March 24, 2015, - 2:14 pm
Chelsea Clinton & Jimmy Kimmel Teach Me A New Hipster Word Amid Much Clintonista-Slobber
*** SCROLL DOWN FOR UPDATE ***
If you thought Jimmy Kimmel’s recent pandering infomercial for Barack Obama was bad, you should watch video of last night’s slobber-fest Kimmel had over Chelsea Clinton. Whatever happened to the good old days of Amy Carter, when former American Presidents’ daughters went off into the sunset and lived normal lives?
And what the hell happened to Jimmy Kimmel? He used to be irreverent. He used to be iconoclastic. And, above all, he used to be funny. Now, he’s just a junior version of bitter, old, stubborn liberal, David Letterman. He panders to celebrities he used to mock. And he is a total butt-snorkeler when it comes to liberal politicians. So it goes with Dr. Chelsea Clinton, Ph.D. (likely in B.S.).
Chelsea Clinton isn’t even a politician. She’s just the fortuitous (for her) combination of the sperm and egg of two immoral, cheating, lying liberal politicians who might have had sex once, before her father became the self-anointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Hawaiian Tropic Bikini Contest Court. But Jimmy Kimmel gave Chelsea Clinton top billing on his late night show, last night, ahead of more famous, more popular celebs, like Adam Carolla. And Kimmel pandered on and on and on, as Chelsea Clinton claimed that Bill Clinton changed his new granddaughter’s diapers. Um, do you really believe that? “Stars . . . they’re just like us!” She also claimed that she is a big fan of action movies. Again, if you believe that, I have some Whitewater stock and Benghazi e-mails to sell you. Then, the little Clinton jewelette and Kimmel did some promotion of some new group called, “Serve a Year,” asking Americans to take a whole year off and volunteer. Of course, it’s really not about that. Serve a Year is a project of the Clinton Foundation, so this whole thing is just a major pimping of Hillary for Prez. I think we’ve already served eight years-plus to the Clintons’ throne. We don’t need any more. I guess they don’t realize that because of liberal economic policies (like ObamaCare!), most Americans are hurting and can’t afford to work for a whole year for free.
Oh, and by the way, while they were pimping us on all things Clinton, I learned a new pretentious phrase from Dr. Chelsea Clinton:
“food insecure.”
Huh? Sounds like a hifalutin’ phrase for anorexic or extremely fat but hiding binge eating. Nope. It’s a hifalutin’ phrase for something else.
Chelsea Clinton was telling us how concerned she is about the Earth and its inhabitants (so concerned that she spends more than most people make in a year on fancy designer duds–let them eat cake!). She decried what she claims were over 50 million Americans who are “food insecure.” Apparently, this is a fancy, New Age, hipster-pseudo-intellectual way of saying, “hungry” or “in danger of being hungry.” But don’t you dare say that in simple, plain, country bumpkin, regular-people-speak. The people who know better than you because they wear environmentally-friendly hemp clothing dyed with coffee and tea instead of toxic pigments (and then fly in private jets, as Chelsea Clinton, Ph.D. does) have decided that the new cool phrase to show they care (and couldn’t actually care less) is “food insecurity.”
James Bovard wrote about the phoniness and fakery of the “food insecurity” pimps, last fall, in the Wall Street Journal:
On Wednesday the Agriculture Department released the results of its annual Household Food Security in the United States survey for 2013. According to the USDA survey, 14.3% of U.S. households—some 49 million Americans—were “food insecure at least some time during the year in 2013.” The decrease from 14.5% of households in 2012 was “not statistically significant.” Yet if the past is any guide, the survey will be wrongfully invoked by politicians and pundits as proof of a national hunger crisis.
Is being “food insecure” the same as going hungry? Not necessarily. The USDA defines a “food insecure” household in the U.S. as one that is “uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food” at times during the year. The USDA notes: “For most food-insecure households, the inadequacies were in the form of reduced quality and variety rather than insufficient quantity.”
The National Academy of Sciences urged the USDA in 2006 to explicitly state that its food-security survey results are not an estimate of nationwide hunger. The USDA responded by dropping any mention of “hunger” in the survey’s response categories. Nevertheless, the survey’s results continue to be pervasively misrepresented as an accurate measure of hunger in America.
As Bovard noted, the term “food insecurity” is used to up-sell Congress and the American people on an alleged need for even more food stamps and entitlements. But Bovard noted something that isn’t a surprise to you or me, but might be to most people:
Though the food-security survey results are often touted as evidence of widespread hunger, another USDA survey debunked that conclusion. The agency’s Agricultural Research Service conducts periodic surveys of “What We Eat in America.” The most recent survey (2009-10) revealed that children ages 2 to 11 in households with less than $25,000 in annual income consume significantly more calories than children in households with incomes above $75,000.
Unfortunately, the Obama administration is resisting disclosures that could explain the paradoxical relationship between food stamps and food insecurity.
By the way, Doc Chelsea Clinton’s baby has parents in an income category well above that 75 Grand.
Jimmy Kimmel, of course, didn’t challenge a thing Chelsea Clinton said because, after all, he wants her mother to be President and Chelsea to be President after that.
That’s not funny. And neither, anymore, is Jimmy Kimmel.
He’s “sense of humor insecure.”
**** UPDATE: By the way, forgot to mention this. If you’ll note in one of the videos, Chelsea Clinton unintentionally outs mom Hillary in yet another lie. She admits that when Hillary Clinton was publicly begging Chelsea Clinton to have a baby, she already knew that Chelsea Clinton was pregnant. But she pretended she didn’t to get public sympathy. And be in the public spotlight in a positive, grandmotherly way. Clinton Grandmothers . . . they’re just like us! Nothing with these people is real, genuine, or sincere in any way. All staged.
More Chelsea/Jimmy BS – Get Out Your Barf Bag . . .
Tags: Chelsea Clinton, Clinton Foundation, First Daughters, food insecure, food insecurity, Jimmy Kimmel, Jimmy Kimmel Chelsea Clinton, Serve a Year
“She’s just the fortuitous (for her) combination of the sperm and egg of two immoral, cheating, lying liberal politicians who might have had sex once, before her father became the self-anointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Hawaiian Tropic Bikini Contest Court.”
Does anyone actually believe Chelsea is Bill’s biological daughter? He shoot blanks, or so he’s told his countless number of mistresses. Chelsea has the unmistakable lips and face of Webb Hubbell.
GW: Hence the word, “might” in that sentence. DS
Gary Welsh on March 24, 2015 at 2:26 pm