One of the real scumbags on America’s death row is pulling for Hillary Clinton.
I don’t have official confirmation of this mind you. But if I was a convicted death row inmate, convicted for killing my baby and my baby mama, who I also had happened to be married to at the time I whacked them, I’d be pulling for Hillary big time.
You see convicted death row inmate Scott Peterson and Hillary Clinton agree on something very close to their hearts: a core belief that an unborn child has zero rights.
The fact that he killed his wife says a great deal. But did they ever really prove that he did it. Some would say the evidence didn’t go far enough. They would argue that jury got suckered into having the heart strings played for the “wife AND child” story that the prosecutor put forward, and man if that wasn’t enough to just do him in.
That people could honestly be allowed to believe that an unborn “person” should count in a murder charge, well, in Scott Peterson’s mind I’m confidant he believes that’s just wrong.
And guess who agrees with him?
Yes, just a few days ago on NBC’s Meet The Press and on The View the nominee of the Democratic Party openly espouses the exact same position as the Scott Peterson defense did.
It takes either the most scientifically ignorant human walking the planet, or a person who simply can not tell the truth to make the argument that Peterson and Clinton subscribe to. Since 68% of the American public believes that Hillary rarely tells the truth about nearly anything so I’ll let you draw your own conclusions about her. As for the convicted death row inmate, I think he’s highly motivated by anything that will keep him alive a few days longer.
But given the science, the technology, the ultrasounds—now in three dimensions, the ability to hear the beating heart, trace the movement of the fingers and toes, and literally observe this person (using Hillary Clinton’s own words) as he or she grows and progresses, how can we as a nation allow a woman who believes the butchering of that life is moral be allowed to ever hold office?
What about the land of the free, and the home of the brave? What about “all men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights?”
What about all the piles of propaganda we heard last week about how Hillary Clinton cares so much about children?
What about the basic idea that “Thou shall not murder?”
What makes it a murder in the case of Scott Peterson’s conviction, and a sentence that he will pay with his life for, is what Hillary Clinton openly mocks and drips with disdain over.
Democrats are stupid people if they believe that their new platform that literally says we should be allowed to kill that child—just like Scott Peterson did—even up until the very moment of natural birth is what most Americans think is just, good, or in any way right.
Yet Hillary Clinton now stands on that platform as the standard bearer for the stupid and evil Democratic idea that killing a child—as he or she is coming into this life—is actually good.
So what does that say about her?
Well… I wouldn’t leave her alone with any kids.
So why would we consider letting her pick Supreme Court justices that would take her insane and immoral belief code and rewrite the American founding document through judicial activism? Why would we let her expand government power so that more and more of our tax dollars get used to commit genocide against babies like Connor Peterson?
Why would we as a nation stake our reputation to a woman whose belief system lines up with a convicted murderer on death row?
There has been much said about the lack of incredible choices in the general election before us in 2016. I’ve contributed to that discussion.
But can’t we all agree that someone who embraces the beliefs of a death row inmate is no more qualified to pick judges than someone who would ask to be commander in chief if say she had left our boys behind, lied to their families, and asked Congress what difference it made.