Friday, April 18, 2014

Chelsea With Child... Progressive Media Goes Bonkers!

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Purveyor of Truth


Not that the event of Chelsea Clinton being with child should be a big deal, except apparently to Crooks and Liars and as would be expected Momma and Poppa Clinton.

Well, I suppose if Momma Hillary gets herself elected to the presidency of our developing Oligarchy it may be a big deal because we may be looking at a possible Clinton Dynasty right here in America. Oy Vey!!!

At any rate one of the bastions of progressive "journalism" CROOKS AND LIARS just couldn't help themselves and threw out the bait in their article Will Chelsea Clinton's Pregnancy Become Another Right Wing Conspiracy? UPDATED

It's a plot!

Skip

... But I'm forgetting myself because Hillary is not allowed to be a happy mother. We may see a normal life unfolding, but Teabirchers see coverups and conspiracies.

Skip

I wouldn't be surprised at all if Hillary gets asked to comment on Chelsea's pregnancy by the media, since that's only natural, right? But after that happens more than once I really expect Limbaugh and all the wannabees to scream bloody murder that Chelsea's announcement was staged, a set-up plot which is being aided by the librul media to cover up Benghazzzzzzzziiii!

And they say conservatives can't let a sleeping dog lie and intentionally keep pointless BS alive.

Who cares really?

Have a Good "Good Friday" and a "Happy Easter."

Via: Memeorandum



15 comments:

  1. Just a wild guess but I'm assuming here that "Crooks and Liars" is only interested in conservative crooks and liars (kind of like Sean Hannity and liberate deviants). Yes?

    ReplyDelete
  2. While frequenting C&L is not a practice I would have to say, based solely on the times I have visited the site, your assumption is a safe bet.

    ReplyDelete
  3. C&L are not fans of Hillary's, they are progressive. Progressives are not keen on oligarchies and dynasties. But what this particular site does is point out the pointlessness of the pointless diversions of the right as they loot and wreck the country. They're good at it too, both of them.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  4. If Hillary runs I'm betting they'll fall in solidly behind her. Progresssive is as Progressive does, to crib Momma Gump.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Well, of course they'd get behind her! What choice do they have?

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
  6. BTW, C&L were right. Some wingnut, commenting on the announcement of Chelsea's pregnancy claimed it was all a plot to gain something or other or something:

    Newsmax host Steve Malzberg on Thursday speculated that Chelsea Clinton's pregnancy was no accident, and that Hillary Clinton's grandchild would arrive just in time to serve as a "prop" for a widely expected 2016 presidential run.

    Chelsea's pregnancy didn't attract the sort of attention that Prince William and Kate Middleton's announement did. That set the entire American media "bonkers."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh the absurdity of it all. Can't help but chuckle at the wonders of what is American politics.

      Off to the gym for for 3 to put things back into proper perspective.

      Delete
  7. Ummm, libertarian candidate, republican candidate, green party candidate, remain neutral...

    but they won't. No matter how much more qualified or superior to Hillary another candidate might be C&L will do the sheeple thing. Like good trained lap dogs.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Liberals and progressives will get behind candidates to the left of the Dems when they can, but it's not often a realistic choice. Libertarians and Republicans are too far right to vote for, so I xcan't imagine why one Earth you would suggest such utter silliness. We do what everyone does - we vote for the candidate who is the best possible realistic choice. You call that being a "sheeple?" You don't then understand the the point. Silliness.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe it is you that doesn't understand the point jmj.

      Have a nice Easter.

      Delete
  9. The media and pregnancies, Kardashian, William & Cate, Drew Barrymore, one of the Bush twins;
    Sort of glad my kids were just a notice under births in the local paper....

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm still kind of pissed at Chelsea for having her wedding in Rhinebeck. All of the publicity that it generated has turned what was a quaint little hamlet into tourism central....Good for the local economy but I do miss the character.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I went to Rhinebeck years ago in my early twenties for the air show. Loved the area and the show. I might take the grandson to Rhinebeck someday. But we'll skip the tourist BS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You gotta check out the mansions, Les. Start off with the Samuel Morse House in Poughkeepsie and then the Roosevelt Museum/Library/Homestead and the Vanderbilt Mansion in Hyde Park, the Mills Mansion and the Wilderstein in Rhinebeck, and finally Montgomery Place and Clermont Manor just to the northwest of Red Hook. You might require 2 days to see everything but it's definitely worth it (the views to the Hudson are especially beautiful).

      Delete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.