOOOOS! - again), Abbot
& Costello, The Three Stooges, and a drag queen by the name of ‘Lypsynka,’
who was the love child of three parents: Moammar Qaddafi, Joycelyn Wilderstein,
and Michael Jackson.
It. Is. Never. Their. Fault.
Nor is itEVER A BABY.
In fact, many pro-aborts call pregnancy a disease. So, I
suppose if pregnancy is a disease, it makes sense that the patient is the woman
and should have the right to have the 'disease' removed.
'The National Institute of Health has said
that it is a danger to women's health and safety of their families, that for 30
years, to be exposed to the prospects of pregnancy.'
- Congresswoman Gwendolynne Moore (D-WI)
Of course, these same people will strenuously argue that pregnancy
in sea turtles, the Delta smelt, or, if the big cat, Cecil the Lion, had been
actually a transgendered 'Cait' named Cecile the Lion must be Federally
protected. And, Gaia forbid anyone, anywhere harms one of these sacred 'unborn
animals', they should face enormous fines and lengthy sentences in
Leavenworth...if not extradition to a dictatorship with absolutely no due
process nor human rights and whose leader recentlycelebrated his 91st birthday with a
feast that included Baby Elephants...or, summary execution (Yeah,
I'm looking at you Piers Morgan, Mia Farrow, Cher, etc). As another aside, if
you want to learn what is actually going on in Zimbabwe, then I beg you to
watchMugabe and the White Africanand
Fighting For Survival.While the West convulses in moral hysteria over
the 'murder' of Cecil, 99% of Zimbabweans had never heard of him and are
wondering where the world has been as they suffer through starvation (Recall
that Zimbabwe was 'the breadbasket of Africa' before Mugabwe took over,
collectivised, and 'redistributed' the white-owned land to the peasants
and workers his family, friends, and political supporters), the most
extreme poverty, thirst, lack of medical care, housing, education,
representation, and basic human rights and civil liberties. Zimbabwe is a
corrupt, communist, tinpot dictatorship run by a virulent racist, Robert
Zimbabwe, who once said in a reference to ALL white people
everywhere:
If you are hoping that change is soon to come to Zimbabwe due to
Mugabe's advanced age, think again.'Gucci' Grace Zimbabwe, the
country's First Lady AND FIRST SHOPPER,who
claims supernatural powers, is angling to break the real Last. Glass. Ceiling:
Becoming the world'sFIRST! WOMAN! DICTATOR!You go, G→!
But, here's the problem with all of this: Pregnancy, itself, isNOTa disease. A 'foetus' isNOTa
wart. A 'foetus' is NOTa tumour.
And, the 'Party of Science' denies Science! every time that it argues
otherwise. Unlike a disease, pregnancy is part of biology and the human
existence. Yes, of course, pregnancies can develop complications like
toxemia or pose great risks to women with pre-existing conditions, but
pregnancy, itself, IS. NOT. A. DISEASE.
Secondly, and this is essential, an embryo, zygote or foetus is
NOT just like a wart, a tumour, or whatever. If you examine a wart that
has been removed from a woman, the cells contained therein have the exact same
DNA as the patient. The same goes for a tumour or a toe or a heart or a lung or
a kidney or a hair follicle. A 'foetus' has its own DNA. How
many people have two sets of DNA? A 'foetus' has its own brain. How many individuals
in history have ever had two brains? Gaia knows, there are many Progtards
that should be singing 'All I Want For Winter Solstice Or Festivus Is A Brain!' Just
one. A 'foetus' has its own heart. How many people in the
history of mankind have had two hearts? It would be nice if the ghouls at
Planned Butcherhood and its orthodox followers had just one.
Secretary Hillary Clinton, when first asked about the recent Planned
Parenthood videos, she said that they were 'disturbing'.
Sometimes, things are so bad, so obvious that one can no longer be willfully blind or claim some sort of ignorance.
Clinton may be the rich, white, elitist Democratic frontrunner,
but even she had to apologise and genuflect before the Altar of Abortion,
which is the Holy Sacrament of the Church of Progressivism. After all,
this woman claimed to be a Progressive in the manner of one of her heroines,
Margaret Sanger.
In accepting Planned Butcherhood's Margaret Sanger Award, Mrs Clintonsaid:
'Now, I have to tell you that it was a great privilege when I was told that I would receive this award. I admire Margaret Sanger enormously, her courage, her tenacity, her vision ... And when I think about what she did all those years ago in Brooklyn, taking on archetypes, taking on attitudes and accusations flowing from all directions, I am really in awe of her....Margaret Sanger's work here in the United States and certainly across our globe is not done...Here at home, there are still too many women who are denied their rights because of income, because of opposition, because of attitudes that they harbor. But around the world, too many women are denied even the OPPORTUNITY to know about how to plan and space their families. They're denied the power to do anything about the most intimate of decisions.'
So, women are 'denied the power to do anything about the most intimate of decisions' in America? Lady, there were 1.06 MILLION abortions last years so shut your lying trap already. Further, on this issue of women and 'choice', do they have the 'right to choose' to kill their adulterous husbands? Both unplanned, unborn children and adulterous husbands are unfair, unjust, sexist social constructs that place undue and unnecessary 'burdens' on women. Why is it legal for a woman to kill one, but not the other?
24-week old 'foetus' killed during an abortion
Adulterous husband
One innocent. The other, not so much.
Hillary said this about the alleged human being, Margaret Sanger, that saidthese:
'The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its
infant members is to kill it.'
'[We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and
segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose
inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to
offspring.'
'Plan for Peace'from Birth Control Review (April 1932, pp.
107-108)
'Article 1. The purpose of the American Baby Code shall be to
provide for a better distribution of babies… and to protect society against the
propagation and increase of the unfit. Article 4. No woman shall have the legal
right to bear a child, and no man shall have the right to become a father,
without a permit… Article 6. No permit for parenthood shall be valid for more
than one birth.'
'We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with
social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most
successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We
don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population,
and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs
to any of their more rebellious members'.
'[The most penetrating thinkers] are coming to see that a
qualitative factor as opposed to a quantitative one is of primary importance in
dealing with the great masses of humanity.
In the aforementioned tome, Margaret Sanger also spoke about her philosophy of eugenics asserting the only people that she and her peers viewed as 'quality' were worthy of life and should be allowed. Like the Socialist that she was, she echoed Karl Marx's position on speaks on her
eugenic philosophy – that only the types of “quality” people she and her peers
viewed as worthy of life should be allowed to live. Just look:
'Until its complete extermination or loss of national status, this racial trash (Voekerabfall, i.e. 'racial trash') always becomes the most fanatical bearer there is of counter-revolution, and it remains that. That is because its entire existence is nothing more than a protest against a great historical revolution. … The next world war will cause not only reactionary classes and dynasties, but also entire reactionary peoples, to disappear from the earth. And that too is progress.'
- Karl Marx, Neue Rheinische Zeitung, 1849
'The chief mission of all other races and peoples, large and small, is to perish in the revolutionary holocaust.'
- Karl Marx, Marx People’s Paper, 16 April 1856
According to Marx, all European countries contain ‘left-overs of earlier inhabitants’, now rightly brought into subjugation by more advanced peoples. Amongst such ‘racial trash’ (Voekerabfall) were listed Scottish Highlanders, Bretons, Basques, South Slavs (Slovenes, Croats, Serbs) and Czechs. He also maintained this position on Negroes and Gypsies. Sanger further included the mentally ill, deviants, and, of course, Da JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOS.
Now, we return to Sanger:
'Such parents swell the pathetic ranks of the unemployed.
Feeble-mindedness perpetuates itself from the ranks of those who are blandly
indifferent to their racial responsibilities. And it is largely this type of
humanity we are now drawing upon to populate our world for the generations to
come. In this orgy of multiplying and replenishing the earth, this type is pari
passu multiplying and perpetuating those direst evils in which we must, if
civilization is to survive, extirpate by the very roots.'
'Women of the working class, especially wage workers, should not
have more than two children at most. The average working man can support no
more and and the average working woman can take care of no more in decent
fashion.'
Here we have a woman, Hillary Clinton, who called the Planned
Butcherhood videos 'disturbing' and Margaret Sanger a heroine, but was 'forced' to apoligise
to those that believe a 'foetus' is just another 'clump of cells' even though
it has its own DNA, brain, heart, central nervous system, circulatory system,
spinal column, liver, kidneys, legs, fingers, hands, arms, toes and everything
that a living human being normally has.
So, for Mrs Clinton, I have two simple questions:
According to a report by the New York City Department
entitled Summary of Vital Statistics
2012 The City of New York, Pregnancy Outcomes,31,328
black 'foetuses' were aborted and 24,758 black children were born. For
those who are math-challenged, 31,328 > 24,758.
Furthermore, in 2012, there were more black babies killed
by abortion (31,328) in New York City than were born (24,758). While the
African-American population only makes up 25.1% of the population of the Big
Apple, 42.2% of all abortions performed in 2012 were of black, unborn children.
So, Mrs Clinton, do black lives really matter
to you and Progressives?
Secondly, Mrs Clinton, Senator Barbara Boxer once said that,
basically, a baby doesn't become a person and have human, civil, and constitutional
rights until it leaves the hospital.
So, when
do YOU believe life begins?
It shouldn't really be that hard, Mrs Clinton, since you claim to
'follow the science'.
Then again, when even The Sex Pistols are repulsed by you and your
fellow pro-aborts' position on a woman's right to 'choose (to kill a separate
being with distinct DNA)', I guess 'no
mas' really is the last refuge of a Progressive. I imagine a future where Planned
Butcherhood's Margaret Sanger Award is the 21st century's equivalent of the Ku
Klux Klan's Chief Justice Roger Taney Award.
By the way, how many hankies did you use while crying over the
'murder' of Cecil?
Bodies by The Sex Pistols She was a girl from Birmingham She just had an abortion She was case of insanity Her name was Pauline, she lived in a tree She was a no one who killed her baby She sent her letters from the country She was an animal She was a bloody disgrace Body! I'm not an animal Body! I'm not an animal Dragged on a table in factory Illegitimate place to be In a packet in a lavatory Die little baby screaming Body screaming fucking bloody mess Not an animal It's an abortion Body! I'm not animal Mummy! I'm not an abortion Throbbing squirm, gurgling bloody mess I'm not a discharge I'm not a loss in protein I'm not a throbbing squirm
Fuck this and fuck that Fuck it all and fuck a fucking brat She don't wanna baby that looks like that 'I don't wanna baby that looks like that' Body, I'm not an animal Body, an abortion Body! I'm not an animal Body! I'm not an animal An animal I'm not an animal..... I'm not an abortion..... Mummy! UGH!
