Here, by the way, is what misogynistic terrorism looks like:
Ooops, sorry, that's....well, an exaggeration, anyway.
Let's try that again:
You'll note there's not a Republican presidential candidate anywhere in that picture, or even off-camera. Whereas it does bear a striking resemblance to the products of Planned Parenthood butcher shops and death factories....
...,just a few years further down the life cycle.
Which reveals a great deal about the inspiration of the Empress's clumsy, ham-fistedly overheated rhetoric:
Hillary Rodham Clinton is drawing parallels between terrorists and the Republican presidential candidates when it comes to their views on women.
She says at an event in Ohio that Republican efforts to cut access to health centers and opposition to abortion rights are "extreme" and likens it to "terrorist groups" and "people who don't want to live in the modern world."
]Mrs.] Clinton says the policies of Republican presidential candidates are "out of date and out of touch." She specifically cites candidates Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and John Kasich.
Pot, kettle, black, game, set, match.
Mrs. Clinton was always going to engage in such smears, of course. She's the erstwhile Queen of Feminazism, so it was inevitable on that basis alone. What is noteworthy is that she's having to do so now, so early in the 2016 cycle, as opposed to a year from now, in the heated home stretch of the general campaign. It's defensive, in other words, not offensive, aimed less at Rubio, Bush III, Kasich, et al than it is at what should be the unassailable core, the very impregnable heart, of her base support: single women. Of all her presumptive base demographics, that's the one that one would think could be taken for granted as a "gimmie" that will always be behind her no matter what.
And yet here's the old puffgut, frantically pandering to feminists in order to shore up their support. Not a good sign for a campaign whose sole rationale is "First! Woman! President!"
Neither is this West Virginia survey:
The poll also noted about 36% of those likely to vote in the Democrat presidential race supported Hillary Clinton, while 32% supported Bernie Sanders. About 32% remained undecided.
[Mrs.] Clinton was recognized by nearly all of the survey’s respondents while Sanders could not be rated by a third of respondents.
With a third less name-recognition, Weekend Bernie is neck and neck with Hillary in a State in which she trounced Barack Obama in 2008 by forty points.
What could explain such a stark contrast and rapid fade? Americans are finally generally seeing Mrs. Clinton as "a shady liar whose server shenanigans suggest willful wrongdoing":
“Liar” is the first word that comes to mind more than others in an open-ended question when voters think of [Mrs.] Clinton. “Arrogant” is the word for Trump and voters say “Bush” when they think of Bush. [hyuk]
Oh, but it doesn't stop there:
If you combine "liar, dishonest, untrustworthy, crook, untruthful, criminal, deceitful, email, Benghazi, corrupt, and crooked", that totals 61.9% of all responses. "Woman"? Just 5.6%.
Hence, what the RNC is whinily but accurately describing as her "inflammatory rhetoric". And rest assured, she means every syllable of it. But she wouldn't be saying it now if her campaign wasn't spiraling down the drain.
Metaphorically speaking, it's starting to look like the grisly pics above.
Ironic that this "terrorism" was self-inflicted, huh?