New Planned Parenthood Video: More Price Haggling, Admissions of Procedure Changes for Harvesting

HotAir.com:

The Center for Medical Progress released another in its ongoing series of undercover videos exposing Planned Parenthood’s operations and trade in organ harvesting. Dr. Savita Ginde, the VP of PP’s Rocky Mountains group who appeared briefly in the previous video, echoes Deborah Nucatola in explaining how PP trains its technicians to adjust their procedures to maximize organ and tissue extraction — a violation of the federal law that allows such transfers in the first place. Ginde also discusses how to use language to obfuscate the obvious transaction taking place, the sale of specific organs for specific compensation.

“Putting it under ‘research’ gives us a little bit of an overhang over the whole thing,” Ginde remarks. “If you have someone in a really anti state who’s going to be doing this for you, they’re probably going to get caught.”

Ginde also admits on video that some of the organ harvesting takes place on babies delivered intact and potentially alive first, which would violate the federal Born Alive Infant Protection Act, which went into effect in 2002. Note well that this contains disturbing imagery, starting at 8:40 in the video, much of which was included in the previous video, but some of which is new. Among the latter is the technician chorting, “And another boy!” It’s stomach-turning on many levels:

New undercover footage shows Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains’ Vice President and Medical Director, Dr. Savita Ginde, negotiating a fetal body parts deal, agreeing multiple times to illicit pricing per body part harvested, and suggesting ways to avoid legal consequences.

Planned Parenthood of the Rocky Mountains (PPRM) is a wealthy, multi-state Planned Parenthood affiliate that does over 10,000 abortions per year. PPRM has a contract to supply aborted fetal tissue to Colorado State University in Fort Collins.

In the video, actors posing as representatives from a human biologics company meet with Ginde at the abortion-clinic headquarters of PPRM in Denver to discuss a potential partnership to harvest fetal organs. When the actors request intact fetal specimens, Ginde reveals that in PPRM’s abortion practice, “Sometimes, if we get, if someone delivers before we get to see them for a procedure, then we are intact.”

RELATED: Josh Earnest: ‘Not a Lot of Evidence’ Planned Parenthood Acted Unethically

Ted Cruz Responds to Mitt Romney: There’s a Reason He Got ‘Clobbered’ in 2012

Mediaite.com:

Earlier this week, Ted Cruz said that if the Iran deal went through, President Obama would be “the world’s leading financier of radical Islamic terrorism.” Mitt Romney had some harsh words for that today:

ADVERTISEMENT

During a radio interview with KFYO’s Chad Hasty, Cruz continued to insist the Iran deal is a horrible one and addressed Romney’s tweet.

He said, “One of the reasons Republicans keep getting clobbered is that we have leaders like Mitt Romney or like Jeb Bush who are afraid.”

Cruz insisted that tone doesn’t matter when they have facts on their side, and the reason Romney lost in 2012 was his refusal to use any sort of harsh rhetoric.

Cruz is right. The Left uses harsh tones and tactics all the time in fighting for their agenda...it's about time conservatives who truly believe in conservationism, do the same.

RELATED: Congress Must Reject the Iran Deal

Study Finds Conservative Media ‘Impeding’ GOP Ability to Govern and Win

Mediaite.com:

A new paper from the Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy concludes that conservative media outlets like Fox News have a serious negative impact on Republicans’ ability to govern and win elections.

The paper, written by New York Times national correspondent Jackie Calmes, is titled “‘They Don’t Give a Damn About Governing’ Conservative Media’s Influence on the Republican Party.”

The conservative media, she writes, is setting the agenda for the GOP, and this in turn is “impeding Republicans’ ability to govern and to win presidential elections.” Basically, they’re not offering real solutions and instead are fueled by anger.

One anonymous Republican said that basically every single legislative battle has been swayed by the conservative media because “the loudest voices drown out the sensible ones and there’s no real space to have serious discussions.”

There’s a lot about the history of the conservative media in America, with a particular focus on Fox News, Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Steve Deace, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, etc., and the conclusion brings up the long-running concern about conservative media being “untethered from reality.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Hannity responded in comments to The Washington Post, calling the suggestion he offers no solutions “bullshit” and accusing Calmes of having a “predetermined opinion” on the conservative media before she wrote it.

RELATED:  Sean Hannity lashes back at Shorenstein study on conservative media outlets

Jon Stewart Was Basically A Stenographer for Barack Obama

Mediaite.com:

For Jon Stewart, this certainly isn’t the high note he wanted to go out on.

The guy who prides himself on speaking truth to power, as the anti-establishment, take-to-both-sides-hero for millennials everywhere… reduced to a stenographer for a sitting president so thin-skinned about any and all criticism that he needs to dictate his own comedy. As originally reported in Politico by Darren Samuelson, the outgoing Daily Show host met with President Barack Obama twice in the past four years but failed to let anyone know about it. It was only then that Stewart — who loves to play the “I’m just a comic. Don’t take me seriously!” card anytime he gets called out on something — decided to go the Stephanopolus route in trying to explain away his two meetings with the president.

“Well, I mean, I don’t know if they were secret,” the 52-year-old said last night while pointing out his name (which one?) was clearly on the visitor logs. It all sounds so much like Stephanopoulos explaining that his donations to the Clinton Foundation that were also there for all the public to see… buried on his tax forms. All I know is this: If I met with the president and hosted a program which primarily focuses on politics, pretty sure I’d let my audience know at the very least that what had happened. Unless, of course, I have to carry out my PR orders in a way no White House Press Secretary or Sunday talk show appearance ever could.

Before this appears to be an ideological thing, know this: It’s been stated in this space on numerous occasions that these kind of off-the-record meetings attended by an eager media hoping to take a selfie in the Oval Office like it’s a sophomore year field trip are truly pathetic. It happened throughout Bush 43’s term with conservative media and again with the current president (progressive hosts and the aforementioned face of the Daily Show primarily getting invites).

It really makes little sense from a journalism perspective to go down this road: Why attend a meeting with the most powerful person on the planet if you can’t report back what was said? In the end, these people are there not for an interview, but for instructions. And that’s exactly why Stewart took the Acela down to DC: To come back to New York and serve as the Baghdad Bob of arguably the most influential news program—forget that it’s billed as fake—on the dial right now.

But don’t take him seriously… he’s just a comedian that happens to have access to the president. All major comedians can say that, right? He’s also a director and has acted in the past.

Looks like it’s time to add stenographer to the list as well. No matter…Stewart will get the Letterman treatment next week when he leaves The Daily Show, and rightly so. He didn’t earn $25-$30M a year for hosting a show four days a week for nothing. His timing, delivery and intelligence is something you don’t teach or learn.

RELATED: ‘Daily Show’ Writer Recalls Heated Dispute With Jon Stewart

Caving To Liberal Pressure Boy Scouts Allow Homosexual Scout Leaders

WaPo.com:

The Boy Scouts of America, facing litigation, shrinking membership and sweeping acceptance of gay rights, voted Monday to lift its ban on openly gay troop leaders and employees.

The national organization will no longer allow discrimination against its paid workers or at BSA-owned facilities. But local troops and councils will be permitted to decide for themselves whether they will allow openly gay volunteer leaders.

It wasn’t clear if the compromise would satisfy religious traditionalists. The Mormon Church put out a statement Monday night saying its “century-long association with Scouting would need to be examined.”

The executive board’s vote was  taken at the suggestion of the group’s president, former defense secretary Robert Gates, who noted that the Scouts are facing potential lawsuits by gay adults who were shut out of positions. But church-state legal experts said the decision will likely just  shift the controversy and legal battles from the national group to local troops and councils as volunteers barred from participating file suit.

Welcome to Barack Obama's Godless  BSA.

RELATED:  Boy Scouts of America ends national policy excluding gays as leaders, to no one’s satisfaction

Bruce Jenner’s ‘I Am Cait’ Draws Only 2.7 Million Viewers

AdAge.com:

It seems the buildup over Caitlyn Jenner's transformation dissipated a bit too soon for E! to make a major splash with the debut of the docu-series "I Am Cait."

The show, which chronicles Ms. Jenner's journey as a transgender woman, premiered to 2.73 million total viewers on Sunday night and pulled a 1.2 rating among the all-important 18-to-49 demographic.

That's a meaningful audience for the NBC Universal cable network, and cable TV in recent months has struggled to provide premieres on this level.

It does, however, fall short of some robust expectations. Nearly 17 million people tuned in to ABC's "20/20" in April to watch Bruce Jenner's interview with Diane Swayer, and more than 7 million people watched Ms. Jenner accept the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at the ESPYs earlier in the month, also on ABC.

That's an utter fail by any other name.

RELATED: Caitlyn Jenner's ESPY Courage Award win is SLAMMED by victim in fatal car crash as she claims former Olympian ' still refuses to accept responsibility for taking a life'

Hillary Clinton Will Testify Before Benghazi Panel in October

Mediaite.com:

Despite having already testified before Congress on the Benghazi attack, former Secretary of State and current 2016 presidential contender Hillary Clinton will testify before the Republican-led House committee sometime in October.

According to NBC News, the apparent date of the testimony is October 22, although neither the committee nor the Clinton campaign have confirmed this. All that’s known at this time is that the testimony, which will be public, will take place in October.

Despite her previous testimony, Clinton has come under scrutiny yet again, this time due to her use of a private email account. The Benghazi committee, chaired by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-South Carolina), subpoenaed these emails back in March and subsequently called upon Clinton to testify again.

Unsurprisingly, the whole thing has devolved into a political fight — especially since Clinton’s spotlight has recently grown due to her formal decision to enter the 2016 presidential race:

Republicans have seized upon revelations that Clinton chose to use a private email server, instead of a government one, and later deleted thousands of emails she said were not related to her work.

ADVERTISEMENT

Whether or not Clinton’s testimony will negatively affect her campaign remains to be seen, though you probably already have a pretty good guess about the matter. (The answer is “yes.”)

RELATED:  IG to Congress: Hillary sent at least 4 classified e-mails through her server; Update: Hillary’s response cites “inaccuracies” in coverage

Barack Obama Lectures Kenya President Over "Gay Rights"

Politico.com:

President Barack Obama and Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta sparred over support for gay rights here Saturday, with Obama urging fast changes and Kenyatta saying it was not something Kenyan culture or society would “accept.”

Linking LGBT discrimination in Africa to the history of Jim Crow laws in America, Obama said ensuring gay rights must be a priority on a continent — and in a country — where bias against gays is accepted, and violence against gays is common.

Standing by Obama’s side at a joint press conference here in front of the Kenyan state house, Kenyatta repeated what he has said before about gay rights: it’s “a non-issue.”

Kenyatta’s remarks were the ones that drew applause among the Kenyan audience.

Obama, though, delivered a firm message: People may have their own personal biases, he said, but the government has a responsibility to make sure those are not part of the law.

“As an African-American in the United States, I am painfully aware of the history of what happens when people are treated differently under the law,” Obama said. “There were all sorts of rationalizations that were provided by the power structure for decades in the United States for segregation and Jim Crow and slavery, and they were wrong.”

Kenyatta went on to offer that kind of rationalization, arguing that he and his people are more concerned with economic growth, among other things.

“For Kenyans today, the issue of gay rights is really a non-issue. We want to focus on other issues that really are day-to-day issues for our people,” Kenyatta said.

Throughout Obama’s supportive response, Kenyatta’s body language was clearly uncomfortable, fidgeting at the podium. When pressed by a reporter if he’d answer after he initially seemed as if he’d duck the question posed to both leaders about gay rights, Kenyatta sighed, “yeah, I’ll address them.”

In a common refrain among African leaders, Kenyatta rattled off what he’d put on his agenda ahead of gay rights: public health, inclusivity of women, infrastructure, education and entrepreneurship, implying that he felt patronized by Americans who want him to care about an issue they only themselves began grappling with recently.

Equating racist Jim Crow laws which got thousands killed and lynched with "gay rights"--just what the Godless white, liberal crowd wants their favorite puppet to do. Good thing the Kenyans can smell bullshit a mile away.

RELATED: Why Gay Marriage Isn’t the ’60s Civil Rights Fight

After Kate Steinle's Tragic Death, Congress Finally Targets Sanctuary Cities

Townhall.com:

In light of the tragic death of Kate Steinle, who was killed by an illegal immigrant in San Francisco, Congress is debating legislation to deal with so-called sanctuary cities. The thought was that these local ordinances would allow illegal immigrants to report crimes without fear of deportation. Well, this skirting of federal immigration law has reaped some awful results. Yesterday, the House passed legislation that would withhold funds to cities that have passed sanctuary ordinances (via the Hill):

House Republicans passed legislation on Thursday that would deny federal funds to sanctuary cities. 

The bill, passed 241-179, would withhold certain federal law enforcement grants to cities that have policies designed to shelter illegal immigrants from deportation.
[…]

Critics of the sanctuary laws say such policies encourage people to immigrate to the U.S. illegally at the expense of citizens.

“A refuge for whom? A sanctuary for whom?” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said. “A sanctuary for Kate Steinle? Or a refuge for a convicted felon with a 25-year-long criminal history?”

Democrats accused House Republicans of bringing up the bill in part because of real estate mogul and Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s focus on illegal immigration and sanctuary cities; they dubbed the bill the “Donald Trump Act.”

“Just a few weeks into his campaign and Donald Trump has a bill on the floor of the House. That is better than some of the senators he’s running against.” Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Ill.) said mockingly.

Republicans denied that Trump had any influence on their decision to bring up the legislation.

“This is a valid concern that we’re voting on today,” said Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-N.J.), who has often broken with his party on immigration in the past and said he finds Trump’s comments offensive. “I’m not going to let Donald Trump dictate my vote.”

Five Republicans joined all but six Democrats in opposing the measure.

The five Republicans who voted against the bill were Reps. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.), Bob Dold (Ill.), Dan Donovan (N.Y.), Pete King (N.Y.) and Dave Reichert (Wash.).

Six Democrats voted for the bill, in a break from previous immigration votes in which the party voted unanimously. The Democrats voting yes were centrist Reps. Ami Bera (Calif.), Jim Cooper (Tenn.), Henry Cuellar (Texas), Bill Keating (Mass.), Collin Peterson (Minn.) and Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.).

The sanctuary city debate centers on laws that are aimed at encouraging illegal immigrants to report crimes to the police without fear of deportation.

RELATED: Kate Steinle's family continues push for immigration reform

Department of Justice Backtracks, Hillary Clinton Email Inquiry Was Not ‘Criminal’

Mediaite.com:

The Department of Justice has apparently backtracked from an earlier statement saying that they had received a criminal referral into Hillary Clinton‘s email account from inspector generals in the State Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

The New York Times reported that, “Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state…”

“A Justice Department official confirmed the department received a criminal referral but gave no other details,” Reuter’s Jonathan Allen reported. But the DoJ walked back that statement later in the afternoon, clarifying that the referral was not criminal in nature.

The confirmation-turned-contradiction of the Times is sure to inflame the heated debate surrounding the allegations contained in the piece. The article had already been edited under pressure from the Clinton campaign, infuriating liberal and conservative journalists alike.

RELATED:  Krauthammer: It Will Snow in Hell Before DOJ Launches Criminal Investigation into Hillary

Marco Rubio to Trump: We Already Have a President with No Class

Mediaite.com:

Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio took a shot at Donald Trump during an appearance on Fox and Friends, saying the presidency didn’t need another man with no class.

ADVERTISEMENT

When asked about Trump, Rubio agreed that illegal immigration was a serious issue, but that Trump was the wrong man for the job. “Here’s what’s so important to me; the presidency of the United States is not just the top government official. It is the leader of our people and our nation as well.”

“It’s important we have– to conduct the presidency, it has to be done in a dignified way, with a level of class,” he said. “I don’t think the way he’s behaved over the last few weeks is either dignified or worthy of office he seeks.”

“We already have a president now that has no class,” Rubio continued, in a swipe against President Barack Obama. “I mean, we have a president now that does selfie-stick videos, that invites YouTube stars there, people who eat cereal out of a bathtub… he goes on comedy shows to talk about something as serious as Iran. The list goes on and on.”

But Rubio brought it back to Trump in the end. “It’s important to have a presidency that restores dignity and class to the White House. And I don’t believe that some of the language Mr. Trump is employing is worthy of the office. I just do not.”

If only Rubio's campaign was more consistent on social issues, he could be higher in the polls.

RELATED: Marco Rubio on Trump: We already have a president with no class. Why would we want another?

Poll: By Large Margin, Americans Support Religious Opt-Out for Gay Wedding Participation

Townhall.com:

In the wake of last month's Supreme Court ruling establishing same-sex marriage as a nationwide constitutional right, critics and supporters of the decision alike wondered what the future might hold for Americans of faith whose objections to such unions were unswayed by the judicial outcome.  Will Evangelical photographers, Muslim florists, and Catholic bakers be coerced into serving gay weddings, or will they be sued and harassed into dust by the Left's highly-choreographed pro-"tolerance" enforcement squad?  Early indicators are mixed, so expect a lot more litigation on this front in the coming years, including lawsuits against churches and religious charities.  As these battles take shape, the American people -- whose support for gay marriage has swelled to historic highs in numerous polls -- appear poised to come down on the side of religious liberties.  The punitive orthodoxy enforcement mob is a loud and influential minority, according to a new poll from the Associated Press:

The Supreme Court's ruling last month legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has left Americans sharply divided, according to an Associated Press-GfK poll that suggests support for gay unions may be down slightly from earlier this year. The poll also found a near-even split over whether local officials with religious objections should be required to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, with 47 percent saying that should be the case and 49 percent say they should be exempt. Overall, if there's a conflict, a majority of those questioned think religious liberties should win out over gay rights, according to the poll. While 39 percent said it's more important for the government to protect gay rights, 56 percent said protection of religious liberties should take precedence. The poll was conducted July 9 to July 13, less than three weeks after the Supreme Court ruled states cannot ban same-sex marriage. According to the poll, 42 percent support same-sex marriage and 40 percent oppose it. The percentage saying they favor legal same-sex marriage in their state was down slightly from the 48 percent who said so in an April poll. In January, 44 percent were in favor. Asked specifically about the Supreme Court ruling, 39 percent said they approve and 41 percent said they disapprove...59 percent of the poll respondents said wedding-related businesses with religious objections should be allowed to refuse service to gay and lesbian couples. That compares with 52 percent in April. Also, 46 percent said businesses more generally should be allowed to refuse service to same-sex couples, while 51 percent said that should not be allowed.

Lots to unpack here: Since SCOTUS' controversial 5-4 decision, support for same-sex marriage has slumped to a very thin plurality in this series, with a similarly close plurality disapproving of the Court's action.  This conflicts with other polling showing a steady upward trajectory in public approval of gay marriage.  (A backlash against perceived judicial activism, perhaps?)  The survey also suggests that framing related fights through a religious liberty prism is politically savvy, in addition to being right on the merits.  By a nearly 20-point margin, Americans say that when the brand new constitutional right to gay marriage comes into conflict with the bedrock First Amendment principles of free exercise and free speech, the latter categories deserve more weight.  Roughly six in ten respondents say businesspeople who serve the wedding industry ought to be allowed to opt out if their deeply held beliefs run counter to participating in a gay wedding.  As was the case in a previous AP poll, the split is much sharper on the question of whether government officials should be allowed to decline to issue marriage licenses on religious grounds.  People seem less willing to grant waivers to agents of the state, whose taxpayer-funded jobs require carrying out the and enforcing the law.  I'm inclined to agree, although isn't it interesting how many on the Left will hunt down and destroy any local county clerk who objects to presiding over gay marriages ("enforce the law of the land"), while adamantly defending so-called sanctuary cities ("don't enforce the law of the land").  A slim majority of respondents say businesses should not be allowed to generally deny service to gay patrons as a matter of course, though an almost shockingly large minority disagrees.  There is a libertarian argument to be made that private businesses ought to be permitted to refuse service to anyone for any reason, and that market forces can react accordingly.  This is politically untenable, of course, to say nothing of the entrenched, immoral discrimination such an attitude would have preserved at various points in our history.

All those yahoos running for POTUS on the GOP side need to see this.

RELATED:  Justice Samuel Alito: Gay Marriage Ruling Could Extend to Abolishing Min. Wage

Liberal Media Pushing Nose-Picking, Average Looking 'Supermodel' Cara Delevingne Down Your Throat Because She's Gay

DailyMail.com:

She shot to fame as one of the world's most established supermodels after appearing in campaigns for Burberry, Chanel, Mulberry and Yves Saint Laurent. 

But Cara Delevingne, 22, didn't mind letting go of her more pristine status on Tuesday, as she was caught picking her nose on The Today Show.

The model-turned-actress was captured on live morning television with her fingers up her nose as she appeared alongside her co-star Nat Wolff to promote new film Paper Towns. 

But Cara was caught off-guard during her appearance on The Today Show, as she was seen looking the other way and picking her nose when the cameras suddenly cut to her. 

Her co-star Nat was luckily paying attention and happily waved for the cameras, while Cara was left red-faced. 

She's known for her fun-loving personality and is never one to shy away from making a fool of herself but even Cara looked shocked when she noticed what had happened. 

The model attempted to style it out as she touched her nose with her index finger, as she started hysterically laughing before the show cut to an ad break. 

I swear every time I see a picture of this chick, I think: 'she's so average looking'. But hey she likes girls instead of boys and that's all that matters to a liberal press that always celebrates those who engage in sexually deviant behavior.

RELATED: Who Is This Cara Delevingne Person and Why Is Every Celebrity in Love With Her?

Ben Shapiro Files Police Report Against Cross-Dressing MSNBC Reporter Who Assaulted him On Dr. Drew Show

Breitbart.com:

Breitbart News Senior Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro has filed a report with the Los Angeles Police Department alleging battery against transgender Inside Edition reporter Zoey Tur, née Robert Albert Tur.

Shapiro filed the report Sunday morning, two days after a contentious exchange with Tur on the HLN program Dr. Drew. On a panel discussion over Bruce Jenner’s receipt of ESPN’s Arthur Ashe Courage Award, Tur grabbed Shapiro’s neck and growled, “You cut that out now, or you’ll go home in an ambulance.” Shapiro later alleged that Tur had threatened him after the appearance, “I’ll see you in the parking lot,” and that CNN security had escorted Shapiro to his car after ensuring Tur had left the premises. Tur also tweeted out on Friday that he would like to “curb stomp” Shapiro.

Tur’s threats against Shapiro followed Shapiro arguing that referring to transgender people by their preferred instead of biological sex is “mainstreaming delusion.” Of Jenner, Shapiro declared, “How he feels on the inside is irrelevant to the question of his biological self.” After Tur suggested that Shapiro knew nothing about genetics, the following exchange then occurred:

Shapiro asked if the discussion was supposed to be on genetics and asked, “What are your genetics, sir?” Pinsky said to Tur, “I’d stay away from the genetics and back to the brain scans.”

Tur then said to Shapiro, “You cut that out now, or you’ll go home in an ambulance.” Shapiro responded, “That seems mildly inappropriate for a political discussion.” Oduolowu said that, to be fair, Shapiro was being rude, to which Shapiro answered, “I’m sorry, it’s not rude to say that someone who’s biologically a male is a male.” Tur stated, “You just called me a ‘sir.’”

After some of the other panelists, particularly radio and “Chain Reaction” host Mike Catherwood, objected that Shapiro knew that what he said would be “insulting” and “inflammatory.” Shapiro responded, “It’s not a matter of insulting or inflammatory. It’s a fact. You are a male. Dr. Drew is a male.”

Shapiro explained to Breitbart News why he filed the police report. “Just because the left has designated someone a member of the victim class does not mean that that person gets to infringe the rights of others,” he said of his report. “Until the left learns that, their aggression will not stop.” Shapiro also said that he had spoken with a detective at LAPD, and that he would be pursuing any possibility of charges regarding alleged criminal threats.

Just another example of how convenient it is for these 'transsexuals" to reach back to their biological sex when confronted by people who expose their mental illness.

RELATED: The Other Behind-the-Scenes Comment Allegedly Uttered by Transgender Reporter to Conservative Commentator Before He Filed a Police Report

Barack Obama's "Free College" May Not Be All That It's Cracked Up To Be

NBCNews.com:

Is free college the answer for surging tuition and the crippling burden of student loan debt? 

Amid new initiatives and broadening political support to make education more affordable, the idea of sending U.S. high school graduates to college for free has gained ground. Earlier this year, President Barack Obama proposed a nationwide free community college plan, currently being weighed by Congress. 

The president's plan would grant free tuition to any student enrolled at least halftime with a 2.5 grade-point average, and with a family income under $200,000. In recent weeks, similar proposals have been passed by Oregon and Tennessee.


According to a Gallup Poll of millennials, college affordability is the top financial concern, and with good reason: The class of 2015 graduated with an average of $35,051 in debt, an all-time high. Underscoring the sense of urgency, 70 percent of graduating students leave college with debt. 

Crushing college costs has become a big political talking point in the current election cycle. Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders unveiled a "Robin Hood Tax" in May, which is a plan to tax 50 cents on every $100 of Wall Street trades to pay for tuition-free public college, helping to fuel support from younger voters for his candidacy. In Seattle, Republicans in Washington's Senate have proposed a raft of measures to curb state tuition costs by 25 percent. 

Free or cheap college is appealing for a number of reasons, but is it the best plan? Some critics have their doubts. 

"The paradox of free college is that the institutions may have to limit the number of spots or reduce quality," said Ben Wildavsky, director of higher education studies at the Rockefeller Institute of Government, State University of New York. 

"In some countries with free tuition, it's often students who can afford fancy private schools that get the preparation needed to be admitted to the free universities," he said. 

RELATED:  Progressive Group Outlines Fuzzy Dreams Of Debt-Free College For All

Adultery-Dating Website AshleyMadison Gets Hacked

ConsumerAffairs.com:

Here's some good news for divorce lawyers, though probably bad news for anyone else involved: this weekend, hackers broke into the adultery-dating website “AshleyMadison” and leaked personal details about some of its clients, including credit card details.

AshleyMadison (registered motto: “Life is short. Have an affair.®”) is owned by Avid Life Media, which owns other hookup sites including “Established Men” and “Cougar Life.”

ALM chief executive Noel Biderman confirmed the hacking to security expert Brian Krebs late Sunday evening, and said the company was “working diligently and feverishly” to take down as much of that information as it could. Biderman also suggested that the hacker might be someone who has or had legitimate access to ALM's servers – in other words, a current or former employee or contractor.

Hackers demand site be taken down

The hacker or hackers behind the breach self-identify as The Impact Team. The team is threatening to release all of the information it stole from AshleyMadison unless the site is taken down. According to its own statements, The Impact Team's main complaint with AshleyMadison isn't that the website promotes or facilitates adultery, but that it allegedly lies to its clients.

Specifically, people with dating profiles on AshleyMadison are also offered the chance to pay $19 for a “full delete” function – basically scrubbing your complete profile and activity history from the site.

Oh the irony. A website that exemplifies social liberal turpitude gets hacked and now thousands of married people having affairs behind their spouses back may get busted...oh my.

RELATED: Ashley Madison hack: Meet one user who ISN'T worried if her details are published

Ann Coulter Takes Down Geraldo Rivera with Crimes Committed by Illegal Immigrants

RELATED: Every Pro-Immigration Claim Is A Lie

Transgender Reporter to Ben Shapiro: You Keep Calling Me “Sir,” You’ll Go Home In An Ambulance

HotAir.com:

Via Breitbart, the key bit comes at 5:30. Shapiro’s point is that Zoey Tur, formerly Bob Tur, is male genetically and therefore a man in fact, however he/she may identify. Tur’s reply is to grab him by the neck and threaten to knock him into the middle of next week, which is … about as cartoonishly masculine a response to an insult as I can imagine. All that’s missing is a belch for emphasis. Now we can look forward to a day or two of SJWs noting that the boorish impulse to beat someone into tar because you don’t like his attitude knows no gender, and actually represents a bold, exciting new frontier in femininity. If the man of the future is a woman, I suppose the woman of the future should be a man.

By the way, you’ll be relieved to know that after criticizing ESPN for giving Caitlyn Jenner an award for courage, director Peter Berg has seen the light and reaffirmed his “utmost respect” for the former Olympian. I wonder who threatened to kick his ass.

Update: I should have guessed.

See, Shapiro started it. His “violent” words — the word “sir” — evoked a similarly violent response. This is the same logic used on campus lately to harass visiting speakers for their thoughtcrimes. Free speech is one thing but rhetorical “violence,” well, no civilized culture should stand for that.

RELATED: Pentagon may lift ban on transgender people

Bill Clinton Says He Now 'Regrets' Signing "Three Strikes" Law

CNN.com:

Bill Clinton said Wednesday that the crime bill he signed into law as President in 1994 worsened the nation's criminal justice system by increasing prison sentences.

"I signed a bill that made the problem worse," Clinton told an audience at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People's annual meeting in Philadelphia. "And I want to admit it."

The omnibus crime bill that Clinton signed included the federal "three strikes" provision, mandating life sentences for criminals convicted of a violent felony after two or more prior convictions, including drug crimes.

Clinton said Wednesday that he signed the law because "we had had a roaring decade of rising crime" when he entered the White House.

"We had gang warfare on the streets. We had little children being shot dead on the streets who were just innocent bystanders standing in the wrong place," he said.

In response, Clinton said, the bill increased the number of police on the streets and enacted gun control legislation. But decades later, Clinton believes the results of the law were mixed, at best.

"In that bill, there were longer sentences. And most of these people are in prison under state law, but the federal law set a trend," Clinton said. "And that was overdone. We were wrong about that. That percentage of it, we were wrong about. "

This is another more than timing. After all, wifey's running for President and Slick Willie knows damn well how much she's gonna need those Black votes come November of 2016 to win the nomination, much less the top office.

RELATED: Media flashback: Clinton’s nuclear deal with North Korea

Unlike Liberal Media, Evander Holyfield Isn't Fawning Over Bruce Jenner Being A Cross Dresser

BBC.co.uk:

Caitlyn Jenner's called on sports people to help change attitudes towards transgender people, but boxer Evander Holyfield doesn't seem to get it.

The reality star, who used to be known as Bruce, received a standing ovation after winning a "courage" award at a ceremony in LA.

Speaking on stage at the ESPYS, which honours sportspeople, the former Olympian said: "Trans people deserve something vital, they deserve your respect."

But afterwards, former heavyweight champion Evander Holyfield said: "I just know that's Bruce Jenner and I'll leave it at that."

Transgender groups say it's respectful to use the name and pronoun a transgender person prefers.

Good job by Holyfield for calling a spade, a spade.

RELATED: Bruce Jenner Has Had Cross-Dressing Fetish For Years, Kris Jenner Knew The Whole Time

Report: Caitlyn Jenner's Camp Pitched ESPY Award in Exchange for PR Plugs

Chron.com:

ESPN's annual ESPY Awards show generally comes and goes with little controversy.

Until this year, that is. 

Caitlyn Jenner, the former Olympic champion decathlete, will be awarded the Arthur Ashe Courage Award at Wednesday night's event which will be televised on ABC. Abby Wambach, a member of the U.S. women's national soccer team that just won the World Cup, will present Jenner with the award.

According to a new report, Jenner's ESPY award originated as a pitch from her representatives to ESPN. Per RadarOnline, Jenner's camp suggested to the network that she receive the award and offered public relations plugs on her upcoming reality show in return.

"They suggested that she receive the Arthur Ashe award,” a source told the website. “It was a brilliant move because the executives at ESPN loved the idea, and immediately began making sure it got done. Caitlyn’s journey to accepting the award will also be featured on her upcoming reality show, 'I am Cait.'”

That's right. Thanks to Barack Obama, white liberals, the Gay Mafia and the rest of the sexually-deviant loving, morally bankrupt souls on the Left, a man who chooses to dress and act like a woman is getting a notable "courage" award, while real courageous athletes of recent past are blithely passed over.

RELATED: iPhone’s Siri Will Correct You if You Call Caitlyn Jenner ‘Bruce’

John Boehner Orders Probe into Planned Parenthood Organ-Harvesting

TheHill.com:

Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has ordered a congressional investigation into Planned Parenthood, one day after an undercover video surfaced in which a high-level official discusses transferring the organs of aborted fetuses.

Boehner is also urging the Obama administration “to denounce, and stop, these gruesome practices,” according to a statement from his office Wednesday.

“When an organization monetizes an unborn child — and with the cavalier attitude portrayed in this horrific video — we must all act,” Boehner’s statement reads.

His comments, which come after similar remarks by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), are certain to inflame the already-heated debate over the video, which Planned Parenthood has said “grossly mischaracterizes” their use of fetal tissue. McCarthy on Wednesday pledged to assist House committees with their investigations, calling the claims "grotesque and inhumane."

Minutes after Boehner’s statement, the House Energy and Commerce Committee announced it will begin a probe into the video, which was produced by a previously unknown anti-abortion group called the Center for Medical Progress.

And of course, the normal scum defenders we see everyday on the Left, are trying hard to decry this as yet another conservative "conspiracy".

RELATED: Overnight Healthcare: Some Dems defend Planned Parenthood

10th Circuit to Little Sisters of the Poor: Comply with Contraception Mandate

BecketFund.org:

Moments ago, in a departure from the U.S. Supreme Court’s protection of the Little Sisters of the Poor last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled that the Little Sisters must comply with the government’s HHS mandate. This mandate forces religious ministries to violate their faith or pay massive IRS penalties (see video).
 
The following statement can be attributed to Sr. Loraine Marie Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor:

As Little Sisters of the Poor, we simply cannot choose between our care for the elderly poor and our faith. And we should not have to make that choice, because it violates our nation’s commitment to ensuring that people from diverse faiths can freely follow God’s calling in their lives. For over 175 years, we have served the neediest in society with love and dignity. All we ask is to be able to continue our religious vocation free from government intrusion.

The following statement can be attributed to Mark Rienzi, Senior Counsel of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty and lead attorney for the Little Sisters of the Poor:

We’re disappointed with today’s decision. After losing repeatedly at the Supreme Court, the government continues its unrelenting pursuit of the Little Sisters of the Poor. It is a national embarrassment that the world’s most powerful government insists that, instead of providing contraceptives through its own existing exchanges and programs, it must crush the Little Sisters’ faith and force them to participate. Untold millions of people have managed to get contraceptives without involving nuns, and there is no reason the government cannot run its programs without hijacking the Little Sisters and their health plan.

The Tenth Circuit heard oral argument in this case December of last year, when for the first time since the case began, Sr. Loraine Marie Maguire, Mother Provincial of the Little Sisters of the Poor, delivered a public statement on the case (see statement here). 

Today the Tenth Circuit ruled that government can force the Little Sisters to either violate their faith or pay massive IRS penalties. The court held that participating in the government’s contraception delivery scheme is “as easy as obtaining a parade permit, filing a simple tax for, or registering to vote” and that although the Sisters sincerely believe that participating in the scheme “make[s] them complicit in the overall delivery scheme,” the court “ultimately rejects the merits of this claim,” because the court believes the scheme relieves [the Little Sisters] from complicity.”

RELATED:  The illiberalism of persecuting churches through tax-exempt penalties

Scott Walker Officially Announces Presidential Campaign

Mediaite.com;

Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker became the fifteenth or whatever GOP candidate Monday morning, tweeting his candidacy and releasing a YouTube video several days after someone, possibly the computer gods, jumped the gun and accidentally announced last week:

“I am running for president to fight and win for the American people,” Walker promised in the video. “Without sacrificing our principals, we won three elections in four years in a blue state. We did it by leading.  Now, we need to do the same thing for America. It’s not too late. We can make our country great again.”

Walker was arguably the first breakout star of the 2016 election cycle, catapulting into national prominence after a barnburning Iowa Freedom Summit performance last winter. He has stayed in the top five of primary polling ever since, though subsequent missteps on foreign policy have led GOP figures to wonder if he’s too much of a novice for the position.

After the way this guy took on corrupt unions in his state time and time and time again and won, I'd say he's one of the few GOP candidates for President people should take seriously.

RELATED: What Democrats Should Fear Most About Scott Walker

Rob Lowe Thinks Ariana Grande's Apology Is 'Lame'

HuffPo.com:

On Wednesday, pint-sized pop star and ponytail enthusiast Ariana Grande apologized for getting caught on camera saying that "I hate Americans" and  "I hate America," after she made the bizarre choice to lick donuts that she hadn't purchased.

Grande claimed her comments were taken out of context and she was "upset by how freely we as Americans eat and consume things without giving any thought to the consequences that it has on our health and society as a whole."  She then tried to make her case by citing child obesity rates, but at least one person out there isn't buying it, and that guy is Robe Lowe. He's calling her apology "#Lame."

Lowe definitely has a point, especially since Grande's apology didn't explain WTF she was doing licking donuts in the first place, which, let's be honest, is the real issue (or it should be). Her remarks weren't taken out of context and are pretty common comments people make when they are disgusted by the amount of casual gluttony that is so pervasive in this country. It's just something someone in Grande's position can't afford to get caught saying, especially after pulling such a weird stunt like licking donuts she didn't buy. (Okay, Lowe actually seems hung up on the America comment, he also tweeted, " Cannot wait for the new Arianna Grande/Dixie Chicks jam to drop! #IActuallyLoveAmerica" but he's missing the big picture).

The 22-year-old's donut drama isn't over yet, as The Associated Press reported that police in Lake Elsinore, Calif., where Wolfee Donuts is located, are investigating the video with Riverside County public health officials. Additionally, a cashier at the shop told the AP, that Grande didn't buy any of the donuts she licked and added that "she was really rude."  

I saw Grande's 'apology' video and calling it 'lame' is being kind. Besides, that stupid, infantile, spoiled brat only apologized in the first place because she got caught.

RELATED: Ariana Grande Will Not Face Criminal Charges After Doughnut-Licking Incident

The Sexism of “Rape Culture”

RedState.com:

In current discussions regarding sexual assault, the focus seems to be on the surety of the woman’s victimhood as well as the man’s criminal act. If anything, a certain Rolling Stone apology from last December should cause us to pause and never assume the truth in any situation, especially one so life-changing as rape. The act of rape is a most personal, vicious crime, and my heart goes out to those who have experienced it. Being accused of rape is life-altering as well. Even if the allegations are dropped, the stigma of “predator” continues long into the future.

Rape culture exists, but not in the cozy confines of the U.S.A., although the feminist elite would have you think that. American females are quite comfortable to venture out individually and go about business as usual. If an every-man-is-a-potential-rapist society existed here, us women would never leave our homes. By using the label of “rape culture“, this gives power to the idea of a societal undercurrent in which all women are treated as objects by all men who escape any responsibility whatsoever. This is simply not the case.

Along with branding all of American society as a “rape culture”, a huge focus is the world of the college campus. University students do a lot of dumb things, and yes, sexual assault occurs on campuses around the nation. But it is not the epidemic that the Left would like for you to believe. As Heather Mac Donald explained in her National Review piece (after UVA student Hannah Graham was abducted and before the eruption of the “Jackie” scandal):

Many feminists claim that 20 to 25 percent of female undergraduates will be sexually assaulted during college. If that statistic were correct, you wouldn’t see the heightened security measures that UVA has instituted, because there would be no females left on campuses to protect. A 20 to 25 percent rape rate would have emptied the colleges years ago. Instead, every year applications from females snowball. So far, campus administrators have played along with the campus-rape-epidemic claim, confident in the belief that most people don’t really believe it. They get to appease the feminists on and off campus without endangering their application rate. Harvard recently created a new centralized office of trained sexual-assault investigators, after president Drew Gilpin Faust announced that the school “must do better” on sexual assault. If the public were ever to buy the conflation of the alleged 20 to 25 percent campus rape epidemic with what happened to Graham, however, Harvard and every other college would turn on a dime and start asserting that they are among the safest and most crime-free environments in America — which is true.

The extremely safe nature of the American college campus is quite evident. Women flock to universities. This would not be the case if the threat, as reported by the Left, was considered accurate even for a moment. It would be exceedingly foolish to place oneself in such an environment. Despite all this being obvious, new sexual consent policies are all the rage. The idea of “yes means yes” is not the problem. Of course common sense consent should be encouraged, but that is not the issue. The real issue is the reverse sexism that emanates from this declaration, and the increase in freewheeling accusations that have undoubtedly been brought on.

“Jake was drunk. Josie was drunk. Jake and Josie hooked up. Josie could not consent. The next day Jake was charged with rape. A woman who is intoxicated cannot give her legal consent for sex, so proceeding under these circumstances is a crime. It only takes a single day to ruin your life. Think about it. Be responsible.”

Predator? Jake. Prey? Josie. Why? Male v. female. That’s why. And the “Be responsible” message seems aimed at Jake more than anything. The reality that is completely avoided by this poster is that neither man nor woman, when sufficiently intoxicated, has or exercises self-restraint.  That is just the truth of that type of situation. But although this is the case, Jake was the sole perpetrator, and Josie would never be considered an accomplice. With advertisements such as this, the Left is saying that women need to be protected. They are admitting that women need help over men. And here I thought women in 2015 America were strong creatures who kick down the patriarchy with every independent thought of theirs? Oh, how I was wrong. We’re helpless creatures, right? Well, apparently only in situations where accusation of assault might come up. Only then are we allowed to pearl-clutch in the corner, albeit briefly.

I went to college and can recall a lot of promiscuous girls who got around plenty without a care in the world. No doubt this stupid and dangerous law will give a pass to chicks hellbent on revenge towards a guy who turned them down as well as young women who could care less about being responsible with their bodies and sex. But for the Left self-responsibility never matters.


RELATED:  'Can I put my hand there?': New York law changes the rules of the college hook-up

Majority of Voters Say Justice Dept Should Penalize ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Housing Illegals

FreeBeacon.com:

A majority of likely U.S. voters believe the Justice Department should take legal action against cities that provide sanctuary for illegal immigrants.

According to a Rasmussen Reports poll released Friday, 62 percent of likely voters say the Justice Department should penalize “sanctuary cities” that do not comply with the federal government’s immigration laws.

The poll comes as sanctuary cities undergo extra scrutiny following last week’s murder of a San Francisco woman suspected to have been carried out by an illegal immigrant.

Only 26 percent oppose the federal government taking legal action against such cities, and 12 percent of likely voters are undecided on the issue.

Furthermore, a majority of 58 percent agree that the federal government should cut off funds to these sanctuary cities for providing asylum for illegal immigrants to the U.S., while 32 percent oppose such punishment.

Ignore the liberal lies out there. This issue isn't about an 'entire race of people' as some hyperbole's on the Left would like you to believe. It's about people, of any race, coming into this country illegally and on top of that committing crimes while they're here. Those are the people who need to be deported and stay deported and any person or town that protects them needs to feel the full force of the law.

RELATED: Report: Lawmakers Working On Bill In Response To Kate Steinle’s Murder By Illegal Alien

Geraldo Rivera Refuses To Fawn Over The Lie That Is 'Caitlyn Jenner': ‘The Kardashians Are the Fakest People’

RELATED: LGBTQ Icon Bored by ‘Bruce Jenner/Caitlyn’

Fox’s Jesse Watters Confronted San Francisco Board of Supervisors over Kate Steinle’s Death

Mediaite.com:

Bill O’Reilly‘s roving reporter Jesse Watters dropped his usual shtick to get serious and confront San Francisco’s board of supervisors over Kate Steinle‘s death.

Since Monday, O’Reilly has made it clear he’s very outraged about Steinle being shot dead by an illegal immigrant who had already been deported. He said the Obama administration is “complicit” and her death is “collateral damage” of San Francisco’s “insane left-wing politics.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Tonight he kept the focus on San Francisco, showing video of Watters there yesterday confronting the city board of supervisors over their “dangerous sanctuary city policies.”

He held up a picture of Steinle, said the city let her killer out, and called them out for their silence and for not looking at the photo.

Later on in the segment, Watters attempted to confront other city officials in their offices about her death, but did not exactly get direct responses.

RELATED:  San Francisco Sheriff Brought Kate Steinle's Illegal Alien Killer Back to The City

Barack Obama Allows Daughter Malia Internship with Admitted ‘Sexual Predator’ Lena Dunham on Raunchy Sex Show

BizPacReview.com:

It’s one thing for President Obama to use his presidential authority in order to introduce his daughters to Justin Bieber; that is simply presidential dad responsibility.

It’s another thing entirely to allow your daughter an internship on the set of “Girls,” starring the ultra-liberal Lena Dunham. US Weekly, however, reports the president has done just that.

Malia Obama has been spotted on the set bringing coffee to the cast and crew as well as keeping the public away from the set.

“She’s a fan [of the show], and she mentioned that to Lena when she came to the White House,” a source close to the television show’s production team explained to the magazine. “I’m not sure how long she’ll be interning for. It’s a bit of a trial thing for her. They’ve known each other and discussed for a while. Lena and her get along great.”

This is not Malia’s first Hollywood internship. Last summer, she worked on the set of Halle Berry’s CBS show “Extant.”

Lauren Berger, CEO of InternQueen.com and author of the career advice book “Welcome to the Real World,” applauds Malia Obama for using her “networking skills” to land the internship. Others scoffed, tweeting comments such as “why is malia obama interning for lena dunham???? didn’t obama do a background check on her first” and “Wouldn’t let my daughter within a mile of that show.”

The tweeters are referring to Dunham’s raunchy lifestyle and extreme feminist views. Dunham’s memoir, titled “Not That Kind of Girl,” out last year, accused an innocent man of rape and included an account of how she sexually abused her younger sister and bribed her in the process (“anything sexual predator might do to woo a small suburban girl I was trying,” she wrote).

Of all the shows on TV to intern at, she picks a show that not only has a lying, hypocritical child molester in charge, but one with a noted racist history too...smh.

RELATED: The coming of age of Lena Dunham

Johns Hopkins Psychiatrist Destroys 'Caitlyn Jenner' Meme: Transgender is ‘Mental Disorder;' Sex Change ‘Biologically Impossible’

CNSNews.com:

Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the former psychiatrist-in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital and its current Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry, said that transgenderism is a “mental disorder” that merits treatment, that sex change is “biologically impossible,” and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder.

Dr. McHugh, the author of six books and at least 125 peer-reviewed medical articles, made his remarks in a recent commentary in the Wall Street Journal, where he explained that transgender surgery is not the solution for people who suffer a “disorder of ‘assumption’” – the notion that their maleness or femaleness is different than what nature assigned to them biologically.

He also reported on a new study showing that the suicide rate among transgendered people who had reassignment surgery is 20 times higher than the suicide rate among non-transgender people. Dr. McHugh further noted studies from Vanderbilt University and London’s Portman Clinic of children who had expressed transgender feelings but for whom, over time, 70%-80% “spontaneously lost those feelings.”

While the Obama administration, Hollywood, and major media such as Time magazine promote transgenderism as normal, said Dr. McHugh, these “policy makers and the media are doing no favors either to the public or the transgendered by treating their confusions as a right in need of defending rather than as a mental disorder that deserves understanding, treatment and prevention.”

“This intensely felt sense of being transgendered constitutes a mental disorder in two respects. The first is that the idea of sex misalignment is simply mistaken – it does not correspond with physical reality. The second is that it can lead to grim psychological outcomes.”

The transgendered person’s disorder, said Dr. McHugh, is in the person’s “assumption” that they are different than the physical reality of their body, their maleness or femaleness, as assigned by nature. It is a disorder similar to a “dangerously thin” person suffering anorexia who looks in the mirror and thinks they are “overweight,” said McHugh.

 RELATED: Bruce Jenner Fatal Crash First Bus Surveillance Video

New Jersey Democrats Will Try To Legislate Christie Out of Office

Politico.com:

“He’s not doing the state any good by spending the bulk of his time out of state,” Lesniak said. “And even when he’s in-state, he’s focusing on what he has to do to get elected president — which often runs contrary to what he ought to do for the state.”

The plan comes in the wake of a Monmouth University poll released a week ago that said that 76 percent of New Jersey voters think Christie is more focused on his political future than he is on New Jersey. The poll also found that 57 percent want him to resign since he’s decided to run for president.

Still, the proposal isn’t likely to become law. It would need to be signed by Christie or have the support of enough Republicans in the Legislature to join with Democrats in overriding a veto by the governor. Lesniak acknowledged that a major step is getting Republicans on board.

“We could do this in July,” Lesniak said. “But the bigger problem is getting the handful of GOP senators that we’d probably need to override him, although I think it would send a good statement regardless. And who knows? Maybe some Republicans would vote for it.”

Christie used to be my guy, but ever since he announced that he's running for President, he's really been a major disappointment, all the while proving a conservative media that mostly hates his guts, to be right. This is obviously a witch-hunt by vengeful liberals hellbent on getting rid of Christie, but the way Christie's been running Left of late, who cares.

RELATED: Chris Christie Criticizes Supreme Court Ruling On Gay Marriage

Seattle Seahwks QB Russell Wilson Won't Have Sex Until Marriage

Great example for all the young-uns out there, too bad the Godless liberal press simply can't comprehend the idea of two grown adults choosing to abstain from sex until marriage. One thing's for sure tho, Russell won't be receiving a phone call from POTUS on this significant decision and tremendous example-setter.

RELATED: Three Lies About Premarital Sex

No, Jimmy Carter, Jesus Probably Wouldn’t Be a Fan of Gay Marriage

Mediaite.com:

Former Democratic president and born-again Christian Jimmy Carter declared today that he believed that Jesus would embrace gay marriage. In support of this belief, flying in the fact of 2,000 years of scriptural and historical scholarship, Jimmy Carter cited noted theologian Jimmy Carter.

ADVERTISEMENT

Let’s take a look at some of the language Carter and host Marc Lamont Hill used:

• “I believe he would, I believe Jesus would.”
• “I don’t have any verse in scripture…”
• “No no no, just intuitively, yeah.”
• “I’m not– that’s just my own personal belief.”

All of which seems be a tacit admission that Carter realizes there’s basically no textual or historical support for his assertion. He just believes that he’s right. And feelings, as the modern left will tell you, trump all.

There are two major and popular perceptions of Jesus, the divine Jesus Christ and the so-called “Historical Jesus,” historians’ attempt to reconstruct Jesus’ life without making any claims of divinity. Either way you conceive of Jesus, it’s extremely unlikely he was a gay marriage supporter.

If Jesus was just a man, he was a peasant in 1st century Galilee. He was a member of a religious community with extremely strict, patriarchal marriage laws and that believed homosexuality should be punished with death. The notion that he would have positive beliefs towards gay marriage literally millennia before any of the world’s brightest minds even considered that marriage could exist outside of a man-woman marriage… well, it’s more than a little far-fetched.

If there are any atheists or skeptics who do believe that Jesus was so incredibly prescient and ahead of his time, I earnestly suggest you might as well embrace His omniscience and divinity. But of course, you’d have to believe that the same disciples who copied down Jesus’ radical claims of divinity and complete equality of the sexes, races, and classes accidentally forgot to add the gay thing.

As for the notion that the Jesus of the Gospels — the Messiah and Son of God that Carter has worshiped for a lifetime — would support gay marriage… well, Carter was right to admit he didn’t have any scripture to quote. The kindest interpretation is that the Gospels are silent about gay marriage. At worst, they are explicit that marriage is intended to be between man and woman.

“Have you not read that He Who made them in the first place made them man and woman?” Jesus told the religious leaders of the day, “It says, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will live with his wife. The two will become one.’ So they are no longer two but one. Let no man divide what God has put together.” How heterocisnormative, am I right?

Great piece and Jimmy Carter is obviously old and senile. Meantime I'm still surprised that a leftist site like Mediaite would hire a really good conservative writer like Alex Groswold.

RELATED: Jimmy Carter: ‘I Believe That Jesus Would Approve of Gay Marriage’