Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Thursday, March 23, 2017

For pro-life news updated throughout the day, visit

Top Stories
• House Expected to Vote Friday on Legislation to Defund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
• Democrats Will Filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch
• Cecile Richards: Women Members of Congress Who Vote to Defund Planned Parenthood Aren’t Real Women
• Neil Gorsuch Defends His Opposition to Assisted Suicide: “Intentionally” Causing Someone’s Death is Wrong

More Pro-Life News
• Abortion Activist Wants to “Humanize” How She Aborted Her Baby
• Woman Pregnant With 4 Babies After IVF Regrets “Selective Reduction” Abortion of One Baby
• Melanie and Madeline, Two Young Women With Down Syndrome Changing the Face of Beauty
• Three Different Doctors Told Mom Seven Times to Abort Her Baby Because He Would be Disabled
• MSNBC Gripes That Neil Gorsuch Believes “Human Life is Fundamentally and Inherently Valuable”
• Woman Died From Botched 23-Week Abortion After She Lost So Much Blood She Went Into Shock
• Study Shows Breast Cancer Rates Steadily Increasing After the UK Legalized Abortion
• Pro-Life Legislator Under Fire for Saying a Baby Resulting From Rape is “Beauty From Ashes”
• California Legislator Pushes Bill to Force College Health Centers to Sell Abortion Pills
• Drug Marketed as a Pregnancy Test May Have Caused Abortions
• Arkansas Legislature Passes Bill to Ban Sex-Selection Abortions

House Expected to Vote Friday on Legislation to Defund Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz
The House of Representatives it’s expected to vote on Friday on legislation that will defund the Planned Parenthood abortion business as well as repeal major parts of Obamacare, which funds abortions.

Cl ick to Read at

Democrats Will Filibuster Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, an abortion advocate announced today that Democrats will filibuster the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.

Click to Read at

Cecile Richards: Women Members of Congress Who Vote to Defund Planned Parenthood Aren’t Real Women
Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards issued a scathing criticism of pro-life female lawmakers on Thursday ahead of a scheduled vote to defund Richards’ abortion chain.

Click to Read at

Neil Gorsuch Defends His Opposition to Assisted Suicide: “Intentionally” Causing Someone’s Death is Wrong
Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch defended his opposition to assisted suicide yesterday during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings.

Click to Read at

Abortion Activist Wants to “Humanize” How She Aborted Her Baby
When abortion activists talk about “humanizing” abortion, they are not talking about unborn babies. They mean getting rid of anything that makes abortion seem bad.

Click to Read at


Woman Pregnant With 4 Babies After IVF Regrets “Selective Reduction” Abortion of One Baby
A woman who had In Vitro Fertilization done and conceived four babies had a “selective reduction” where one baby was aborted.

Click to Read at


Melanie and Madeline, Two Young Women With Down Syndrome Changing the Face of Beauty
Two beautiful young girls – one in France and the other from Australia – are showing the world a new face of Down syndrome.

Click to Read at

Three Different Doctors Told Mom Seven Times to Abort Her Baby Because He Would be Disabled
Hydrocephalus is a disease where fluid collects in the brain of an unborn baby. the prognosis varies, but many children with hydrocephalus go on to live normal lives.

Clic k to Read at

Drug Marketed as a Pregnancy Test May Have Caused Abortions

Arkansas Legislature Passes Bill to Ban Sex-Selection Abortions

Daily Pro-Life News Report
Twice-Weekly Pro-Life
News Report
Receive a free daily email report from with the latest pro-life news stories on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Receive a free twice-weekly email report with the latest pro-life news headlines on abortion, euthanasia and stem cell research. Sign up here.
Comments or questions? Email us at
Copyright 2003-2017 All rights reserved.

Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Mar 22, 2017 8:09 PM

URL of the original posting site:

We Have Now Hit Full-On Crazy

Liberals are ecstatic that a judge in Hawaii is writing immigration policy for the entire country, and that policy is: We have no right to tell anyone that he can’t live in America. (Unless they’re Christians — those guys we can keep out.)

As subtly alluded to in the subtitle of “Adios, America: The Left’s Plan to Turn Our Country Into a Third-World Hellhole,” the goal of liberals is for the poor of the world to have a constitutional right to come here whenever they want.

I can’t help but notice that the Third Worlders aren’t moving to liberals’ neighborhoods.

After nearly 1 million Rwandans were murdered by other Rwandans in 1994, our government asked itself: Why not bring more of this fascinating Rwandan culture to America? Ten thousand of them poured in. So far, nearly 400 have been convicted in the United States of lying on visa applications about their role in the genocide.

And that’s why we have to tighten our belt, America! Massive international investigations don’t come cheap.

Almost every immigration case is a con, something we find out every time there’s a San Bernardino shooting and half the family turns out to have scammed our immigration officials. One hundred percent of the “humanitarian” cases are frauds.

Earlier this month, Rwanda’s Gervais Ngombwa was convicted for lying on his immigration application by claiming to have been a victim of the 1994 genocide. In fact, he was a well-known perpetrator — even featured in Rwandan newspaper articles as a leader of the genocide.

For most of the last two decades, Ngombwa has been living in Iowa with his wife and eight children in a house built by Habitat for Humanity — because no Americans need houses. He came to the authorities’ attention a couple years ago by setting that house on fire after a domestic dispute, then filing a fraudulent $75,000 insurance claim.

Another Rwandan genocidalist living in America was featured in “Adios, America”: Beatrice Munyenyezi, granted refugee status as an alleged victim of the genocide, even though she, too, had helped orchestrate it.

Munyenyezi was living safely in Kenya when she applied for a refugee visa to America. The welfare is way better here. And, luckily for us, she had a “chronic medical condition” that required constant attention from a New Hampshire hospital.

Hesham Mohamed Hadayet arrived in the U.S. on a tourist visa, then immediately applied for “asylum” on the grounds that he was persecuted in Egypt — for being a member of an Islamic terrorist group.

Being a member of a noted terrorist group cannot be used to block you from coming to America, thanks to Barney Frank’s 1989 amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act, because liberals love this country so very, very much. Being a talented neurosurgeon from Switzerland, however, is disqualifying.

Hadayet’s refugee application wasn’t denied until he’d already been living here for three years. When he was called in for a visa overstay hearing, he didn’t show up, and the INS didn’t bother looking for him. After allowing Hadayet to mill about America for another year, our government granted him permanent residency and a work permit.

On the Fourth of July following the 9/11 attack, Hadayet shot up the El Al ticket counter at the Los Angeles International Airport. I guess the Egyptians were right!

As bodies were being cleared away from the ticket counter, including Hadayet’s, his wife blamed America for the attack, denying her husband had anything to do with it. “He is a victim of injustice,” she explained. “In America, they hate Islam and Arabs after Sept. 11.”

At least immigrants are grateful.

Immigration bureaucrats are so determined to transform America without anyone seeing what they’re doing that the INS initially refused to release Hadayet’s file to congressional investigators, in order to protect his “privacy.”

Of course, anybody could miss Egypt’s designating someone a terrorist. And maybe the INS’s test for Rwandan “refugees” is: Would this person be able to convince Rolling Stone magazine that “Haven Monahan” raped her?

How about Rasmea Yousef Odeh? She waltzed into America after having been convicted and imprisoned in Israel for a supermarket bombing that left two Hebrew University students dead, and also for the attempted bombing of the British consulate in Israel.

She was released in a prisoner exchange — whereupon Odeh made a beeline for the U.S.

True, Odeh wasn’t subjected to the Inquisition-like vetting accorded the humanitarian cases, like the Boston Marathon bombers (we were warned by Russia), Hadayet (we were warned by Egypt) or the Blind Sheik (same).

But how did our immigration authorities miss a CONVICTION FOR BOMBING IN ISRAEL?

Apart from the terrorism, welfare and fraud, what great things did any of them do for our country?

Ngombwa was a custodian at the Cedar Rapids Community School District in Iowa, a job that, evidently, no American would do. Munyenyezi had a job as an advocate for refugees — just one of the many jobs being created by immigrants. Hadayet ran a failing limousine company and was $10,000 in debt. Odeh was an unemployed waitress and a Palestinian grievance activist. Recently, she’s been heavily involved in anti-Trump, anti-white male protests, because who doesn’t like incessant Third World unrest?

In 1960, 75 percent of the foreign-born in America were from Europe. Today only about 10 percent are. More than a third of all post-Teddy Kennedy act immigrants — not just the wretched humanitarian cases — don’t even have a high school diploma.

What is the affirmative case for this? How is it making America better? Improving the schools? The job market? Crime? The likelihood of terrorism?

Can the liberals doing cartwheels over a district judge’s announcement that everyone in the world has a right to come here (except Europeans and Christians), give us the cost-benefit analysis they’re using? Twenty million Third World immigrants give us ( ) terrorists, ( ) welfare recipients, ( ) uncompensated medical costs, ( ) discrimination lawsuits, but it’s all worth it because ( )?

Commentary by  Ann Coulter  

URL of the original posting site:

The more hysterical liberals become about Russia, the more your antennae should go up. Their selective misgivings with Russia are just like their selective alarm with (our ally) Chiang Kai-shek, leader of the nationalist Chinese government, and (our ally) Ngo Dinh Diem, president of South Vietnam.

As explained in lavish detail in Treason: Liberal Treachery from the Cold War to the War on Terrorism, liberals instinctively lunge toward treason. They say Putin is a “thug” and a “bully” who kills journalists. Liberals never used to mind Russian leaders killing journalists. Nor millions of scientists, writers, Christians, Jews, kulaks, Ukrainians and so on.

Have you guys heard of the Evil Empire? Now Democrats are hypersensitive to a Russian leader’s flaws?

Liberals were cool with the show trials, the alliance with Hitler, the gulags, the forced starvations, the shooting down of American planes and goose-stepping through Eastern Europe. But that was when the Russian leader was Joseph Stalin or Nikita Khrushchev — not the beast Putin!

Back then, liberals were spying for Stalin (Julius Rosenberg’s code name: “Liberal”), the U.S. president was calling the bloodthirsty dictator “Uncle Joe,” and The New York Times was covering up Stalin’s infamous crimes. In the storied history of fake news, the Times’ Walter Duranty won a Pulitzer Prize for his false reports denying the Ukrainian famine, in which more than 7 million people were deliberately starved to death.

As far as the Times is concerned, those were Russia’s halcyon days!

Back when Russia was actually threatening America with nuclear annihilation, Jimmy Carter warned Americans about their “inordinate fear of communism.” Sting sang that “the Russians love their children, too.” But now liberals are hopping mad with Putin. They could never forgive Russia for giving up communism.

To add insult to injury, Putin embraced the Russian Orthodox Church! This was deeply offensive to fiercely Christophobic liberals.

Russia’s descent into insanity and madness was clear when Putin refused to allow LGBTQ marches through Red Square. For having the same position on gays as Obama did, circa 2008, Russkies were walking on the fighting side of liberals!

Trump’s election victory was the capstone of the left’s rage with Putin. To explain the inexplicable, Putin was made the center of liberals’ axis of evil, the mastermind of a malevolent plot to steal the election from Hillary Clinton. That’s how liberals became born-again John Birchers, seeing Russians under every bed. Now, no fear of Russia is inordinate. The Russians do NOT love their children, too.

We really could have used some of this fighting spirit about 50 years ago when the Soviet Union sought total world domination and Stalin’s spies were crawling through the U.S. government. But back then, liberals were blackening the names of Whittaker Chambers, Richard Nixon and Sen. Joe McCarthy. (Later proved 100 percent correct by the top-secret Venona Project.)

Russia’s loss of the left’s esteem happened very quickly. In 2008, The New York Times editorial page demanded that Obama “signal to the Russians that he wants better relations,” and complained of the “alarming” deterioration of “Russian-American relations” under Bush.

It was considered the height of statesmanship when Obama was caught on a hot-mic in 2012, telling Russian president Dmitry Medvedev, “This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility. I understand you.”

To hoots of laughter at the Democratic National Convention, Obama said: “You don’t call Russia our number one enemy — not Al-Qaida, Russia — unless you’re still stuck in a Cold War mind warp.”

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow couldn’t contain her hilarity over the GOP offering “an extra bonus of threatening Russia.”

But today, Democrats (and two especially showboating Republicans) are horrified that Trump wants to get along with Russia. Tonight, the threatening evil of Vladamir Putin will be the top issue on Rachel Maddow’s show, assuming she still has a show. (Maybe she can get a copy of Putin’s tax returns!)

When the same people who hailed Stalin as a beloved American ally are happy to threaten Putin with thermonuclear war, we may deduce that the left’s newfound Russia-phobia has some seditious objective. Historically, liberals show their manliness by demanding war with our friends and allies, while methodically undermining America’s ability to fight the wars it’s already in.

The No. 1 enemy of Western civilization today isn’t non-communist Russia. It’s Islam.

And who is a key ally in that fight? Russia has been dealing with these troublesome Muslims for centuries. It was Russian officials who tried in vain to warn our blind, incompetent government about the Boston Marathon bombers.

The left’s hysteria about Russia isn’t just an attempt to delegitimize Trump. It’s the usual Christophobic fifth column rooting for the Islamization of the West.

Posted by CLASHDAILY.COM | Published on March 21, 2017

URL of the original posting site:

Hey James, are you ready to put your accuracy record up against Wikileaks?

Comey stood up and said that emails on Republicans were not released during 2016.


He’s being called out as a liar. And Wikileaks is offering proof. And whatever you think of Wikileaks’ practices — they’ve not been proven wrong yet.

Comey, on the other hand, has been SPECTACULARLY wrong.

When you follow that link, you’ll see something that looks like this:


And if you look WAAAAAY up in the top corner, you’ll see this:


Don’t take our word for it. There’s a lot of fake news out there. Follow the link yourself. Either the one in the tweet, or (if you prefer) this one here. And then decide for yourself which one is fake.

Does anyone know whether someone in Comey’s position is permitted to lie to Congress?

The Question WE would love to get to the bottom of is this: Is Comey that Arrogantly dishonest?  Or is he a superior breed of incompetent?  Or is he actually Corrupt?

Posted by CLASHDAILY.COM Published on March 15, 2017

URL of the original posting site:

We’ve heard Trump throw red meat to his rallies… “Who will pay for it?” But were ANY of his critics expecting this plot twist?

Mario Burgos owns the Albuquerque-based professional services firm, Burgos Group. He is just one of about 60 Hispanic business owners who are now bidding for contracts with the federal government as it seeks to fulfill Trump’s campaign promise to build a wall. Burgos conducts business in seven states and employs around 120 people, according to CNN.

But Burgos isn’t the only Hispanic business owner looking to take advantage of the president’s proposal. About 600 private businesses have tossed their names into the hat, in hopes of landing one of the lucrative deals. Of the 600 companies, about 60 — or 10 percent — are Hispanic-owned.

“It’s not an anti-immigrant thing for me,” Burgos told CNN. “It’s about creating jobs. And honestly [it’s] like any other job.” —Blaze

Which brings up a good question. When did Liberals start opposing infrastructure jobs? And how do their UNION backers feel about it? Well, maybe the collapse that ‘Blue Wall’ in the Electoral College settles that question. But that doesn’t stop Democrat knee-jerk opposition to all things Republican.

What next? Will Democrats try to shut down the government just to oppose the wall? Actually, they MIGHT! But THAT would be EVIL. And HEARTLESS. (We know this because that’s what they called Republicans when REPUBLICANS wanted to shut down the government.)

That tells us one of two things. Either they are lying, opportunistic pieces of something unprintableOr… They THEMSELVES were the evil ones all along.

Come to think of it, these options are NOT mutually exclusive.

Published on March 21, 2017

URL of the original posting site:

The ‘Activist Mommy’ does it again! She says what many Conservatives want to say to Tomi Lahren. And she even brings up the Constitution!

ClashDaily has covered Lahren’s controversial statement on The View here.

As well as Lahren’s subsequent suspension from The Blaze.


That. Was. Amazing.


It’s a matter of what is considered life. And that’s the discussion the Left refuses to have. Because it’s so much easier to justify removing a ‘clump of cells’ that is in the woman’s body than recognizing the innocent life that is dependent on the woman for continuing to exist. That would make abortion the same as murder. Which is the position that the Pro-Lifers take.

It’s funny that it was progressive Dr. Seuss — who filled his books with political messages — that captured the Pro-Life position so simply and beautifully: ‘Even though you can’t see them at all, a person’s a person no matter how small.’

If you don’t get it, go back and read ‘Horton Hears A Who’.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: