Connect with us

News

Sanders Got Booted From The Red Hen, But Just Got Served In A Much Better Place

Take THAT, Maxine!

Published

on

Sarah Huckabee Sanders hasn’t been treated fair by the American left since day one of her taking the Press Secretary post from Sean Spicer. Spicer was a staunch supporter of President Trump, but for some reason didn’t work out. The torch handed off to Sanders, and the media instantly tried to discredit her, and do everything in their power to make her squirm. Sanders has never given in to their hateful rhetoric or constant disrespectful attitudes during press meetings. One of the many reasons we all love Sarah has to do with how she spanks the drive-by media when they lie or try to pigeonhole her.  Sarah always seems to come right back out swinging and defending the Presidents actions. We look at Sarah as the strong female on the front lines of a raging war against President Trump. She holds her head up high and makes sure the American people know the truth. Jim Acosta hasn’t had much luck trying to push Sanders away. It was rumored the members of the media were going to try to get rid of Sarah after her first week. We see who won that fight.

Sarah Sanders was famously refused service at the Red Hen Restaurant in Lexington, Virginia because she worked for President Trump. The owners of the Red Hen took Sarah outside and asked her to leave. Sanders was okay with this as her, and her family got up to leave without causing a scene. Could you imagine if someone asked Robert Gibbs, Jay Carney, or Josh Earnest to leave a Resturant because they worked for Barack Obama? The media would automatically resort to racism because their boss is half African American. You would think the media feminist would have defended Sanders and her family, but there is a double standard when it comes to the rights of women in the Democrat party. The only way you’re going to be defended is if you’re a Feminist working for someone in the Democrat party. If you do not meet that “Standard,” then there is no reason to defend someone like you. You’re considered an enemy of the movement.

Sanders didn’t let her being refused service bother her. She tweeted out that she had been refused service, and she respectfully left the establishment. Good things come to people who wait. We’ve all been taught that. Sanders hasn’t spoken about the incident for some time now, and it’s paid off. Sanders is now having the time of her life at Windsor castle where she has been welcomed with opened arms by Queen Elizabeth, and the Royal family. Sarah tweeted out of a photo of her having Tea, and meeting members of the royal family. The Queen as treated Sanders the way liberals could never do. They have zero class while the Queen is the definition of class.

Trending: First Video of Latest Trump Star Vandal Swinging Pickaxe Shows What Happened – Spread Like Wildfire

“What an incredible experience to go with @Potus and @Flotus to Windsor today.” Sarah wrote.

You know just as well as we do the left is fuming over this. Hell, they’re fuming because President Trump shook the hand of Queen Elizabeth. Apparently, there is some “protocol” when meeting the Queen that you’re not to touch her for any reason. That’s strange. I thought we stooped caring what the British wanted after 1776?

Sarah Sanders has made American proud. She’s stood toe-to-toe with the drive-by media and isn’t going anywhere. What liberals fail to realize is the fact they don’t have much of a leg to stand on anymore. They’re made complete fools of themselves and expect everyone else around the world to trash the Trump administration.

English leftist took to the streets as President Trump arrived in London. They protested his visit as if he was going to conquer their land? It’s not clear why these people were protesting unless they were paid by George Soros to cause havoc. This seems to be the trend back home in America. However, not all Londoners were pissed off the American President came to visit.

Across the other side of London, a pub in Hammersmith had renamed itself “The Trump Arms” for the presidential visit and was scheduled to hold an event Saturday evening featuring hot dogs, cocktails, and other American treats.

Decorated with copious amounts of American flags, MAGA caps and a life-size cutout of President Trump, patrons told Fox News they had come out of their way to show support for Trump.

Mark Nicholas said he objected to the way Trump had been treated when he visited London.

“If the Queen was treated in America the same way, we’d be up in arms,” he said. I think whether you like him or don’t like him, he should be treated accordingly.”

Landlord (currently going by the title of “chief of staff”) Damien Smyth, said that it was London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s approval of the “Trump baby” balloon that made him take the leap into changing the name of the establishment.

The Trump Arms is celebrating President Trump’s visit.

“What an insult, not an insult to Trump because he’s a tough old dog, there’s no problem with him,” he said. “But it is an insult to the good decent American people who did vote for Mr. Trump.”

Smyth said that they were seeing a huge increase of people coming to the pub, and the reception had been overwhelmingly positive.

Outside the pub, a few protesters made their stand. Margaret Owen was wearing a sign saying “Dump Trump” and said she was furious to see the “Trump Arms” near her home.

“To come out on my street and see this is outrageous, I am outraged,” she said.

When asked if she at least agreed the pub should be allowed to change its name, she said: “No, you wouldn’t have Hitler there, would you? Would you say ‘Welcome Hitler’?”  Fox News

Join the conversation

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

News

Dem Candidate Pushing ‘Irresponsible Breeder’ Tax On Certain Parents Because Of ‘Privilege’

Published

on

Scott Wallace is a multimillionaire running in Pennsylvania’s 1st Congressional District against current incumbent Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (PA-R). Considered an elite, even amongst the wealthy, he boasts a net worth of between $127 million and $309 million, according to his financial disclosure statement. This would make him the third-richest member of Congress if he were elected to the House today.

From a hardline leftist pedigree, his grandfather was Henry Wallace, the “New Deal visionary” and one-time vice president under former President Franklin D. Roosevelt. His wealth is inherited, stemming from a seed company his grandfather founded that was purchased by DuPont for $10 billion in the 1990s, along with a large number of stocks with the largest being DowDuPont.

His campaign is largely self funded with Wallace claiming he is “putting a significant amount of my own assets into this because this is the most important thing I can imagine doing for America at this point in my life — this is a very expensive district to run in, but it is crucial in the Democrats’ efforts to retake the House.”

But just why this is so incredibly important to Wallace goes beyond the typical party lines of Republican and Democrat. Receiving endorsements from both Planned Parenthood and the National Organization for Women (NOW), Wallace is a population control zealot who believes families who choose to have more than two children are “irresponsible breeders” and should be taxed. Wallace has donated nearly $7 million dollars to various population control groups over the past 20 years, with the majority going through his own Wallace Global Fund.  In addition to its efforts towards population control, the foundation has also reportedly donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to anti-Israel groups that support a boycott of the Jewish State.

Fox News reports:

“Zero Population Growth (ZPG) was among the organizations that received the money from the fund. According to public records, it received $420,000 between 1997 and 2003.

The group, shortly after being founded in 1968, released a brochure advocating abortion to stabilize population growth and claimed that “no responsible family should have more than two children.” To deal with larger families, it also called for families to be “taxed to the hilt” for “irresponsible breeding.”

It also blamed the overpopulation on the ‘white middle-class’ that ‘use up more than their share of resources and do more than their share of polluting‘ and urged them to ‘voluntarily limit their families to two children.’

Paul Ehrlich, who co-founded the ZPG, once called abortion “a highly effective weapon in the armory of population control.” The goal of the organization, which changed its name to Population Connection in 2002, has remained the same since its inception, arguing that the world needs to contain population growth with particular emphasis on American families.

The organization’s political arm, Population Connection Action Fund, publicly endorsed Wallace for Congress, saying his support for their cause is “exactly the kind of dedication we need in Congress.”

Wallace’s fund also gave $20,000 in 2010 to the Center for the Advancement of the Steady State Economy (CASSE), a group that sees the economic growth as undesirable and instead supports an economy with ‘stable or mildly fluctuating levels’ and a society where birth rates equal death rates.

The organization openly supports zero population growth and its executive board member, Herman Daly, advocated issuing reproduction licenses, allowing women to have only two children unless they buy the license for more children from other women. Daly called it the ‘best plan yet offered’ to limit population growth.”

The group advocates strongly for abortion and along with taxing families “to the hilt” for having more than two children, as noted in a Yale Law School publication about the “voices that shaped the abortion debate before the Roe v. Wade Supreme Court’s ruling.”

The group advocates that –

  1. That no responsible family should have more than two children. Any family wanting to care for more than two children should adopt further children. Adopting children does not increase the population.
  2. All methods of birth control, including legalized abortion, should be freely available—and at no cost in poverty cases.
  3. Irresponsible people who have more than two children should be taxed to the hilt for the privilege of irresponsible breeding.

Fox News continued:

Zoe Wilson-Meyer, communications director for Wallace’s campaign, didn’t answer Fox News’ questions on whether Wallace still supports the ideas expressed by the groups.

“The Wallace Global Fund has for decades been a leader in helping women gain access to family planning. Former Co-Chair Scott Wallace is proud of the work of grantees like Planned Parenthood in empowering women and protecting reproductive rights and will stand up for Pennsylvania women,” she said in an email.

“In Washington, Brian Fitzpatrick voted to defund Planned Parenthood and supports Donald Trump’s effort to take away a woman’s right to choose,” she added.

Largely reminiscent of Nazi Germany who exercised eugenics to its full and most horrific potential, this policy of so-called “irresponsible breeders” also resembles the one-child policy from China that saw forced abortions or other forced invasive birth control procedures. Yet eugenics practices had their roots in America as well. American newspapers frequently offered praise for eugenics just prior to WWII and The Holocaust …. that is until Adolf Hitler revealed the true horrors of what eugenics really looked like. They avoided the subject for decades thereafter.

Nine out of ten eugenicists in the 20th Century were also Progressives or Socialists, and the most central component to the eugenic creed is the desire to engineer and centrally plan human reproduction, weeding out the unwanted or undesirable, according to a report on eugenics by PBS.

Yet where does that end? Who determines who is undesirable? Is it the unborn child conceived at an inconvenient time? The elderly mother? The child with cerebral palsy? Those with PTSD? Autism? Blue eyes? White skin? You cannot get to genocide without first visiting identity politics and they say the propagandist’s job is to effectively make the people forget his “enemy” is, in fact, a human being just as he is. It seems we never really do learn from history, do we?

Continue Reading

News

Trump Issued Major Warning: ‘We Will Look Into Discriminatory and Illegal Practice’ – It’s On!

Huge problems and everyone needs to know!

Published

on

President Donald Trump voiced his concerns over “discriminatory and illegal practice” when he posted about the alleged controversy going on with Republicans being censored on Twitter. The tactic is sometimes referred to as “shadow banning” and it seems to be a strategy that social media platforms use to limit the visibility of some people. For example, ever wonder why someone who is genuinely popular might have tons of followers but their posts don’t seem to get many responses? It could be one of several reasons. Either they have fake followers, the post is no good, or they are being censored. In many cases, it’s a form of censorship that’s the obvious result. When a social media user goes from getting a lot of replies and views on their posts, then all of a sudden there’s very little replies and it seems like no one has seen the post – then they were hit with that form of censorship or suppression.

Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been called out for suppressing the content of certain Republican voices or those who support President Donald Trump. Well-known stars like Diamond and Silk have made it very public that they feel targeted for the views and opinions on their pages. That’s just the tip of the iceberg because the problem spans from targeting well-known mainstream people all the way down to the independent publishers. Censorship like this is affecting people’s careers and causing an unbalanced platform in which people with certain views are being limited. It might not be listed as a “ban” but it’s certainly limiting the viewership of certain people. The content that would once appear in people’s feed or timeline now requires a fine-tooth comb to find and it seems like people are realizing this more often and being upset with it.

Trump spoke about it on Twitter and Vice News completed a report on it.

Vice News reported: “Twitter is limiting the visibility of prominent Republicans in search results — a technique known as “shadow banning” — in what it says is a side effect of its attempts to improve the quality of discourse on the platform.

The Republican Party chair Ronna McDaniel, several conservative Republican congressmen, and Donald Trump Jr.’s spokesman no longer appear in the auto-populated drop-down search box on Twitter, VICE News has learned. It’s a shift that diminishes their reach on the platform — and it’s the same one being deployed against prominent racists to limit their visibility. The profiles continue to appear when conducting a full search, but not in the more convenient and visible drop-down bar. (The accounts appear to also populate if you already follow the person.)

Democrats are not being “shadow banned” in the same way, according to a VICE News review. McDaniel’s counterpart, Democratic Party chair Tom Perez, and liberal members of Congress — including Reps. Maxine Waters, Joe Kennedy III, Keith Ellison, and Mark Pocan — all continue to appear in drop-down search results. Not a single member of the 78-person Progressive Caucus faces the same situation in Twitter’s search.

“The notion that social media companies would suppress certain political points of view should concern every American,” McDaniel told VICE News in a statement. “Twitter owes the public answers to what’s really going on.”

Presented with screenshots of the searches, a Twitter spokesperson told VICE News: “We are aware that some accounts are not automatically populating in our search box and shipping a change to address this.” Asked why only conservative Republicans appear to be affected and not liberal Democrats, the spokesperson wrote: “I’d emphasize that our technology is based on account *behavior* not the content of Tweets.”

Twitter directed VICE News to a May 15 blog post that explained the company’s new approach to combating “troll-like behaviors.” After making changes to its platform, the company said that “[t]he result is that people contributing to the healthy conversation will be more visible in conversations and search.”

Twitter did not respond to a follow-up question.

Twitter’s troll hunt, however, has ensnared some of the most prominent Republicans in the country. Type in the names of McDaniel, conservative members of Congress like Reps. Mark Meadows, Jim Jordan, and Matt Gaetz, and Trump Jr.’s spokesman Andrew Surabian, for example, and Twitter’s drop-down search bar does not show their profiles. The search menu also does not display the verified profile of Rep. Devin Nunes of California, only his unverified one that he seldom uses to post.

That limits their visibility and the ease of finding their profiles compared to their liberal counterparts.

UPDATE: July 26, 10:00 AM: Twitter appears to have adjusted its platform overnight to no longer limit the visibility of some prominent Republicans in its search results.”

At what point do social media platforms give the control back to the people? Users should not have to worry about their views being censored by the machine.

Censoring any content that is not illegal should not be tolerated by the users.

Continue Reading

Like Us on Facebook

Recent

Trending

No trending posts found at this time.