July Jobs Report: 164,000 Job Gains, 3.2% Wage Growth, 151 Million Working

by Christopher Paslay

Good news for the economy all around, as Trump’s policies continue to benefit all Americans.

Although economic growth has cooled some in the past few months, things are still looking up for Americans. More importantly, the Federal Reserve cut interest rates Wednesday, its first reduction since December 2008. Although savings accounts may feel the squeeze, lower interest rates will help Americans find affordable mortgages and negotiate auto loans, and will help them pay off their credit cards and student loans.

According to Markets Insider:

US employers added 164,000 jobs to the economy in July, falling in line with analyst estimates and pushing the nation’s labor force to a new record.
The national average wage rose 3.2% to $27.98 per hour, and the total number of jobs in the US hit 151 million. The unemployment rate remained 3.7%
A study conducted by Bloomberg looked at hiring across each industry and organized the July jobs data across those lines. One area it explored was how quickly those industries are adding employees.

The five industries that generated the fastest employment growth in July were:

Motor vehicles and parts, which added 7,200 jobs and has a current wage of $23.47
Offices of other health practitioners, which added 7,300 jobs and has a current wage of $23.29
Child day care serves, which added 8,100 jobs and has a current wage of $14.08
Logging, which added 400 jobs and has a current wage of $22.62
Couriers and messengers, which added 6,700 jobs and has a current wage of $19.02

Kirsten Gillibrand Scores 10 on the Vomit Meter

by Christopher Paslay

The pasty white senator from New York says it’s her duty to explain white privilege to suburban white women who voted for Trump.

Were you able to make it through all 54 seconds of the above video without vomiting all over the place? Neither could most people. Still, if you can’t stomach the video and still want to read what Kirsten Gillibrand says about her duty to lecture suburban white women who voted for Trump about their “white privilege,” the transcript is provided below (with analytical commentary). Enjoy.

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: “I don’t believe that it’s the responsibility of Cory and Kamala to be the only voice that takes on these issues of institutional racism, systemic racism in our country. I think as a white woman of privilege who is a U.S. senator running for president of the United States, it is also my responsibility to lift up those voices that aren’t being listened to.”

(Thank you, Kirsten, for acknowledging that you are indeed special and so much better than the rest of us.)

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: “And I can talk to those white women in the suburbs that voted for Trump and explain to them what white privilege actually is.”

(Yes Kirsten, please teach those good natured, family-oriented suburban women who voted for Trump how to see the world through the lens of skin color like you do so well.)

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: “That when their son is walking down the street with a bag of M&Ms in his pocket, wearing a hoodie, his whiteness is what protects him from not being shot.”

(Its was Skittles, not M&Ms. Oh, and by the way: The Trayvon Martin case was over seven years ago, so you might want to Google something else to talk about. And for the record, Martin was 17 years old, 5-11, and not only sucker-punched George Zimmerman for being a “creepy-ass-cracker,” but also pounded Zimmerman’s head off the cement, MMA style.)

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: “When their child has a car that breaks down and he knocks on someone’s door for help and the door opens and the help is given, it’s his whiteness that protects him from being shot.”

(So a black person comes to my door, and I have my gun, and my response is to shoot them? What universe do you live in?)

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: “That’s what white privilege in America is today.”

(Thanks for explaining that so accurately.)

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: “And so my responsibility is not only to lift up those stories, but explain to communities across America, like I did in Youngstown Ohio, to a young mother, that this is all of our responsibilities, and that together, we can make our community stronger.”

(Thank you, Kirsten, for lifting up those heartwarming stories and bringing us all together as one. Vomit! Puke! Gag!)

Alveda King Supports Trump. So Would MLK If He Were Alive.

by Christopher Paslay

Martin Luther King’s Dream — putting content of character over color of skin — is dead among liberals. Today, only conservatives and President Trump remain colorblind, favoring merit over pigmentation.

Content of character is dead among liberals. Gone. History. Kaput. Today, the most important thing for Democrats and their cadre of groupthink leftists is how many “boxes” you can check off: gay, lesbian, bi, trans, black, Hispanic, Native, female, Muslim . . . and so on and so forth. Or, put another way, diversity in reverse: non-male, non-white, non-heterosexual, non-Judeo-Christian, etc.

Hence today’s Democrats — the Check-Off Party. Or, if Check-Off is too harsh, perhaps this meme: the Perception Party. This works, too, since the main objective of leftists is to create the perception of fairness and equality among their members, and the perception of hatred and racism among their political enemies, regardless of whether these things exist in any form whatsoever in reality.

Case in point: On Sunday, President Trump tweeted the following, criticizing Elijah Cummings for the condition of his home district in Baltimore:

Rep. Elijah Cummings has been a brutal bully, shouting and screaming at the great men & women of Border Patrol about conditions at the Southern Border, when actually his Baltimore district is FAR WORSE and more dangerous. His district is considered the Worst in the USA.
Why is so much money sent to the Elijah Cummings district when it is considered the worst run and most dangerous anywhere in the United States. No human being would want to live there. Where is all this money going? How much is stolen? Investigate this corrupt mess immediately!

Although nowhere in the tweet is race mentioned, liberals and the mainstream media predictably cried racism, right on cue. What didn’t matter to them was the fact that the people of Baltimore, including the mayor, agreed that the district was indeed rat infested, dangerous, dilapidated, and in dire need of help. Trump’s tweet to Cummings was aggressive, sure, but not racist. And there are many Americans, both black and white alike, who feel that Trump was right to bluntly shine a light on the unacceptable conditions of Baltimore, that his spat with Cummings is ultimately resulting in bringing awareness to a situation that has long been ignored.

Reverend Alveda King, niece of MLK, didn’t think Trump’s tweet was racist at all. “All of that news is absolutely fake,” she said at a two-hour meeting Monday at the White House with inner-city faith leaders, some of whom left saying the president is concerned about people of all races.

According to the Washington Examiner:

Ms. King said Mr. Trump’s policies are working for black Americans.
“America is troubled,” Ms. King told reporters after the meeting. “If we say we’re color blind, we need to put on our glasses. We can see a troubled America, but we can [also] see a blessed America.”
She said employment rates are up in every segment of society, “including the black community.”
“Historically black colleges and universities under this president are being blessed,” she said. “The babies in the womb, the sick and poor and elderly, are being blessed.”
She added, “We have a president who’s listening. We have an opportunity to continue to be blessed. And I was glad to pray with him today.”

Bill Owens, a Trump supporter and the founder and president of the Coalition of African-American Pastors, also denied Trump’s tweets were racist, and pointed out that Trump goes after leaders from all backgrounds if he disagrees with them on a policy.

Of course, none of this matters to the left.

Tragically, liberals are not only hopelessly obsessed with race, religion, gender, and sexuality — choosing to view the world via these superficial lens instead of through a person’s values, beliefs, and actions — but they are successfully indoctrinating America’s young people to do the same. No longer is it acceptable to be “colorblind,” or to judge people by “the content of their character.” Incredibly, many liberals have suggested that the word “colorblind” is a code word for “white supremacy,” and that it’s our duty to monitor the world by race, religion, gender, and sexuality.

Amazingly, many Millennials don’t want to be colorblind, and find that way of viewing the world boring and archaic. Identity politics, especially in the form of preferential treatment for “victim” groups, has caused some youth to cling to their separate identities as a sort of ego fulfillment, as a way to have a tribal affiliation with those who share their same ideologies. In short, the power and rush gained from wearing their race, religion, gender, or sexuality on their shirtsleeve is more exciting and appealing than simply treating people as . . . well, people.

Which means merit and content of character is not only forgotten, but frowned upon. A person’s race, religion, gender, and sexuality come first, and what they think, say, or do comes second. As a result, two people could think, act, or do the same things, but depending on their group affiliation, one could be labeled a “social justice worrier,” while the other could be called a “hateful racist bigot.”

Is this the world MLK would want to live in? Is this what has become of his “dream”? I think not.

Reverend Alveda King Supports Trump and his merit-based world view, as do many inner city black pastors. And if MLK were alive in 2019, I bet he’d support President Trump, too.

Trump Signs 9/11 Victim Compensation Bill

by Christopher Paslay

President Trumps signs yet another piece of bipartisan legislation, continuing to find common ground among a divided Congress.

President Trump, the most admired man in America other than Barack Obama, continues to be one of the most productive presidents in modern American history. This morning he signed a bill that provides relief to victims of the September 11, 2001 terror attacks. As reported by the Daily Caller:

H.R.1327, or the “Never Forget the Heroes: James Zadroga, Ray Pfeifer, and Luis Alvarez Permanent Authorization of the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund Act,” provides full funding for the 9/11 victim compensation fund through 2092. The compensation fund provides for medical care and losses experienced by victims and first responders stemming from the deadly attacks, and is estimated to cost over $10 billion over the next ten years.
The president signed the bipartisan legislation during a special event in the Rose Garden, featuring the families of the bill’s namesakes, including their children, widows, parents, and siblings.
“Today, we come together as one nation to support our Sept. 11 heroes,” Trump said. “They answered terror with the emotional strength of true American warriors.”

President Trump’s ability to work with Congress and get things done is quite impressive, despite the fact the American press fails to adequately cover most of his achievements.

According to the Pew Research Center, “Between its inception in January 2017 and its final day on Jan. 3, the GOP-led 115th Congress enacted 442 public laws, the most since the 110th Congress (2007-09).” And most notably, almost 70 percent of these bills were bipartisan, the most in 20 years.

In Defense of Penn Law Professor Amy Wax

by Christopher Paslay

Supporting an immigration policy based on merit that accepts people from countries whose citizens have the ability to assimilate to American culture and values isn’t racist; it’s simply good policy.

(Note: A version of this article was published July 28th on the American Thinker.)

In 2001, Sonia Sotomayor said in a speech at Berkeley Law, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.”

Defending diversity — taking the position that things would be better off with more nonwhites and fewer whites — is at the very core of the toxic identity politics plaguing America today. The hard left doesn’t want to nominate another white male for president in 2020, or in the words of Politico, “a candidate that looks like Bernie or Joe.” In fact, according to most liberals, police departments would be better off with more nonwhites and fewer whites, as would fire departments, school districts, small businesses, Hollywood, Major League Baseball, U.S. Congress, and the Philadelphia Orchestra, to name a few places.

Whether this race-based view of progress is ultimately true is debatable. What’s not is the fact that it’s perfectly okay to call for more diversity in America — to publicly state things would be better off with more nonwhites and less whites.

Yet when Penn law professor Amy Wax mentioned the same premise only in reverse — that our country would be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites— liberals had a complete meltdown; the media vilified her as an intolerant racist, and after hundreds of Penn students signed a petition calling for Wax to be relieved of all teaching duties, Penn Law School issued a statement condemning her words.

To be fair to Professor Wax, she doesn’t advocate whites over nonwhites. But this didn’t stop Vox writer Zack Beauchamp, who was covering the National Conservatism conference where Wax was presenting a lecture on immigration, from creating this misunderstanding. According to Beauchamp’s recent article:

One panel on immigration — a major topic throughout the conference — stood out in particular. University of Pennsylvania law professor Amy Wax, no stranger to culture-war controversies, used her talk to argue for an immigration policy that would favor immigrants from Western countries over non-Western ones — “in effect,” she said, “taking the position that our country will be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites.” She believes this is not racist because her view is “grounded firmly in cultural concerns — doesn’t rely on race at all.”

Beauchamp’s article went viral, prompting those who attended the convention to jump to Wax’s defense. Yoram Hazony, an Israeli conservative, accused Beauchamp of misrepresenting Wax’s position. Although Hazony didn’t take a stance on Wax’s position, he stated on Twitter:

Zack misunderstood this passage from Wax’s paper, and Wax did not say what he claims she said. Wax advocated an immigration policy that favors immigrants with cultural affinities to the U.S. She emphasized that the position she was defending “doesn’t rely on race at all.”

Beauchamp insisted Hazony’s accusation was false, and that he accurately reported Wax’s comments. Beauchamp wrote:

But more important — and revealing — than his allegation of inaccuracy was his take on Wax’s argument. Stressing that he didn’t have a “position on Wax’s position,” he assailed the cries of racism aimed at Wax since she did not propose racial quotas explicitly and rooted her views in culture rather than biology.

The alarming thing about Beauchamp’s rush to vilify Wax is not just the hypocrisy of the matter (the fact that there exists a double standard in regards to “racism” among whites and nonwhites), but also the fact that Beauchamp is selectively interpreting Wax’s lecture on nationalism; a full transcript of Wax’s lecture was published by the Federalist and can be found here.

Beauchamp is wrong to label Wax a “racist,” and his selective excerpt from her lengthy presentation — purposefully taken out of context at a time when the full transcript wasn’t available to the public — proves that Beauchamp lacks professionalism and basic journalistic integrity. For those who take the time to read Penn Law professor Amy Wax’s full lecture, they’ll find that Wax analyzes the pros and cons of nationalism, but is especially drawn to a brand she calls “cultural distance nationalism.”

“According to this view,” Wax stated, “we are better off if our country is dominated numerically, demographically, politically — at least in fact, if not formally — by people from the First World, from the West, than by people from countries that have failed to advance.” In other words, Wax talks about a kind of immigration that favors people from technologically advanced countries with strong economies over countries that are poor and destitute, not only because immigrants from these countries may have more to offer America in terms of skills, but also because it may be easier for them to assimilate to American culture and values.

Which leads to the part of Wax’s lecture that Beauchamp strategically singled out for scrutiny:

Perhaps the most important reason that the cultural case for limited immigration remains underexplored has to do with that bête noire, race. Let us be candid: Europe and the First World, to which the United States belongs, remain mostly white for now. And the Third World, although mixed, contains a lot of nonwhite people. Embracing cultural distance, cultural distance nationalism, means in effect taking the position that our country will be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites.
Well, that is the result, anyway. So even if our immigration philosophy is grounded firmly in cultural concerns — doesn’t rely on race at all — and no matter how many times we repeat the mantra that “correlation is not causation,” these racial dimensions are enough to spook conservatives. As a result, today we have an immigration policy driven by fear: the fear of being accused of racism, white supremacy, xenophobia. Which has cowed and paralyzed opinion leaders, policymakers, politicians across the spectrum, and impeded their ability to think clearly.

Is Wax advocating a kind of immigration based on race that calls for whites over nonwhites? Absolutely not. She’s merely presenting a lecture that analyzes immigration based on culture and merit — giving preference to immigrants from countries with stable economies that provide their citizens with useful skills and the ability to assimilate to American values. In fact, she doesn’t believe that “our country will be better off with more whites and fewer nonwhites,” but suggests this is an inevitable side effect of cultural distance nationalism — a side effect that will be exploited by people who want to shut down conservatives’ immigration policy debate and accuse them of racism, white supremacy, and xenophobia.

Which is exactly what Zack Beauchamp has done. He’s misrepresented Wax’s words in an effort to brand conservatives as racist and to bully people like professor Wax into silence, and tragically he’s succeeded. But supporting an immigration policy based on merit that accepts people from countries whose citizens have the ability to assimilate to American culture and values isn’t racist; it’s simply good policy.

Ex-Miss Michigan Kathy Zhu Joins Women for Trump Coalition

by Christopher Paslay

After being stripped of her Miss Michigan crown for her conservative beliefs, Zhu joins #WomenforTrump Coalition Advisory Board.

Great news! Ex-Miss Michigan Kathy Zhu recently Joined the Women for Trump Coalition! According to CBS News:

Kathy Zhu, the former Miss Michigan who was stripped of her title last week after several offensive tweets surfaced, has joined Trump’s reelection campaign efforts. The official Team Trump twitter account welcomed her on board Thursday, calling her a “patriot who has continued to stand for American values despite being stripped of her crown.” . . .
Speaking at a Women for Trump event in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan Friday, Zhu claimed that being openly conservative is extremely difficult. “It’s harder, I think, than coming out as, honestly, gay,” she said.

Zhu was stripped of her 2019 crown last week because of two controversial tweets from 2017 and 2018:

The first tweet read, “There is a ‘try a hijab on’ booth at my college campus. So you’re telling me that it’s now just a fashion accessory and not a religious thing? Or are you just trying to get women used to being oppressed under Islam?”

The second tweet was as follows: “Did you know that the majority of black deaths are caused by other blacks? Fix problems within your own community first before blaming others.”

“Little attacks like those really, really diminishes the value and the trust of the word, ‘racism,'” Zhu responded in a twitter video.

Zhu is now putting her energy into something much more positive than splitting hairs over nonsensical accusations of racism: she’s working with conservative women to help President Trump get reelected.

“Team Trump welcomes Kathy Zhu to the Official #WomenforTrumpCoalition Advisory Board! [Kathy] is a patriot who has continued to stand for American values despite being stripped of her crown. Thank you for your support of President [Donald Trump],” Team Trump wrote Friday evening on Twitter.

According to the Daily Caller:

Zhu spoke at a Women for Trump luncheon Friday in Bloomfield Hills, Michigan, where she was greeted by a standing ovation, reported The Detroit Free Press. . . .
“I think that everything I’ve said is considered free speech because it is backed up by statistics, facts, something I have experiences or my opinions,” she continued, according to The Detroit Free Press. “I don’t have a racist bone in my body. I don’t think I am Islamophobic, but I am going to criticize something that doesn’t fit within my morals when I see it.”

Zhu supported Trump’s 2016 campaign when she was a teen, and is back to help the president a second time. Hopefully, Zhu can work her mojo and help Trump get reelected in 2020!

Pro-Trump, Pro-American Products Raising Millions for Charity

by Christopher Paslay

Trump-loving Americans donate millions to fallen soldiers and their families.

While Democrats and members of “The Squad” continue to trash America, President Trump, and our country’s brave law enforcement officers, patriotic Americans such as Rush Limbaugh and the pro-Trump apparel company PrintedKicks are raising millions of dollars for injured and fallen American soldiers.

As reported by Fox News:

The CEO of the Tunnel to Towers Foundation revealed Tuesday on “Fox and Friends” that radio host Rush Limbaugh‘s recently released Betsy Ross tee-shirt generated more than $2 million for the nonprofit organization. Frank Siller, who started the foundation in memory of his brother – a New York firefighter who lost his life on 9/11 – said that he is “beyond words” over the response to Limbaugh’s Betsy Ross shirt.
Limbaugh, who appeared on “Fox & Friends,” last week explained that he released the shirt to give people an opportunity to push back on those who trash American values and do not stand for American ideals. He explained that he and his wife came up with the idea for the shirt after former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick reportedly urged Nike to nix the release of a sneaker that featured a Betsy Ross flag over the flag’s perceived slavery-era connections. . . .
Siller explained that the foundation helps the families of fallen police officers, first responders and soldiers – many of whom left behind a grieving wife and children. The new funds have enabled the foundation to immediately pay off the mortgages of six heroes, and that is just the beginning, said Siller.

PrintedKicks, a small American-owned apparel company that makes a really cool pair of Trump sneakers (see here), will donate 100 percent of the profit the company makes from their stylish Betsy Ross sneakers to a charity that helps veterans suffering from PTSD. According to the Daily Caller:

Another company has come out with Betsy Ross flag-era sneakers, in a direct counter to Nike who recalled their flag-themed kicks when former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick said the design was reminiscent of the slave era. While other companies are likely concerned with making a profit off of a massive political statement, there’s a small time company that is 100 percent American owned and operated with a very different mission at hand. PrintedKicks, is a proudly pro-Trump, pro-police, and pro-military company, so it should come as no shock that they felt pretty opinionated about the Betsy Ross sneakers being removed so close to the 4th of July.

To purchase Rush’s “Stand Up for Betsy Ross” T-shirt, click here. To buy PrintedKick’s Betsy Ross sneakers, click here.

Kudos to Rush Limbaugh and PrintedKicks for supporting President Trump and America, and for raising money in support of our country’s injured and fallen soldiers.

President Trump Gives Religious Freedom Award to Muslim Imam

by Christopher Paslay

On July 17, the Trump administration officially recognized that Imam Abubakar Abdullahi of Nigeria selflessly risked his own life to save members of another religious community, who would have likely been killed without his intervention.

President Trump’s love of the First Amendment was on display last week when his Ministerial to Advance Religious Freedom gave away several awards to international faith leaders and human rights activists. One such recipient was Muslim Imam Abubakar Abdullahi of Nigeria, who selflessly risked his own life to save hundreds of Christians. According to the State Department:

On June 23, 2018, ethnic Fulani herdsmen, who are predominantly Muslim, launched coordinated attacks on 10 villages in Barkin Ladi, killing hundreds of ethnic Berom farmers, who are predominantly Christian. As Imam Abdullahi was finishing midday prayers, he and his congregation heard gunshots and went outside to see members of the town’s Christian community fleeing. Instinctively, the Imam ushered 262 Christians into the mosque and his home next to the mosque. The Imam then went outside to confront the gunmen and he refused to allow them to enter, pleading with them to spare the Christians inside, even offering to sacrifice his life for theirs. Although the gunmen killed 84 people in Nghar village that day, Imam Abdullahi’s actions saved the lives of hundreds more. Born in Bauchi State around 1936, the Imam has lived in Nghar for 60 years and led the Muslim community through the mosque, which was built on land provided by the Christian community. Imam Abdullahi’s courage in the face of imminent danger and his history of outreach across religious divides demonstrates his lifelong commitment to promoting interfaith understanding and peace.

The fact that the Trump administration gave a Muslim Imam such a prestigious honor is further proof against the president’s supposed “Islamophobia.” Trump’s harshest critics rarely judge his actions, rather, project their own bitterness onto him by willfully misinterpreting his intentions. As Jeffrey T. Brown stated in his recent American Thinker article, “It isn’t what Trump actually says or does that matters, it is what he ‘means.’ Trump’s motives, and ours, are provided for us countless times each day by a cadre of unhinged, hyper-emotionalized mental patients.”

An example of such feigned outrage was President Trump’s signing of Executive Order 13769, titled “Protecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United States.” The countries on this travel ban included two non-Muslim nations and excluded Indonesia, which has over 225 million Muslims, more than any other country in the world; in 2018 the Supreme Court agreed with the legality of the ban, and upheld Trump’s executive order. Despite the fact Obama had barred large groups of potentially dangerous immigrants from entering the United States at least six times – and the fact that Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both issued six immigrant bans – Trump was pegged as a xenophobe who hated Muslims.

As evidenced by Trump’s support for international religious freedom, his actions speak much louder than his critics’ false words.

Donald Trump is Second Most Admired Man in America

by Christopher Paslay

President Trump is the second most admired man in America – and the 14^th most admired man in the world – according to a new YouGov poll published in Newsweek magazine.

Well now. Donald J. Trump, the vicious racist and white supremacist who runs concentration camps on America’s southern border, is so awful that his fellow citizens voted him the second most admired man in America, according to a new YouGov poll published in Newsweek magazine.

President Trump is more admired than Clint Eastwood, Bill Gates, Dwayne Johnson, Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, the Dali Lama, Pope Francis, and Will Smith; the only man in America more admired than Donald Trump is Barack Obama.

On the world stage, Trump is #14; Bill Gates is #1. YouGov used the following methodology to compile the lists:

In December YouGov gathered open-ended nominations from panelists across 41 countries, asking them simply: “Thinking about people alive in the world today, which [man or woman] do you most admire?” These nominations were then used to compile a list of the 20 men and 20 women who received the most nominations and were nominated in at least four countries. An additional 10 popular local figures were added to the lists for individual countries.
In January we then used the lists to poll each of the 41 countries asking two questions: “who do you truly admire?”, where respondents could make multiple selections, and “who do you MOST admire?”, where they could only pick one. These two numbers were combined into a percentage share of admiration.

In short, President Trump is not only highly admired by Americans, but also by diverse groups of people across the globe.

On the women’s end of things, First Lady Melania Trump is the third most admired woman in America, ahead of Ellen DeGeneres (gag!), Queen Elizabeth II, Oprah Winfrey, Condoleezza Rice, Hillary Clinton (puke!), Nikki Haley, and Malala Yousafzai; the only women in America more admired than the First Lady are Michelle Obama (#1) and Ruth Bader Ginsburg (#2).

On the world stage, First Lady Melania Trump is the 19^th most admired woman; former First Lady Michelle Obama is #1.

Trump is Smashing Political Correctness to Bits. And It’s Refreshing.

by Christopher Paslay

Trump’s smashing of the PC rulebook is a breath of fresh air.

Trump is driving progressives insane. He’s taking their whiny, disingenuous cries of “racism,” putting mustard on it, and eating it for dinner. Afterward he wipes his mouth with the tablecloth and burps, and doesn’t even say “excuse me.” As president he probably should say “excuse me,” but he is Trump after all, and that’s why so many Americans love him so much.

Wednesday night, at a re-election rally in Greenville, N.C., Trump once again called out The Squad for their anti-Semitic and anti-American behavior, and for their blatant disrespect of the Office of the President. For a brief moment during Trump’s speech, a portion of the audience broke into a chant of “Send her back!” in reference to Ilhan Omar, who’s taken a soft stance on al Qaeda and has been insensitive to the victims of the 9-11 terrorist attacks.

Almost immediately, the mainstream media went bonkers. Former Barack Obama speechwriter Jon Favreau tweeted this:

The crowd at Trump’s rally chanting “send her back” after the President viciously and dishonestly attacked Ilhan Omar is one of the most chilling and horrifying things I’ve ever seen in politics.

“Trump is stoking the most despicable and disturbing currents in our society,” Bernie Sanders said of the rally. “And that very hatred and racism fuels him.”

The Huffington Post billed the re-election rally in Greenville with this banner headline: Hate Show in NC: ‘Let Them Leave.’

Interestingly, Candice Owens, African American conservative and founder of the Blexit movement, had a different perspective on the rally and the “racist” chant. In an interview with Laura Ingraham, she stated:

“They’re upset by it because they’re more or less seeing the exact same thing that happened in 2016. I feel like I have deja vu watching this. We just listened to Chris Hahn condemn an entire audience as all being racists. ‘Everyone who chanted that is racist.’ I mean, there’s no intellectual depth to that analysis. And that is so problematic. He thinks that every black person is going to wake up and magically vote Democrat because of that chant. That’s insulting to black people. To think that we’re so foolish, as you said, that we’d vote against our own self-interest. We’re doing amazing under this economy. It’s very clear what this chant meant. It simply meant if you don’t like this country, if you don’t like America, you are welcome to leave. Obviously the president is not looking to deport Ilhan Omar. So anyone who is taking it that seriously, is completely misreading culture right now. And at the end of the day they’re going to be upset when Trump wins by a larger margin in 2020.”

On Thursday, perhaps to calm growing tension, President Trump took the high road and disavowed the chant. According to Politico:

President Donald Trump claimed Thursday he “was not happy” with the crowd at his campaign rally in North Carolina the previous evening for chanting “send her back,” after he had goaded the audience with a fiery attack on Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.).
“I was not happy with it. I disagree with it. But again, I didn’t say that. They did. But I disagree with it,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, adding that he “started speaking very quickly” in an attempt to silence the rally attendees. “It was quite a chant, and I felt a little bit badly about it.”

Still, the Left is obsessed with control, and feels entitled to oversee every aspect of our culture. Progressives and the left-leaning media not only want to define their own positions, but want to define their opponents’ ideas, too. In order to do this, they rely heavily on political correctness, which, at its core, is the policing of language and thought. Certain words and ideas, stated by certain people, can be labeled “social justice” or “hate speech,” depending on which identity group they belong to. And of course, the Left gets to decide.

Jeffrey T. Brown summed this up perfectly in his recent American Thinker article:

It is a fascinating process, watching yourself being defined by people who actively practice what they pretend to condemn. The awful things that they project upon us don’t spring from our minds, but from theirs. Those terrible thoughts and dark motives are bred in their own warped psyches. The left . . . has rewarded itself with the exclusive right to interpret our every word and thought, and somehow they always conclude the same thing. We are evil, but they are not.

Trump’s smashing of the PC rulebook is a breath of fresh air. For decades, the Left has been painstakingly laying the foundations of political correctness throughout our culture – co-opting language, thought, and ideas to fit their own agenda. Literally overnight, words take on new meanings because liberal intellectuals – bolstered by ivory tower academics and “advocacy” journalists – have decided to conveniently redefine them. As evidenced by Colin Kaepernick’s objection to Nike’s Betsy Ross flag sneaker, a once beloved symbol of pride can suddenly become a reference to hate. And if someone tests these new bounds, they are usually attacked with such ferocity that the person is either forced to publicly grovel and ask for forgiveness, or get destroyed by the PC police.

From the beginning, the Left has been unable to control Trump. He’s taken their PC playbook and ripped it to shreds, page by page. This is why he’s so dangerous to Democrats: not because he’s a racist or sexist or xenophobe, but because he renders such disingenuous and overused labels completely powerless. Trump’s enemies throw these names at him constantly, one after the other, day and night, and nothing seems to slow him down. In fact, he is indeed energized by them.

As Candice Owens so aptly stated, Trump and his supporters aren’t “racist,” and neither was the chant at Wednesday night’s rally. The perspective that we are all haters is just that – it’s a perspective, one take on reality, and a disingenuous one at that. But America is diverse and there are many interpretations of Trump’s spat with The Squad, and more and more Americans are now having the courage to say so publicly. Of course, if progressives and the left-leaning establishment media took the time to actually listen to what Trump supporters had to say they might know this. But progressives don’t want a dialogue, they want a monologue, where they define every term in order to control every argument.