Leatherneck Blogger

Planned Parenthood CEO Cecile Richards’ Salary Has Gone Up a Whopping 265% to Almost $1 Million

with one comment

By Ryan Bomberger
February 17, 2017

It must be nice to be untouchable by mainstream media. You can lie through those shiny white teeth and mainstream media will treat every rehearsed and distorted word like truth.

In an age when liberal news media shows its disdain for corporate America (unless those corporations are touting their hypocritical, pro-LGBT, public potty policies), leftie journalists can’t show enough love for abortion mogul Cecile Richards.

She has “privilege”. Liberals call it “white privilege”. It’s their racist way of blaming white people for nearly every social injustice under the sun. I’m black (biracial), and I find the whole white guilt/white privilegerhetoric racist and unproductive. But the hypocrisy of liberalism never ceases to amaze me. They denounce “privilege” at every turn, except when that turn leads to the nation’s leading abortion mogul. Just watch our latest video showing pro-abortion liberals’ multiple personality disorder at Richards’ recent lecture at the University of Chicago.

I mean, what corporation loses 670,540 clients in less than 10 years, slashes its major services (except one) up to 59%, increases its president’s salary by a whopping 265% (from $360,902 in 2006 to $957,952) and gets praised by the news media? Planned Parenthood.

Since Cecile Richards took over the helm of Planned Parenthood in 2006, she has transformed the abortion chain into a massive PR machine for Democrats. “Planned Parenthood, we’re non-partisan,” absurdly claimed Cecile Richards in a recent interview with MSNBC’s Morning Joe co-host, Mika Brzezinski. For the first time in years, FactCheck.org decided to actually fact-check one of the most public, polarizing and dishonest figures in America. (Factcheck.org hasn’t fact-checked Richards since 2015, and has only ever fact-checked her 3 times).

That whole “we’re non-partisan” line was shredded by the left-leaning organization as it revealed what all of us have known for a long time: Planned Parenthood is an extension of the Democratic Party. Ninety-eight percent to be exact. Just on the Congressional level, Planned Parenthood spent $681,679 on Democrats and a measly $12,500 on Republicans (1.8% to be exact).

Of course, an MSNBC host wouldn’t challenge such a blatant lie; the network has become the PR arm of Planned Parenthood. (‘Morning Joe’ has banned conservative Kellyanne Conway but wouldn’t dare ban Cecile Richards, despite her proven and blatant lying.) This highlights, too, the “privilege” of Cecile Richards on network news shows—she is never challenged by a guest with an opposing view. It’s easier to spew all those lies unchecked by someone who knows the truth.

Yes, she makes nearly a million dollars a year from scamming the American public, but what she represents (faux feminism) is more important to pro-abortion liberals than the facts…than women’s lives…than healthcare. In order to bolster Planned Parenthood’s (plummeting) healthcare “credentials”, Richards will repeatedly talk about how the abortion chain provides cancer screenings. Brzezinski, nor her producers, didn’t bother to ask any clarifying questions like: “Why have cancer screenings plummeted at Planned Parenthood?” Since Richards has taken over, the abortion business has conducted 519,158 fewer breast cancer screenings. In the last five years alone, these screenings have been in a free fall from 747,607 in 2010 to 363,803 in 2014—a drop of 51.3%!

Mainstream media and Cecile Richards don’t trust women—the public—with the truth.

And just a reminder for liberal evangelicals who theologically contort themselves to support Planned Parenthood, remember that love does not delight in evil but rejoices in the truth (1 Corinthians 13:6).

 From Richards’ total fabrication that “1 in 5 women use Planned Parenthood” to “Planned Parenthood is opposed to racism and prejudice of any kind”…honesty is not her policy. Planned Parenthood, birthed in eugenic racism and elitism, celebrates its eugenicist founder—Margaret Sanger—every year awarding journalists, celebrities and other activists with the Margaret Sanger Award.

Planned Parenthood ludicrously tweeted this quote from Cecile Richards: “Everyone must own the responsibility we have as a nation to stand against the violence being done to Black people in America. There are no words adequate to express the outrage and grief—stop killing black people.” Uhhh, this is a joke, right? So #BlackLivesMatter all of the sudden? The billion-dollar federation of abortion facilities (mostly located in predominantly minority neighborhoods) is, literally, the leading killer of unarmed black lives (an estimated 266 per day)! I would say that’s a sure sign of racism. Oh, and ripping apart any defenseless human being because of age and stage qualifies as the most violent form of prejudice.

Richards gets away with it all because she has “privilege”. You know, that conjured up evil that liberals normally wield to silence or demonize those they claim have it. I’m more interested in rights than privilege. And our most basic right—the Right to Life—is an unalienable right that should never be aborted. The late Dr. Mildred Jefferson, the first black woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School and become the first female surgeon at Boston Medical, was also the co-founder of the National Right to Life. And I love her words which guide the work of The Radiance Foundation and our desire to affirm that every human life has purpose: “I am not willing to stand aside and allow the concept of expendable human lives to turn this great land of ours into just another exclusive reservation where only the perfect, the privileged, and the planned have the right to live.”

Terror Snap Shot: ISIS Recruitment, Ability to Carry Out Western Attacks Undiminished

with 2 comments

By Katie Pavlich
February 6, 2017

Despite being pummeled by coalition forces in Iraq and Syria for months, ISIS has suffered few losses when it comes to recruitment and terror attacks outside of its territory according to the “Monthly Terror Snap Shot” released by the House Homeland Security Committee majority.

“Although ISIS faces continued counterterrorism pressure in its key safe havens, the group’s external operations plotting appears undiminished. The New Year opened with a deadly ISIS-linked attack on a nightclub in Istanbul, Turkey, leaving 39 dead and demonstrating the terror group’s continued ability to inspire and organize major attacks,” the report states. “European nations are moving forward with counterterrorism reforms designed to cope with the surging terror threat. Yet despite improvements, the continent still suffers from major security weaknesses that make European countries more vulnerable to attack and put U.S. interests overseas at risk.”

The report warns 2017 looks “alarming” in terms of homegrown terrorism and interestingly ties Esteban  Santiago, the man who killed five people at Ft. Lauderdale airport last month, to the terror army as a potential influence for his actions.

According to a CBS News report, Santiago had visited an FBI office in Alaska prior to the shooting, stating her was being forced to watch ISIS videos online.

The FBI confirmed that in Nov. 2016, Santiago-Ruiz walked into an FBI office in Anchorage and claimed his mind was being controlled by a U.S. intelligence agency and that he was being forced to watch videos for ISIS. He was sent to a psychiatric hospital after police were called, sources said.

Meanwhile, President Trump ordered his first raid against al Qaeda operatives in Yemen last week. While a number of high value targets were taken out and crucial intelligence was collected, Navy SEAL Ryan Owens was killed during the operation.

“I am very encouraged that the Trump Administration is preparing to put greater pressure on jihadists in their safe havens throughout the world. But as they do, we can expect to see militants returning to the West to build new networks and to plot more deadly operations,” Chairman Michael McCaul said about the report. “I look forward to working with the new Administration on shutting down terror pathways in America. We must also remain vigilant here at home, because Americans are being radicalized at an alarming rate.”

Federal Court Rules Florida Doctors Can Ask Patients About Guns

leave a comment »

By BearingArms.com Staff
February 17, 2017

MIAMI (AP) — A federal appeals court ruled on Thursday that Florida doctors can talk to patients about gun safety, declaring a law aimed at restricting such discussions a violation of the First Amendment’s right to free speech.

The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the law does not trespass on patients’ Second Amendment rights to own guns and noted a patient who doesn’t want to be questioned about that can easily find another doctor.

“The Second Amendment right to own and possess firearms does not preclude questions about, commentary on, or criticism for the exercise of that right,” wrote Circuit Judge Adalberto Jordan in one of two majority opinions covering 90 pages. “There is no actual conflict between the First Amendment rights of doctors and medical professionals and the Second Amendment rights of patients.”

Circuit Judge William Pryor, who was a finalist in President Donald Trump’s search for a Supreme Court nominee, said in a separate concurring opinion that the First Amendment must protect all points of view.

“The promise of free speech is that even when one holds an unpopular point of view, the state cannot stifle it,” he wrote. “The price Americans pay for this freedom is that the rule remains unchanged regardless of who is in the majority.”

The law was passed in 2011 and signed by Republican Gov. Rick Scott with strong support from the National Rifle Association. It was the only one of its kind in the nation, although similar laws have been considered in other states.

Supporters in the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature insisted it was necessary because doctors were overstepping their bounds and pushing an anti-gun, anti-Second Amendment agenda.

The law was challenged almost immediately by thousands of physicians, medical organizations and other groups such as the American Civil Liberties Union as a violation of free speech in what became known as the “Docs v. Glocks” case. A legal battle has raged in the courts since then, with several conflicting opinions issued.

“We are thrilled that the court has finally put to bed the nonsensical and dangerous idea that a doctor speaking with a patient about gun safety somehow threatens the right to own a gun,” said Howard Simon, executive director of the ACLU of Florida.

The 11th Circuit noted that Florida lawmakers appeared to base the law on “six anecdotes” about physicians’ discussions of guns in their examination rooms and little other concrete evidence that there is an actual problem. And doctors who violated the law could face professional discipline, a fine or possibly loss of their medical licenses.

“There was no evidence whatsoever before the Florida Legislature that any doctors or medical professionals have taken away patients’ firearms or otherwise infringed on patients’ Second Amendment rights,” Jordan wrote for the court.

The NRA and Florida attorneys had argued that under the law doctors could ask about firearms if the questions were relevant to a patient’s health or safety, or someone else’s safety, and that the law was aimed at eliminating harassment of gun owners. But the 11th Circuit said there was no evidence of harassment or improper disclosure of gun ownership in health records, as law supporters also claimed.

“There is nothing in the record suggesting that patients who are bothered or offended by such questions are psychologically unable to choose another medical provider, just as they are permitted to do if their doctor asks too many questions about private matters like sexual activity, alcohol consumption, or drug use,” the court ruled.

The ruling did determine that some parts of the law could remain on the books, such as provisions allowing patients to decline to answer questions about guns and prohibiting health insurance companies from denying coverage or increasing premiums for people who lawfully own guns.

The case will return to U.S. District Judge Marcia Cooke in Miami for a ruling that follows the 11th Circuit’s direction. The case could, however, also be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Planned Parenthood Clinic Named for Margaret Sanger Hurts 2 Women in 3 Weeks in Botched Abortions

with one comment

By Cheryl Sullenger
February 10, 2017

For the second time in three weeks, an ambulance has transported a patient from the Margaret Sanger Center Planned Parenthood abortion facility in New York City.

According to a pro-life activist who snapped photos of the incident, an ambulance arrived around noon on February 4, 2017, and emergency responders entered the Planned Parenthood center. Paramedics soon returned to the ambulance for a gurney. At approximately 12:25 p.m., they emerged with a patient on the gurney with her head covered with a black cloth.

“We have studied hundreds of medical emergencies at abortion facilities, and it seems like 25 minutes is an unusually long time for paramedics to be on the scene,” said Operation Rescue President Troy Newman. “We don’t really know what happened, but one reasonable possibility is that it took the paramedics time to stabilize the patient before transporting her.”

Other medical emergencies documented by Operation Rescue at this same Planned Parenthood abortion facility include the following:

January 18, 2017: A woman was removed from the abortion facility on a gurney and wheeled to the ambulance, passing under a large pink banner that ironically read “Healthcare happens.”
November 4, 2016: African-American woman who was carted out of Planned Parenthood in a wheelchair, put onto a stretcher, and loaded into an awaiting ambulance.
March 1, 2016: African-American woman was brought out of the abortion facility in a wheelchair and helped into ambulance.
May 4, 2013: Ambulance transport woman from Margaret Sanger Center Planned Parenthood.

Cecile Richards, the CEO of Planned Parenthood Federation of America has stated, “The healthcare and the safety of our patients is our most important priority.”

However, the frequency of recent medical emergencies at their flag-ship New York abortion facility says otherwise.

“Planned Parenthood’s rhetoric is often very different from reality,” said Newman. “Two hospitalized patients within three weeks is appalling, and an indication that there are serious patient care issues at the Margaret Sanger Center Planned Parenthood.”

LifeNews.com Note: Cheryl Sullenger is a leader of Operation Rescue.

Written by Leatherneck Blogger

February 21, 2017 at 07:00

72 Muslims from countries covered by Trump ban convicted of terrorism

with one comment

By Robert Spencer
Jihad Watch
February 11, 2017

How many is too many? What number of Americans killed by jihadis is enough for the Left? Is there any limit that will make them say, “All right, now we have to call a halt to this” and restrict immigration? Or is open borders the unalterable goal no matter how many Americans die in jihad massacres?

“Report: 72 convicted of terrorism from ‘Trump 7’ mostly Muslim countries,” by Paul Bedard, Washington Examiner, February 11, 2017:

Since 9/11, 72 individuals from the seven mostly Muslim countries covered by President Trump’s “extreme vetting” executive order have been convicted of terrorism, a finding that clashes sharply with claims from an appeals court that there is “no evidence” those countries have produced a terrorist.

According to a report out Saturday, at least 17 claimed to be refugees from those nations, three came in as “students,” and 25 eventually became U.S. citizens.

The Center for Immigration Studies calculated the numbers of convicted terrorists from the Trump Seven:

— Somalia: 20

— Yemen: 19

— Iraq: 19

— Syria: 7

— Iran: 4

— Libya: 2

— Sudan: 1

The Center’s director of policy studies, Jessica M. Vaughan, based her blockbuster report on a 2016 report from the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and the National Interest, then chaired by new Attorney General Jeff Sessions, that report found that 380 out of 580 people convicted in terror cases since 9/11 were foreign-born.

She received further information on many in the report to conclude that 72 of those convicted of terrorism come from the seven nations target by Trump….

NBC News Spreads Fear, Lies With “Ghost Gun” Fake News

with one comment

By Bob Owens
Bearing Arms
February 10, 2017

Once again, “investigative reporter” Jeff Rossen is fear-mongering about the firearms industry, this time with an incredibly dishonest article about so-called “ghost guns,” a hysterical term used to describe firearms made from gun parts kits sold both in retail stores and online.

A legal loophole means that anyone, including criminals, can order a so-called “ghost gun” off the web without a background check – a gun with no serial number that can’t be traced.

The guns are built from kits and arrive in pieces, so under existing law, when they’re shipped, they aren’t guns. When assembled by their buyers, they’re lethal – and legal.

Federal officials like Graham Barlowe, the resident agent in charge of the ATF’s Sacramento office, say the loophole is dangerous.

“People that could not pass a background check,” said Barlowe, “are purchasing these unfinished receiver kits and making firearms because they know that if they went to a gun store, they wouldn’t be able to pass a background check.”

Police say criminals are well aware of the availability of “ghost guns,” and they’ve been used in shootings across the country, from Maryland to California.

Jeff Rossen, NBC News national investigative correspondent, went online to see how easy it would be to order these gun kits. He quickly found dozens of websites offering the product, and ordered a rifle kit, which he had shipped to former ATF agent Rick Vasquez in Virginia.

All the parts needed to assemble a gun were in the box when it arrived. It took Vasquez a couple of hours to assemble the weapon.

“This is now a completed semi-automatic firearm,” said Vasquez, showing it to Rossen. Rossen noted that there was no serial number on the finished product, making it untraceable.

Said Vasquez, “That is correct … You cannot trace this firearm.” He and Rossen then took the weapon to a range and fired it, where in Vasquez’s expert opinion, it “work[ed] great.”

Here’s the thing: former ATF agent Rick Vasquez and Jeff Rossen are boldly and directly lying to the viewers/readers of NBC News. I know this from firsthand experience, as I’ve built semi-automatic firearms from the ground up, including AR-15s and an AKM.

You cannot buy “all the parts” for any firearm online and simply slap the pieces together to build a functioning firearm as they mislead viewers, and this is a very easy claim to debunk.

Every firearm made or imported into the United States has a part of the frame or receiver that the ATF recognizes as the actual firearm that carries the serial number. All the other pieces are just parts. It is these other pieces—barrels, stocks, handguards, sights, triggers, etc—that can be bought online or in retail stores as individual parts or in parts kits, but the receiver must either be purchased as a serialized firearm like a whole gun, or it must be manufactured from an incomplete piece of material into a functional firearm.

This is where Vasquez and NBC News are misleading you.


The metal part shown about is an unfinished lower receiver for an AR-15 manufactured by 80% Arms. Let me be very clear when I tell you that you cannot simply assemble this into a firearm by slapping other parts onto it.

Someone purchasing an unfinished lower receiver like this must first use machine tools or a CNC machine like the Ghost Gunner II to drill and mill out the fire control group cavity and selector switch holes. If you do not, you simply have a hunk of metal in the outline of a lower receiver that cannot accept a trigger or a hammer or a selector switch, and cannot possibly be fired. This takes time, specialized tools, and knowledge to complete. I know. I’ve put in the time to mill three of them, one of which had to be scrapped because I did it wrong.


Building an AK-style rifle is even more complex than building an AR-15, starting with a piece of sheet metal that must be bent into a shape using specialized tools, and then assembled in a process more akin to blacksmithing than gunsmithing.

The author's completed 1986 Polish AKM. Photo by the author.

I know, because I spent two days in a machine shop with AK master builder Jim Fuller to build the rifle you see above, and that was starting with a finished (and serialized) receiver.

At no point in their “fake news” article does NBC news or the serially dishonest Rossen describe the effort that you must manufacturer the receiver from incomplete pieces of metal to have the core of a firearm. Instead, they all but gloss over that reality, and dishonestly assert that you can buy all the completed parts online and simply assemble a firearm with hardly any effort at all.

If you wonder why the American people no longer trust the mainstream media, you don’t need to look any further than this example. NBC News and Jeff Rossen have once again been dishonest in order to sell fear and sensationalism, creating an imaginary “loophole” in the law that simply doesn’t exist.

New York Times Explains Why It Kept ‘Gosnell’ Off Bestsellers List…Despite Being Top Seller

leave a comment »

By Courtney O’Brien
February 2017

Gosnell: The Untold Story of America’s Most Prolific Serial Killer is one of the top selling releases on Amazon. Yet, the book, which describes in detail the disturbing story of late-term abortionist Kermit Gosnell, apparently wasn’t worthy of The New York Times bestsellers list. While the Times had the book at No. 13 on the “Combined Print & E-Book Nonfiction” list, it failed to put it in its rightful place as the 4th bestselling nonfiction title.

You better believe the authors noticed the slight. In a statement to their supporters, Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney surmised that the Times had a clear agenda to uphold.

“It’s clear that this is a blatant fake list in a fake news newspaper,” McElhinney said. “It’s not only an insult to the people who have bought this book, but an insult to the readers of the New York Times who buy the newspaper and think they are getting the truth about book sales across America but instead get false facts disguised as a neutral list.”

Newsbusters investigated why the top selling book could possibly be excluded from the newspaper’s prestigious list. The editors admitted that sales aren’t the only factor in their decision making.

The Times’s best-seller lists are based on a detailed analysis of book sales from a wide range of retailers who provide us with specific and confidential context of their sales each week. These standards are applied consistently, across the board in order to provide Times readers our best assessment of what books are the most broadly popular at that time.

Huh? The No. 1 hot new release on Amazon wasn’t considered “broadly popular?”

In her immediate reaction, McElhinney mused that the Times had been concerned about putting a book on its bestseller list that seemed to cast a negative light on abortion.

Their concerns were unwarranted. As the authors explained to me and Christine in an interview last month, Gosnell is not a “pro-life book” – it is a book of journalism.

“We need to teach the New York Times and other fake news outlets a lesson,” McAleer said. “We need to push the sales to such a level that they are forced to acknowledge that the book exists and that the Gosnell story exists. Im devastated by this exclusion after all our hard work. If you tell a story the establishment mainstream media don’t like you have to work ten times harder and even then you can be excluded – the system really is rigged.”

Written by Leatherneck Blogger

February 18, 2017 at 07:00

Would Beyoncé’s Babies Still Be Babies If She Chose Abortion?

leave a comment »

By Nicole Russell
The Federalist
February 2, 2017

The Internet was abuzz Wednesday when Beyoncé announced, via Instagram, she is pregnant with twins. Wearing a bra, underwear, and veil, with a garland of roses as a backdrop, the singer is shown cradling her blossoming belly. At nearly nine million, the photo has broken Instagram’s record for most likes.

As a mother of four who immensely enjoyed each of my pregnancies, I join in congratulating Beyoncé on her wonderful news. Babies are a gift. But I’ve noticed a strange dichotomy among Hollywood stars: While many are pro-choice, and showed up at the Women’s March on Washington a couple weeks ago to voice their opinion as such, others are ecstatic to announce their growing families.

Hollywood might think this is the beauty of America, that every woman has a “choice.” But it’s actually a great illustration of how the abortion industry is hypocritical and logically inconsistent.

Stars Loving Babies

Beyonce’s not the only one proudly sporting her baby bump (as well she should be). A host of gorgeous stars are due this year. From Zooey Deschanel and Kalya Rae Reid to Natalie Portman and Amanda Seyfried, dozens have posted on Instagram, Twitter, or spoken publicly about how excited they are to welcome a baby into the world soon with their partners.

While a few Hollywood stars like Patricia Heaton are openly pro-life, others seem to subconsciously resonate with a pro-life message. When singer Ciara announced on Instagram she was pregnant, she called it “one of the greatest gifts of all that God could give.” Tori Spelling is pregnant this year with her fifth child, saying she “always wanted a big family,” and when Lauren Conrad announced her pregnancy on Instagram she posted an actual photo of her ultrasound picture, showing a clear outline of a tiny baby.


While I applaud and absolutely share in these women’s enthusiasm, it’s hard not to overlook the irony of these announcements. These men and women work in an industry that is rabidly pro-choice, not just promoting a woman’s choice in the matter, but also the myth that babies are fetuses until birth. While many people work in industries where the company’s view might conflict with their personal views, the abortion industry and especially Planned Parenthood collaborates closely with Hollywood stars, such as Amy Schumer and Amy Poehler, to promote their cause.


But that’s the point of “choice,” right?

This is not to say that every pregnant woman in Hollywood is pro-choice, but it’s a safe bet most would echo Planned Parenthood’s mantra “Her body, her choice” while cradling their burgeoning bellies. This is how most of Hollywood and liberals in general react to one star supporting abortion at the Women’s March on Washington and another beaming over her pregnant belly for all to see: Yay choice! Yay women’s rights! ‘Murica!

It’s a microcosm, really, of what the rest of the world does, but its size and glaring dichotomies make the logical fallacies that much more obvious. If Lauren Conrad shares an ultrasound picture for all the world to share in her joy of expecting a tiny baby, isn’t the baby actually not a fetus but a baby—always? Not just because she’s excited to be a mom? Or the fact that Beyoncé doesn’t hesitate to announce the joy of being pregnant with not one but two little bundles—isn’t she acknowledging, in not so many words, when life begins?
Yet Planned Parenthood gets chummy with Hollywood women like Lena Dunham—this video of her praising PP and its founder Margaret Sanger went viral recently—using the glitz and glamor of stardom as a megaphone to shout to the average American woman that unborn babies are just fetuses and abortion is just a process. Together with the rest of liberal America they perpetuate the myth among average women that it’s not a baby unless you want it to be. If you want it to be a baby, go ahead and congratulate Beyoncé. If not, join Lena, Amy, and Scarlett, and support Planned Parenthood. This is not only false advertising but unscientific.

The argument about when life begins is the anchor from which liberals hold their position about abortion. It’s the only bit of daylight between Conrad’s ultrasound and Johansson’s speech at the Women’s March on Washington praising Planned Parenthood. Either mothers are pregnant with babies or fetuses. They can’t be one or the other depending on perspective, mother, or enthusiasm.

For example, according to pop culture tabloids, Conrad and Beyoncé are likely in their second trimesters. If they lived in France, they wouldn’t be able to have a legal abortion, since there it’s limited to the first trimester (they could in England up to 24 weeks gestation, which is more than halfway through a pregnancy). If, in a few weeks, they happened to go into labor early, the babies could very well survive outside their mother’s wombs with medical intervention. Yet American women can have an abortion legally in some states until their third trimesters, well past the point a baby could survive outside mom’s womb with medical help. Barbaric, no?

The abortion industry knows this. But they can’t stop the dual narrative because deep down they know: If a woman wants to be a mom, she will rejoice in that pregnancy and call the person living inside her belly a baby.

Look West, Young Women

Hollywood’s dichotomous struggles with life aren’t going to change any sooner than our nation’s decidedly torn views on abortion (According to Gallup, the country is nearly split down the middle.) But that doesn’t mean we can’t point out the positivity about pregnancies to our friends, mothers, and daughters, who might face this choice in their lifetime.

The excited reaction to Beyoncé’s pregnancy announcement shows the whole of Hollywood isn’t debased about babies, but mix that with Madonna’s speech at the Women’s March on Washington and the two events send a distinctly mixed message: You decide if your baby is a baby. You decide if your baby is wanted. You decide if you’re happy with being pregnant.

But Beyoncé didn’t decide her twins were babies any more than she decided to be born with artistic abilities. That’s a simple, obvious message anyone can grasp.

While Planned Parenthood aligns with Schumer to peddle choice and Beyoncé blows up the Internet announcing she’s having twins, liberal ideology insists we accept a contradiction: that an unborn being is a child or not, entirely depending on a woman’s circumstance. The pro-life position has always been the more consistent position, and this might be the only time I’d tell young women to look to Hollywood for proof.

Nicole Russell is a senior contributor to The Federalist. She lives in northern Virginia with her husband and four kids. Follow her on Twitter, @nmrussell2.


Written by Leatherneck Blogger

February 17, 2017 at 07:00

5 Things You Need to Know About Linda Sarsour

with one comment

The Clarion Project
February 2, 2017

Linda Sarsour is a controversial activist who co-organized the recent Women’s March protesting the inauguration of U.S. President Donald Trump. Now she, along with the Muslim Brotherhood-linked Council on American Islamic Relations, is suing the president over his recent executive order temporarily blocking travel into the U.S. for nationals of seven Middle-Eastern countries.

Here are five facts you need to know about her.

She Attacked Clarion’s Feminist Movie Honor Diaries

Linda Sarsour was one of those behind the campaign against Clarion Project’s interfaith award-winning movie Honor Diaries, which showcases the struggle of nine women’s-rights activists, some Muslim some not, as they campaign against honor violence and female genital mutilation.

Sarsour spread #DishonorDiaries on Twitter to tarnish the film, saying it was illegitimate because of who made the film.

We don’t need Islamophobes to talk to us and tell the stories of oppressed and abused Muslim women,” she told Al-Jazeera America. “It’s just disingenuous.”

Watch the trailer for Honor Diaries:

She Implied Sharia Governance Would Be Fine

She tweeted that sharia’s prohibition on interest in banking is an indication of how positive a sharia-run society would be, leaving out the hudud punishments and other problematic elements.

She Whitewashed Saudi Arabia’s Ban On Women Driving

In 2014 she tweeted her confusion that Saudi Arabia was being criticized for its driving ban when it has 10 weeks of paid maternity leave for women.

She Said Ayaan Hirsi Ali Doesn’t Deserve to Be a Woman

She tweeted that both Honor Diaries Executive Producer Ayaan Hirsi Ali and ACT For America founder Brigitte Gabriel don’t deserve to be women.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali hit back in an interview with Fox News.

She posed for pictures with a man convicted of working for Hamas

At a Muslim American Society joint event with the Islamic Circle of North America, Sarsour posed for a picture with Salah Sarsour, an alleged former Hamas operative who was jailed by Israel in the 1990s on charges of working with Hamas.


Concealed Carrier Kills Armed Robber In New Orleans

with one comment

By Boob Owens
Bearing Arms
February 11, 2017

A man attempting to rob a T-Mobile store in New Orleans last night didn’t count on an armed customer drawing his concealed weapon and putting him down hard.

A customer foiled an apparent armed robbery at the T-Mobile store on St. Andrew Street, police said, shooting and killing the armed robber.

Right around the time police were investigating the shooting of six people in Central City, officers in the same NOPD district were called to a T-Mobile store in the 500 block of St. Andrew Street.

Chief Michael Harrison said a suspect was attempting to rob the store, when a customer shot and killed the man. Both weapons were retrieved, and the customer is being questioned by police, Harrison said.

%d bloggers like this: