Here’s your “Throw up your hands and just give up on society” post of the day. It’s West Virginia’ University’s chart for students, to try to explain the pointless, babbling word salad that is “gender-neutral pronouns.” It looks more like an eye chart. This is why the courts need to step in right away and slap down the Obama Administration’s unconstitutional rewriting of Title IX to redefine “sex” as “whatever gender identity someone wants to claim he/she/they/it/ae/ey/per/ve/xe/zie feel like.”
HUCKABEE EXCLUSIVE! I’ve just discovered must-see secret video of a college class teaching students how to use gender neutral pronouns! It’s easier when you set it to music.
Want a perfect illustration of just how far to the left and over the edge of sanity the Democratic Party has moved? Watch this clip of a major national leader declaring that America is a nation of immigrants, but we are also a nation of laws. We cannot tolerate illegal immigrants taking jobs away from Americans, imposing burdens on social services and committing crimes against Americans. That is why this leader talks proudly of doubling deportations of criminal illegal immigrants, beefing up border security, and cracking down on hiring of illegals and banning welfare benefits to them, before he promises to do even more to stop illegal immigration.
Was this another speech by that bigoted, racist, xenophobic, immigrant-hating Donald Trump? Nope. It’s a clip from Bill Clinton’s 1995 State of the Union Address.
The group Citizens United used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain State Department call logs that show that while working as Hillary’s State Department chief of staff, Cheryl Mills had frequent contact with top Clinton Foundation executives, who would call Mills to discuss State Department business. The logs confirm that donors and insiders enjoyed unique access to the highest levels of government. But once again, Hillary’s defenders are trying to spin away suspicions. They say it’s perfectly understandable and innocent that Mills would be taking calls from VIPs. USA Today even ran an article quoting “experts” as saying that these new revelations show donors had “access,” but they don’t prove that they received any favors in exchange for money.
Um, excuse me, but…isn’t granting big donors access to top State Department contacts a perfect example of a favor in exchange for money?