Posted by Curt on 20 October, 2016 at 12:30 pm. 18 comments already!


Matt Walsh:

If you didn’t watch Wednesday night’s debate, I commend you. Clearly, you value your free time and your psychological and emotional health more than I value my own. But if you’re now relying on media reports to give you an idea of what took place, you must have the impression that there were only two notable moments during the entire 90 minute event:

First, there was Trump refusing to say he’d accept the results of the election.

Second, there was Trump calling Clinton a “nasty woman.

Much hand wringing has ensued over both of these remarks, but the hysteria over the “nasty woman” comment has been especially overblown. After all, you can’t fault the guy for making a factual observation. Virtually everyone who has ever been around her and lived to tell about it has confirmed that she is, in fact, a nasty human being. Even her personal security, who put their lives on the line to protect her, have reported that she treats them like filth. According to former secret service agents, a conversation between Clinton and her security staff could go like this:

Security: “Good morning, ma’am.”

Clinton: “F**k off.”

Nasty? I’d say so.

Speaking of nasty, there was one other exchange last night that I think warrants further discussion — although the media would much rather move on and pretend it didn’t happen. Breaking the longstanding tradition of ignoring the abortion issue completely during presidential debates, moderator Chris Wallace actually brought the subject up within the first 15 minutes. Clinton, of course, spoke glowingly about Planned Parenthood and warned that disaster would surely strike if the billion dollar abortion conglomerate ever stops receiving its monthly welfare checks from the government. When Wallace pressed her to explain “how far the right to abortion goes,” Clinton confirmed that she believes late term and partial birth abortion should be legal:

“The kinds of cases that fall at the end of pregnancy are often the most heartbreaking, painful decisions for families to make. I have met with women who toward the end of their pregnancy get the worst news one could get, that their health is in jeopardy if they continue to carry to term or that something terrible has happened or just been discovered about the pregnancy. I do not think the United States government should be stepping in and making those most personal of decisions.”

In Clinton’s mind, murdering a fully developed infant in the ninth month of pregnancy is a “personal decision.” It should be noted that late term abortions are neveractually needed to save the life of the mother, and in fact are much more likely to endanger the mother’s life. But notice that Clinton also stipulates that partial birth abortion should be an option in case “something has been discovered about the pregnancy.” This kind of vague qualifier is just another way of saying that there should simply be no restrictions on abortions at all, from conception all the way to birth. To defend her extremist pro-abortion position, she makes a very chilling comparison:

“I’ve been to countries where governments forced women to have abortions like they did in China or force women to bear children like they used to do in Romania.”

Clinton is drawing a moral equivalence between a government that forces a woman to kill her child and a government that doesn’t allow a woman to kill her child. That’s not just radical, it’s demented.

Later on in the debate, when the discussion turned to immigration, Clinton attempted to transition from ruthless baby killer mode to compassionate grandmother mode. Using a phrase popular among open border proponents, she chastised Republicans for wanting to “rip families apart” by enforcing our immigration laws. I couldn’t help but see the irony in the fact that Clinton is opposed to metaphorically“ripping families apart” but not in the least bit opposed to literally, physically, ripping babies apart.

Make no mistake, late term abortion — the procedure that Hillary Clinton passionately endorses – means actually tearing fully formed children apart, limb by limb. In this video (warning: very graphic), an abortionist explains exactly how the babies are ripped to shreds during second trimester abortions. Note: there arewell over 100 thousand of these kinds of abortions performed each year. During the procedure, the child is torn apart and extracted piece by piece with a pair of sharpened forceps. When all the limbs have been removed, the baby’s head is crushed. The abortionist knows that the head has been crushed when it sees the child’s brain oozing out of the mother’s birth canal. Hillary Clinton defended this on stage last night.

In the third trimester (warning: also very graphic), viable infants ranging from 24 weeks to term are stabbed in the head with a poison needle. The baby usually dies an excruciatingly painful death, and the mother is left to carry the dead baby around in her womb for a couple of days. If she goes into labor while outside of the abortion clinic, she’ll be advised to deliver her dead child into a toilet. If she doesn’t go into labor, she’ll be sent back to the abortion clinic where the child will be torn out of the womb in pieces. Hillary Clinton defended this on stage last night.

But it doesn’t end there. Hillary supports the currently illegal practice of partial birth abortion. In this procedure, a fully developed and viable infant child is delivered, alive, until only his head remains inside the birth canal. The abortionist then punctures the child’s skull and sucks his brains out through a tube. After the brains are removed, the child’s skull is shattered, and the dead and mangled baby is finally delivered. As we’ve learned from undercover videos, the child will likely be harvested for parts before being discarded in a medial waste bin. Hillary Clinton defended this on stage last night.

Read more

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x