SS Cruz Sinking - ABORTION IS MURDER - Trump EPIC GOP Battle

Listen To Military Veteran Talk Radio

iHeart.SmythRadio.com

Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Show Notes Below:

 Listen to SmythRadio on iHeart Radio

Trump

- Corey Lewandowski incident – Rush (1D)

a.       David Muller fillin host “After the video is it now not true he touch her?”(1E)

b.      Matt Lauer tries to blast Trump (1F)

c.       Ted Cruz responds at the town hall meeting CNN (1G)

-          Sheriff David Clarke Milwaukee WI. (1A) GOP insanity

-          Abortion If You're a Republican Candidate, You'd Better Be Ready for an Abortion Trick Disguised as a Journalist's Question RUSH April 01, 2016

-          The Thom Hartmann Program on Cruz from 1997 (1B)

-          Stefan Molyneux – Ted Cruz Wife, Cruz Craziness all exposed (1C)

-          Ted Cruz Funded by GOP (Cruz email confirmation on the AshleyMadison.com database) money Posted by sundance Erick Erickson Redstate.com

a.       Thanks to the candidacy of Donald Trump the financial intersection of money and political opinion, as guided by the monetary motives therein, has brought some amazing revelations to the surface. These financial/media relationships have largely, and historically, remained hidden.  They have damned sure never been publicly, clearly, and regularly stated so the consuming audience would know the presentation was fraught with financial conflict.

b.      ♦ The Senate Conservatives Fund (PAC) purchasing massive quantities ($400,000) of Mark Levin’s books in exchange for favorable candidacy political opinion.  Conveniently Hidden by the radio host who avoids mentioning the financial conflict created.

c.        

d.      Then again, Levin never informed his audience of his family working within the Staff of Senator Ted Cruz either.  Does Levin’s endorsement, when contrast against the crony-constitutional advocacy, clarify with a little sunlight?  You decide.

e.       

f.        ♦ Or how about the Breitbart Media enterprise being run via an $11 million purchase from Billionaire Robert Mercer, who also funded Ted Cruz’s Super-PAC “Keep The Promise 1”, to the tune of $10 million.  Little overlooked facts, never openly shared for news consumers to determine source motive.   Pesky Sunlight

g.        

h.      ♦ Maybe the Ben Shapiro website “The Daily Wire“, being funded by the billionaire Wilks Brothers, Levi and Farris, in Texas.  Who also fund Ted Cruz and his Super-PAC “Keep The Promise”.  Shapiro never publicly disclosed the financial/content conflict, or the extent therein.  Could Shapiro support any other candidate other than who his content owners approved of?  Again, you decide.  (Yep, Pesky Sunlight)

i.         Glenn Beck Defamation Lawsuit???

j.        ♦ The Chairman of Glenn Beck’s Mercury One charity, David Barton, jointly running the Pro-Ted Cruz Super-PAC“Keep The Promise”; also never put into the sunlight by Glenn Beck or his various media enterprises so the consuming audience could filter presented political opinion through the filter of fiduciary connections.  More Pesky Sunlight

k.       These are just a few of the politically motivated – financially dependent – revelations we probably would never have known about were it not for Donald Trump presenting a genuinely conservative America-First platform; and as a direct consequence, the faux-constitutionalists having to reverse opinion simply to retain income.

l.          

m.    ♦ So it perhaps shouldn’t come as a surprise to find out that Erick Erickson’s media venture “The Resurgent“, is taking Super-PAC money from the (formerly Scott Walker advocates and financial backers) Ricketts family of Wisconsin who fund OUR PRINCIPLES PAC to the tune of $3,000,000 in February alone

n.      Ted Cruz Wife Heidi VP Goldman Sac and Her work on the indep. Task force that wrote “Building a North American Community” sponsored by the Conucil on Foreign Relations’ which will dissolve American Sovereignty.

2.       Obama

-          The Havana Tribune, a state-controlled Cuban newspaper,

a.        has added insult to injury following Fidel Castro’s scathing criticism of President Barack Obama upon his departure from the island. In an editorial, the title of which refers to President Obama as “negro,” an opinion columnist has accused him of “inciting rebellion.”

b.      The article is titled “Negro, ¿Tu Eres Sueco?” which roughly translates to “Black Man, Are You Dumb?” (The idiom “pretend to be a Swede” means to play dumb, hence the title is literally asking, “Are you Swedish?”) The author, who is black, goes on to condemn President Obama for meeting with Cuban pro-democracy activists and “subtly” suggesting that the Cuban Revolution needed to change. “Obama came, saw, but unfortunately, with the pretend gesture of lending a hand, tried to conquer,” Elias Argudín writes.

c.       “[Obama] chose to criticize and subtly suggest … incitations to rebellion and disorder, without caring that he was on foreign ground. Without a doubt, Obama overplayed his hand,” he continues. “The least I can say is, Virulo-style: ‘Negro, are you dumb?'”

d.      Virulo is a white pro-Revolution comedian.

-          After Taxpayer Bailout, General Motors Plans Rollout Of Chinese-Built Buicks In America

FDA authorizes expanded use of medical abortion pill

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

Published March 30, 2016

FoxNews.com

Facebook Twitter livefyre Email

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has kicked up a potential abortion hornet’s nest with states that impose restrictions on a common abortion-inducing drug, approving a new label for the medication that relaxes guidelines for using it.

ADVERTISEMENT

The FDA notified the manufacturer of Mifeprex, a drug previously known as RU-486, in a letter on Tuesday that the drug is safe and effective for terminating a pregnancy in accordance with the new label. Also known as mifepristone, the synthetic steroid drug is used in combination with another drug, misoprostol, to end a pregnancy.

Under the new label, a smaller dose of Mifeprex can be used significantly later in the pregnancy — up to 70 days of gestation, from 49 days.

The decision could rankle lawmakers in states that required the drugs to be used in accordance with the original labels. Critics complained those labels were outdated and restrictive. 

More on this...

Abortion Pill Via Telemedicine Seen Safe, Effective

Abortion pill leads to murder charge after fetus dies

Dr. Manny: Video of woman filming her own abortion fails to tell the whole story

Abortion rights groups say the FDA change will now affect laws in Ohio, North Dakota and Texas that prohibited "off-label" uses of the drug. Similar laws are on hold in Arizona, Arkansas and Oklahoma.

The National Right to Life Committee argued that the FDA changes would not increase safety for women.

“In the end, it is obvious that the FDA's new protocol serves only the interests of the abortion industry by expanding their base of potential customers, increasing their profit margin, and reducing the level of staff and amount of resources they have to devote to the patient,” Randall K. O'Bannon, National Right to Life director of education and research, said in a statement. “It is clear whose interests it is the FDA is serving. It isn't the women, and it isn't the babies.”

The new label rules will make it easier to use the drug. Not only do they widen the window for using it, but according to the New York Times, they reduce the number of trips women have to make to a doctor from three to two in most states.

Under the new label, the drug dosage has been reduced from 600 milligrams to 200 as well. According to The New York Times, the previous dosage had been deemed too high by most medical societies and abortion rights advocates said it increased the cost and side effects of the procedure.

The drug, formerly known as RU-486, induces miscarriage when used with misoprostol.

“This is a huge step in increasing access to medication abortion and it comports with the scientific evidence,” Elizabeth Nash, a senior state issues associate at the Guttmacher Institute, which tracks women’s reproductive health issues, told The New York Times. She said that medication abortions accounted for about a quarter of all abortions in 2011, the last year measured by the institute.

According to a statement by the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the organization was “pleased that the updated FDA-approved regimen for mifepristone reflects the current available scientific evidence and best practices.”

Additionally, The New York Times reported the group saying, “medication abortion has been subject to legislative attacks in various states across the country, including mandated regimens that do not reflect the current scientific evidence. We hope that these states take the FDA label into account.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report

Donald Trump proposes abortion ban, punishment for women who undergo procedure

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio Facebook.com/SmythRadio

83Comments

• REBECCA SHABAD
• CBS NEWS

Mar 30, 2016 3:54 PM EDT

Donald Trump said Wednesday that abortions should be banned and that there "has to be some form of punishment" for women who undergo the procedure.

In a pre-taped segment for an MSNBC town hall that will air Wednesday night, host Chris Matthews asked the GOP frontrunner if women should be punished for having abortions.

"I would say it's a very serious problem and it's a problem that we have to decide on," Trump initially said.

Asked what his proposal to ban abortion means, Trump said "I am against. I am pro-life. Yes. I am pro-life." But Trump failed to explain how he would actually ban the procedure.

"You know, you'll go back to a position like they had where people perhaps will go to illegal places," he said when asked how he would outlaw it. "But you have to ban it."

Play VIDEO

Trump defends aide charged with battery

Matthews eventually asked Trump if he believes in punishment for abortion as a principle "The answer is there has to be some form of punishment," Trump said. "For the women [who have abortions]?" Matthews followed up. "Yes," Trump responded.

Matthews then asked Trump, "10 days or 10 years" and Trump said, "I don't know. That, I don't know," adding that this is a "very complicated position."

After the clip of that segment aired, Trump issued a statement of clarification.

"This issue is unclear and should be put back into the states for determination. Like Ronald Reagan, I am pro- life with exceptions, which I have outlined numerous times," Trump said.

Hillary Clinton immediately weighed in on Trump's remarks on Twitter.

During a pre-taped interview that will also air during MSNBC's town hall, host Chuck Todd asked anti-abortion Ohio governor John Kasich if he would punish women who get abortions.

"Absolutely not," Kasich said. "I do have exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother but of course women shouldn't be punished. Look, you know -- I think probably Donald Trump will figure out a way to say that he didn't say it or he was misquoted or whatever but I don't think so. I don't think that's an appropriate response and it's a difficult enough situation then to try to punish somebody."

Asked how abortion could ever be banned, Kasich said, "I think it's rape, incest, life of the mother, and you build some restrictions around it, but I think you have to be very careful in the way you do it. We're a long way from there."

Trump has admitted during this presidential election that he had once been pro-abortion, but is now strongly anti-abortion. While his opponents, however, have blasted Planned Parenthood, Trump has actually defended the organization for some of the other health services it provides to women.

Just last month, Ted Cruz released a campaign ad that targeted Trump's previous position on abortion. It used footage from an interview Trump did on "Meet the Press" in 1999 where he says, ""I'm very pro-choice" and says he would not ban partial-birth abortions.

© 2016 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Abortion Clinics Are Closing at a Record Pace

Listen to Military Veteran Talk Radio 

iHeart.SmythRadio.com

buswk.co

Abortion access in the U.S. has been vanishing at the fastest annual pace on record, propelled by Republican state lawmakers’ push to legislate the industry out of existence. Since 2011, at least 162 abortion providers have shut or stopped offering the procedure, while just 21 opened.

At no time since before 1973, when the U.S. Supreme Court legalized abortion, has a woman’s ability to terminate a pregnancy been more dependent on her zip code or financial resources to travel. The drop-off in providers—more than one every two weeks—occurred in 35 states, in both small towns and big cities that are home to more than 30 million women of reproductive age.

QuickTake The Vanishing U.S. Abortion Clinic

No region was exempt, though some states lost more than others. Texas, which in 2013 passed sweeping clinic regulations that are under scrutiny by the Supreme Court, saw the most: at least 30. It was followed by Iowa, with 14, and Michigan, with 13. California’s loss of a dozen providers shows how availability declined, even in states led by Democrats, who tend to be friendly to abortion rights.

Stand-alone clinics, not doctors’ offices or hospitals, perform the vast majority of pregnancy terminations. They account for the vast majority of the tally, which was compiled by Bloomberg News over the past three months and builds on a similar undertaking from 2013.

Typically defined by medical researchers as facilities that perform 400 or more abortions per year, the ranks peaked in the late 1980s at 705, according to the Guttmacher Institute, a New York-based reproductive-health research organization. By 2011, the most recent year for which Guttmacher has data, that number had fallen to 553.

Bloomberg’s reporting shows that the downward trend has accelerated to the fastest annual pace on record since 2011, with 31 having closed or stopped performing the procedure each year on average.

State regulations that make it too expensive or logistically impossible for facilities to remain in business drove more than a quarter of the closings. Industry consolidation, changing demographics, and declining demand were also behind the drop, along with doctor retirements and crackdowns on unfit providers.

Texas stands as a case study in the way abortion opponents have changed strategies, opting for legislative action over the clinic blockades and violence of the past.

Most providers there closed after the state became the largest and most populous in the U.S. to require that they become hospital-like outpatient surgical centers, which can cost millions to buy or build. The state also mandates that doctors have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals. The drop-off in access has helped depress the abortion rate in the state by 13 percent, according to a July study, and providers there say full implementation of the law would leave almost a fifth of Texas women 150 miles or more from a facility.

Summit Women’s Center in Bridgeport, Conn., closed in 2015 after 40 years in business, citing reduced demand. In Kalispell, Mont., Susan Cahill said she didn’t have the money to rebuild after her practice got vandalized in 2014. Following the loss of two providers, Missouri is now one of five states in which a sole clinic remains. Of all the facilities in the nation that closed or stopped performing terminations, about a third were operated by Planned Parenthood; of the ones that opened, three-quarters were.

That just 21 new clinics opened in five years underscores the difficulty the industry has faced in replenishing the ranks of health-care providers willing and financially able to operate in such a fraught field. The impact of that challenge is likely to be long-lived: Even rarer than the building of a new clinic is the reopening of one that has shut.

COMMENTS

NARAL Attacks Doritos ‘Ultrasound’ Super Bowl Ad For ‘Humanizing Fetuses’

by DR. SUSAN BERRY7 Feb 20161,796

Abortion industry political advocacy group NARAL Pro-Choice America attacked a Doritos Super Bowl ad which features an ultrasound of an unborn baby as “anti-choice.”

Taking to Twitter, NARAL charged the humorous ad that showed a spunky unborn baby responding to a Dad eating Doritos used an “antichoice tactic of humanizing fetuses and sexist tropes of dads as clueless and moms as uptight.”

You can see the ad here

NARAL also weighed in on the Snickers ad seen during Super Bowl 50. It depicted a grumpy man wearing the blowing white dress Marilyn Monroe wore in the midst of her iconic scene from the film The Seven Year Itch. Once the male stand-in eats a Snickers candy car, he turns into the real Marilyn Monroe who then appears in her famous scene.

The abortion industry advocate tweeted the Marilyn ad was “transphobic” and that it suggests women are agreeable to “being objectified as long as they have snacks.”

Read More Stories About:

Big Government, Abortion, Transgender,pro-life, Super Bowl 50, NARAL, Super Bowl ads, ultrasound

Mike Huckabee Says Ted Cruz "Constantly Changes Positions" On Plenty Of Issues

blogs.cbn.com

The kitchen sink has officially been thrown.

In an exclusive interview with The Brody File, Mike Huckabee calls out Ted Cruz as a flip flopper on his positions when it comes to immigration, Syrian refugees, ethanol and the role of the federal government when it comes to abortion and marriage. ““Do I want to vote for someone who has had a lot of different positions on every issue out there? They sound very convincing but constantly changes position,” Huckabee tells The Brody File from Cedar Rapids Iowa. Huckabee goes on to list his specific policy concerns with Cruz. Watch the video below along with the transcription.

It goes without saying that Huckabee hasn’t done as well in the polls in 2016 than he did in 2008 but the former winner of the Iowa Caucus wants evangelicals here in this state to understand something very important. “The reasons you supported me eight years ago, I’ve not changed one position. You don’t have video of me saying two different things. You don’t have video of me saying something different in Marshalltown Iowa than I said in Manhattan. If I said it in Washington, I said it in Waukee (Iowa)… I don’t have a lot of different opinions on these issues.”

As for whether or not Huckabee can surprise folks Monday night when the Iowa Caucus takes place, he says, “Iowa people are very independent. They don’t do what the New York media tell them what they’re going to do. They do what they choose to do. I still think we’re going to have a big surprise come February 1st." Huckabee has visited all 99 counties in Iowa and has done hundreds of events. Now he just needs the payoff.

MANDATORY COURTESY: CBN NEWS/THE BRODY FILE

Mike Huckabee: “Do I want to vote for someone who has had a lot of different positions on every issue out there? They sound very convincing but constantly changes position; immigration, Syrian refugees, ethanol, changed his position even on whether abortion is a state issue or a federal issue.

David Brody: “You’re referring to Ted Cruz on this?

Mike Huckabee: Yes. Ted is one of the people you mentioned has had some of the support of the folks that supported Santorum and me (Bob Vander Plaats). Here’s what I can tell those folks: the reasons you supported me eight years ago, I’ve not changed one position. You don’t have video of me saying two different things. You don’t have video of me saying something different in Marshalltown Iowa than I said in Manhattan. If I said it in Washington, I said it in Waukee (Iowa)… I don’t have a lot of different opinions on these issues that I believe are fundamental to the survival of our great republic. I’ve been thoroughly vetted, there’s no surprises and there’s also one thing they can be reassured of; I know absolutely I was born in Hope Arkansas and we have absolutely established that you are eligible to run for president if you were born in Hope Arkansas

Mike Huckabee: Iowa people are very independent. They don’t do what the New York media tell them what they’re going to do. They do what they choose to do. I still think we’re going to have a big surprise come February 1st.

COMMENTS

BOMBSHELL! Lois Lerner Tried to Get Obama DOJ and FEC to Also Attack Tea Party Groups

April 16, 2014 By Jennifer Burke

c

It’s becoming more and more clear exactly why Lois Lerner refuses to testify and answer questions regarding the IRS scandal of targeting and harassing Tea Party and other conservative groups. It is also clear why the IRS commissioner made the claim that it would take years to produce the emails surrounding this scandal. According to a report by Townhall, the collusion between Democrats, the Obama IRS and the Obama DOJ goes even deeper than initially thought and emails obtained by Judicial Watch shows the extreme coordination between these groups in the targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups.

Lois Lerner sent the following email to the Obama Department of Justice in May 2013.

“I got a call today from Richard Pilger Director Elections Crimes Branch at DOJ … He wanted to know who at IRS the DOJ folk s [sic] could talk to about Sen. Whitehouse idea at the hearing that DOJ could piece together false statement cases about applicants who “lied” on their 1024s –saying they weren’t planning on doing political activity, and then turning around and making large visible political expenditures. DOJ is feeling like it needs to respond, but want to talk to the right folks at IRS to see whether there are impediments from our side and what, if any damage this might do to IRS programs. I told him that sounded like we might need several folks from IRS,” Lerner wrote in a May 8, 2013 email to former Nikole C. Flax, who was former-Acting IRS Commissioner Steven T. Miller’s chief of staff.
“I think we should do it – also need to include CI [Criminal Investigation Division], which we can help coordinate. Also, we need to reach out to FEC. Does it make sense to consider including them in this or keep it separate?” Flax responded on May 9, 2013. 

After this email exchange, Lerner handed things off to Senior Technical Adviser and Attorney Nancy Marks, who was in charge of setting up a meeting with DOJ.


This news follows the revelation that the second ranking member in the House Oversight Committee, Democrat Elijah Cummings, worked in collusion with the IRS in attacking True the Vote, a group out of Houston who works against voter fraud. Cummings had earlier denied any coordination with the IRS, but that denial has been proven to be a lie.
As this news breaks, Lois Lerner is waiting to see if the House will hold her in contempt after the House Oversight Committee voted to hold her in contempt. TPNN  also previously reported that Lerner “referred to the Justice Department by the House Ways and Means Committee for potential prosecution of her actions. If convicted of the crimes for which she has been accused, she could face 11 years in prison.”
Given the collusion between the Obama Department of InJustice and Lerner in relation to this IRS scandal and attack against Tea Party and conservative groups, many do not believe that Eric Holder will act against her. His refusal to appoint a private and independent investigator into this scandal has been met with criticism from those on the right side of the aisle.
Despite this mounting evidence of collusion between Democrats, the IRS, and the DOJ, President Obama claimed during an interview on Super Bowl Sunday that there was not a smidgen of corruption in regards to the matter.

Anal Jihad - Being Sodomized is a Great way to prepare for TNT.

Published on Dec 23, 2013

http://www.SickBias.com - Yes its true Islam is now promoting jihad by inserting bombs in your butt hole but first you must endure many many hours of anal intercourse in order to open your ass hole up to receive a large load of TNT in your anus. Yea lets be friends with these sick bastards.

 Sodomy

How to End an Abortion Debate Quickly

Whenever I get into a lengthy discussion or debate with a eugenicist (oops, I mean "pro-choicer") about abortion, eventually we get to the argument that since the mother and father do not want this child, and in most cases will live in poverty, abuse, and/or an orphanage - in other words, a life not worth living, I recommend that you consider asking this question:

Can you describe to me a situation that could happen to you in your life that would cause you to actually commit suicide?

This should not be rhetorical. Make them tell you how bad it would have to get in oder for them to really do it. And I don't mean to describe a situation in which he or she would think about committing suicide, I really mean actually carrying it out.

If the pro-choicer begins to describe a situation, then you have the moral high ground. In fact, I would go as far as saying that the character of your debate opponent is so questionable that you could claim that he or she should have no right to have a say in government policy anyway.

But if they say "No," they cannot describe such a situation, as I believe most will, then you can point out the moral of this exercise:

An innocent life is a gift that should take precedence over any worldly situation that life may be confronted with.