Ben Carson Confronted in Awkward Town Hall Exchange with Homosexual Troll: ‘Do You Think I Chose to be Gay?’

Mediaite.com:

Ben Carson held a town hall in New York last night, but while shaking hands and standing for photos, he found himself in a brief but uncomfortable exchange when one person challenged his views about the LGBT community.

Carson hasn’t exactly come across as encouraging for gay rights, having expressed frustration with their comparisons to civil rights, said that prisons prove people choose to be homosexual, and voiced negative opinions on transgender issues. As he greeted supporters, a woman came up to him and asked, “do you think I chose to be gay?”

When Carson did a double take, the attendee asked again, “yes, do you think I chose to be gay?”

“That’s a long conversation,” Carson said before going back to pose with a supporter. “I think you’re full of sh*t,” his questioner while smiling and walking away, to which Carson’s response was limited to “okay.”

This is yet another example of why Ben Carson is steady losing these days. If you're going to be on the campaign trail as a social conservative then be prepared for moments like this, where smug, programmed idiots like this one will challenge you on your stance and come away as a 'winner' by playing the poor victim card. In other words, the easy response to this troll's question could've went something like this: 'Yes, you chose to be gay. Because homosexuality is nothing more than an immoral act, there's no gay gene and just like drinking or doing drugs, sleeping with members of the same sex is 100% your choice. Love ya, have a good day!' I don't know why so many social conservative pols are so afraid to speak their truth to the world. It's not like one-stance gheys are ever gonna vote Republican anyway and it's not like a smart-ass minion like this guy will ever be more intellectual or accomplished than Carson already is--and Carson wonders why he has zero chance of ever being POTUS?!? It's because for a guy so bright, too often he comes off like an idiot in front of the cameras.

RELATED: Armstrong Williams Finally the King of Ben Carson’s Ever-Diminishing Mountain

Does Barack Obama's Gun Control Measures Hurt Hillary Clinton?

WaPo.com:

Whatever one believes about the merits of his actions, they are no different legally speaking from his unilateral action on immigration, which has been blocked so far by the courts as an impermissible executive overreach. As with immigration, it is no excuse to say that Congress won’t act on gun control. For starters, Congress did act, and said no. For another, there is no constitutional clause in Article II specifying that the president can do what he wants if he cannot get Congress’s attention.

Obama’s moves will almost surely help Clinton in the primary against Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), whom she has already attacked for his pro-Second Amendment stances. But the moves will also mobilize the National Rifle Association and potentially aggravate the swing voters in the November election in states such as Virginia, Colorado and those in the upper Midwest. It was Bill Clinton, you recall, who attributed Al Gore’s 2000 loss (including loss of Gore’s home state) in part to the gun issue. And if Republicans are worried that downscale white voters won’t turn out in 2016 without Donald Trump, this surely gives other candidates a tool to mobilize such voters.

Guns aren’t Hillary Clinton’s only policy headache. The stock market’s rocky start to 2016 is indicative of international instability and fears of another recession. The Wall Street Journal reports:

U.S. stocks slipped Tuesday as investors remained cautious on the heels of a sharp selloff.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average gave up earlier gains, falling 56 points, or 0.3%, to 17093. The S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 0.1%.

“I don’t think people are convinced that the U.S. markets will see all-time highs in 2016,” said Keith Bliss, senior vice president at brokerage Cuttone & Co.

RELATED: Video: Teary Obama announces empty gesture on guns

‘Affluenza’ Teen Ethan Couch Spent $2K At Strip Clubs While On The Run In Mexico

Mediaite.com:

If you were curious as to what a kid does while on the run for continuing to be too rich and spoiled for prison, here’s your answer.

“Affluenza” teen Ethan Couch became notorious two years ago after getting off easy for killing four people while driving drunk, and he and his mother were the subject of a well-publicized manhunt when they fled the United States after he violated his probation. Both of them were arrested in Mexico last week, and new details have shown that even during his flight from justice, the affluenza continued to grip Couch.

The Dallas Morning News talked with Marina Meza, who works at the hotel the Couches stayed at, and who noted the Couches odd behavior throughout their stay. For example, Meza recounted how she had to go wake up Tonya Couch one night because her son had been escorted home by a waiter and a manager from two local gentlemen’s clubs, and who demanded compensation for his gigantic tab.

“Then I found out about his past and thought that too was really odd,” Meza said. “He didn’t have enough money to pay the bar bill, and his mother had to bail him out.”

Unlike in the United States, where The Daily Mail noted patrons usually pay for services upfront, most strip joints in Puerto Vallarta run up tabs to be settled at the end of the night. Club staff reported that Couch got extremely drunk at both joints, and that he burned through over $2,000 of his mother’s cash
Meza didn’t recognize the duo until after they left the hotel, but she pointed authorities in the right direction when they arrived in pursuit. Ms. Couch was extradited to the US and is facing her own set of criminal charges, but her son remains in a detention facility in Mexico, where he is filing paperwork to resist deportation.

RELATED:  'Affluenza' teen's lawyer: May be months before he's back in U.S.

Thanks To 1st Gay President Barack Obama Uterus Transplants May Make Male Pregancy Possible In 5 Years

CNS.com:

News that doctors in Cleveland, Ohio have begun screening applicants for a clinical trial of uterine transplantation has prompted some to wonder if science will ever find a way to transplant a uterus into a man, and according to a Yahoo article, we may be just five years away from doing just that.

The article published Nov. 18, quoted Dr. Karine Chung, director of the fertility preservation program at the University of Southern California's Keck School of Medicine, as saying, "My guess is five, 10 years away, maybe sooner."

Theoretically, the article said, a man could receive a uterine transplant, "carry a baby to term, and give birth."

Modern medicine has already found a way to suppress male and introduce female hormones in transgender women, causing the breasts to lactate and obtaining "surgically constructed vaginas that include a 'neoclitoris,' which allows sensations."

Biological women have "vasculature needed to feed the uterus with blood, pelvic ligaments designed to support a uterus, a vagina and cervix, and natural hormones that prepare the uterus for implantation and support the pregnancy."

However, according to Chung, "Male and female anatomy is not that different." At some point, someone "will figure out how to make that work," she said.

Because to Godless, social liberals, trannies are the new 'Black'!

RELATED: New York City initiates the most severe ‘transgender rights’ enforcement in America

Donald Trump Quote of the Day!

"They've created ISIS. Hillary Clinton created ISIS with Obama"

- GOP nominee for President Donald Trump

Ain't The Devil Happy: In The News 1/3/15

Conservatives Need To Avoid The Libertarian Trap

15 Stats That Destroy Liberal Narratives

Clinton Ends 2015 With A $55 Million Fundraising Haul

States Plan Renewed Debate on LGBT Rights, Religious Freedom

Saudis Act Like ISIS, Says Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Amid Seething Sectarian Tensions

Analysis: Obama's Gun Control Options Have Legal Pitfalls

Alex Jones: New Waco Equals Civil War

LA Times: Hollywood Panicked Over Repeat of Last Year's '#OscarsSoWhite Backlash'

Lazy Media Declares Hillary Vindicated on Trump Terror Recruitment; Here’s Why They’re Wrong

Carly Fiorina: Hillary Clinton Calls Everyone 'Sexist'

CNN.com:

Carly Fiorina said Monday that Hillary Clinton will play the "woman card" every chance she gets and that Republicans should get used to it.

"Hillary Clinton, first of all, calls everybody a sexist and that's not fair game," Fiorina said on Fox News' "Fox and Friends." "She called Bernie Sanders a sexist because he criticized her. She's going to play that card, we need to be realistic, and of course she's going to talk about the Republican war on women, which doesn't exist."

Donald Trump blasted both Clintons in a Saturday night tweet, knocking Bill Clinton for his infidelity. He fired back after Clinton derided Trump's "penchant for sexism."

The battle started almost a week ago when Trump said Clinton got "schlonged" in the 2008 primary fight with President Barack Obama.

Fiorina surged to some prominence in the Republican field after taking on Trump at the second Republican debate, but has since fallen again to the back of the Republican pack.

She made the case Monday why she should be the first woman to become president.

"Hillary Clinton wants to talk about the historic nature of her candidacy, she wants to talk about being first woman president and there are people out there -- lots of people, men and women -- who think its time for a woman president," Fiorina said. "My message to them will be, 'Look, how about an honest woman, a competent woman? How about a qualified woman?' But I'm never going to ask for people's support because I'm a woman. I'm going to ask for their support because I'm the most qualified candidate to beat Hillary Clinton and to do the job."

RELATED: Carly Fiorina Starts 2016 With the Worst Pandering of Her Political Career (Updated)

Donald Trump’s Strongest Republican Supporters: Registered Democrats?

HotAir.com:

There’s something for everyone in Nate Cohn’s new post. If you’re a Trump fan, here’s the smoking gun that he really is a new Reagan, the guy who’s going to broaden the tent and sweep to victory in November by bringing centrist Democrats into the GOP. If you’re a Trump critic, here’s further proof that he’s the RINO of RINOs, a man who’s blended nationalism, center-left economics, and Jacksonian foreign policy into something that tastes better to members of the other party than it does to conservatives. That sounds a lot like Perotism, frankly — except, according to the (Democratic) pollster who provided Cohn with data, Trump’s geographic support is the opposite of Perot’s. Perot did best in the west and in New England. Trump cleans up in the south, up through Appalachia, and into the industrial northeastern states like New York. How do you explain that?

Cohn’s theory, comparing Trump’s map of support to a map of “racially charged Internet searches,” is that prejudice is driving some of his votes. There was nothing comparable in Perot’s campaign to Trump inveighing against rapists from Mexico and calling for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States. (There’s no disputing that Trump is the favored candidate of the white nationalists of the “alt-right.”) On the other hand, how many Trump voters in economically distressed industrial areas in the eastern U.S. like Trump’s immigration rhetoric because they “hate” Mexicans and how many simply want less competition from foreign labor in the name of bringing back jobs to America? According to Cohn, Trump’s best state is West Virginia; West Virginia also happens to be the only state in the U.S. where (as of March of this year) less than half of the adult civilian population is employed. Being a protectionist doesn’t make you a racist. Either way, though, this part is certainly true — and important to the future of the GOP:

In many of these areas, a large number of traditionally Democratic voters have long supported Republicans in presidential elections. Even now, Democrats have more registered voters than Republicans do in states like West Virginia and Kentucky, which have been easily carried by Republicans in every presidential contest of this century. As recently as a few years ago, Democrats still had a big advantage in partisan self-identification in the same states.

But during the Obama era, many of these voters have abandoned the Democrats. Many Democrats may now even identify as Republicans, or as independents who lean Republican, when asked by pollsters — a choice that means they’re included in a national Republican primary survey, whether they remain registered as Democrats or not.

 RELATED:  Confessions of a Columnist

If Carrie Fisher Doesn’t Like Being Judged on Looks, She Should Quit Acting

NYPost.com:

Pity Carrie Fisher, who said she felt “pressured” to lose 35 pounds to reprise her role as Leia in “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.”

It’s shameful of Hollywood to have done that.

One pictures similarly gruesome headlines for other entertainers. Imagine a Scott Weiland story on his 65th birthday in 2032: “Weiland: Those Record Company Bastards Pressured Me To Give Up Drugs in 2000.” Or 2001 lung cancer victim George Harrison still being around to angrily promote the Beatles on Spotify this Christmas Eve: “Harrison: Paul McCartney Bullied Me Into Playing Guitar on ‘Maxwell’s Silver Hammer,’ Giving Up Smoking in 1969.”

Fisher told Good Housekeeping UK that — news flash — Disney didn’t love her weight when casting for “The Force Awakens” a couple of years ago.

“They don’t want to hire all of me — only about three-quarters!” Fisher said. “Nothing changes, it’s an appearance-driven thing. I’m in a business where the only thing that matters is weight and appearance. That is so messed up. They might as well say get younger, because that’s how easy it is.”

Not really, because while it isn’t possible to get younger, it is possible (not to mention beneficial) to lose weight, which is exactly what Fisher did. What’s surprising about Fisher’s comments is the note of weary resignation about the importance of “appearance” in the movie biz.

No one would know the name Carrie Fisher if it weren’t for her ability to leverage her looks. George Lucas only cast her in the first place because she was young, slim and cute at the time. (She turned out to be a talented writer as well, but it’s an open question whether the second career would ever have gotten off the launch pad without the fuel provided by her first. Mostly she has written about what it’s like to be Carrie Fisher.)

This week Fisher had herself a Twittantrum when she noticed people were talking about whether she has “aged well” (she’s still only 59!) in the new movie. In a shaky-looking tweet posted at 2:26 a.m., she suggested her fans should “blow us,” meaning her body and her self.

The source of her anger was fan discussion. “Please stop debating”? When has that ever worked? Fisher is a public figure. If she didn’t want the public to talk about her, she could have spent the last 40 years teaching kindergarten. As for whether it’s “messed up” for Hollywood to prefer pretty people to appear in its films, Fisher made millions off being pretty. Far from being bitter about this, she and other actresses who profited nicely from their looks should be grateful they had a turn at the top.

That’s more than average-looking people ever get. As for Disney’s “pressure” to lose weight, she should be even more grateful for being nudged to get healthy.

RELATED:  Carrie Fisher's aging gets judged; Harrison Ford's doesn't

Emails Show Coordination Between Chicago PD, Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s Office Over Laquan McDonald Shooting

Mediaite.com:

Thousands of emails were released yesterday after multiple requests from the press about communications between the Chicago police and Mayor Rahm Emanuel‘s office over the death of Laquan McDonald.

You’ll recall that back in November, the Chicago PD released video of an officer repeatedly shooting McDonald. That officer, Jason Van Dyke, has been indicted on counts of first-degree murder.

Community outrage has centered around Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel. He has pledged police reforms and even fired the chief of police.

But according to the AP, there was email correspondence between Emanuel’s office, the police, and the independent police review board Emanuel set up in which there were concerns about how bad it would be for the city if this became a story.

The head of the Independent Police Review Authority emailed in March about sending witness interview transcripts to the law department so they could use them for settlement negotiations.

And in May, when a spokesman for the review board asked Emanuel about doing interviews (since there was some media interest in the case), an Emanuel spokesman said that they need to “tread lightly” if the focus is on the specifics of the case.

That same spokesman also sent out another email expressing his frustration with how the––again, independent––review board didn’t go along with what he said about one particular media inquiry.

He finally sent out an email, days before the video was finally released in November, asking that everyone speak with “one voice” on the matter.

And then there’s this, from another Emanuel aide, worried about the blowback from the case:

As you might imagine, the timing and details discussed in the Sun-Times article and growing interest in the McDonald incident has not worked in our favor, and is helping to “stir the pot.”

Will the Left go as hard after a politician with a (D) after his name, when it comes to police brutality, as they do the NRA and Republicans? Or is even the "outrage" concerning the deaths of innocent, young black people by police, just used as a another political ploy to keep minorities in this ocuntry voting Democrat?

RELATED:  Rahm Emanuel Announcing Plans for ‘Major Overhaul’ of Chicago PD This Afternoon