Posted on 11/08/2018 2:29:52 AM PST by kevcol
“On the campaign trail, you called yourself a nationalist,” she began. “Some people saw that as emboldingly white nationalist. Now people are also saying…”
Trump interrupted her, saying, “I don’t know why you’d say that — such a racist question.”
She kept going. “There are some people who are saying the Republican Party is seen as supporting white nationalists because of that rhetoric.”
Trump replied, “Honestly? … Let me tell you, that’s a racist question.”
The Washington Press Corps was floored.
.
.
“This president said he was a nationalist … Yamiche asked a real question because there is a concern about saying he is a nationalist. He is a white man who is a nationalist. There are people who are concerned this is code for ‘white nationalist.'”
Ryan said Yamiche is now left with a “residue of hate.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...
Boo hoo !!!
SO sick of this cr@p!!!
She has more than a residue of something smellier
HOWEVER, it is how you interpret the word that influences the discussion.
You say he is a patriot and I certainly agree. Sort of implicit in MAGA, I would think.
By the way, I should disclose right upfront that I don't personally like PDJT and have said so in posts here on FR since he was elected. I did vote for him because...because I sure as Hell wasn't voting for HRC. I don't like him mainly because of his big talking, flamboyant, careless NYC billionare style of expressing himself because it is so grating and, well, frankly, not very presidential. But you've got to accept him for what he is and also admit he does keep things stirred up.
That said, saying PDJT is a nationalist doesn't make him any less patriotic than anyone else and certinly a lot more patriotic than all of the elite superior people on the liberal left and in the MSM who have been attacking him continuously since before the 2016 election.
Among the many things nationalism stands for to mainstream conservative Americans are: secure national borders, respect for law and enforcement of same, respect for American history, traditions and culture, preeminent military strength, a vibrant and growing economy that has its foundation in American citizens holding good paying jobs in America, etc. There is nothing within the mainline conservative definition of nationalism that explicitly or implicitly advocates racism.
Now there are white racist groups and America haters on the left that have cooked up their own definitions of nationalism that do incorporate racist elements. But those definitions are simply made-up to serve those group's own self-serving interests. Those definitions and their advocates should be denounced for what they are: racists.
This condemnation not only includes the obvious white racists on the right but also the anti-white supremacy white liberals on the left who talk out of both sides of their mouth on the issue. The anti-white racists are insidious; saying “I'm not anti-white” when called to account in uncontrolled public settings, and spewing really vile and very undifferentiated racial hatred for whites when they feel they are in a safe, unaccountable setting among fellow travelers. By the way, did I mention they (the left/liberals) are also mostly socialists and communists?
Anyway...
To the liberal/left, nationalism = racism.
Using this reporters “logic,”
If a white man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a white racist,
Then
A black man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a black racist,
A latino man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a latino racist, and
An asian man saying “I'm a nationalist.” is a asian racist,
etc. (fill in the blank)
We know this is faulty logic because any reasonable definition of “nationalism” (especially as it applies to the United States) does not incorporate racial preference in anything.
What it does is express openly a fundamental preference for ones own country and an elevation of respect for it. These things are an anathema to the internationalist left.
Conservatives need to shift the emphasis in this conversation away from the southern border. The race element (brown, mostly latino) drowns out the fact that they (the caravan group and all the other crossers)all intend to enter the United States illegally; that is, without first receiving authority to do so. This includes the supposed "asylum seekers." Apparently, Mexico just isn't good enough for them to make their application and wait. (Although, to be fair, stay in Mexico and wait for approval is what some immigration activist lawyers are reportedly now telling the real asylum seekers among the caravan's travelers.)
Let's start focusing on the other group illegally inside the country. There is a statistic being cited stating that about 40% of the illegal immigrants in the United States are visa "overstays." These persons entered the country on legitimate visas and deliberately didn't go home when they expired. Those persons come from all over the world, including Europe, so shifting focus to them should dilute the argument that imigration enforcement is being driven solely by racism.
Some analysis is needed to breakdown that 40% number in order to develop a nuanced discussion. What countries are they from? What purpose did they state on their visa application? Are there any political, social, educational, racial, sexual, educational, economic class background trends in the data? When apprehended, where have they been? How have they been supporting themselves? Etc.
Ultimately a profile of various types of visa overstayers (new word?) should emerge.
Personally, I would like to see this trend analysis applied to some sort of risk-based insurance/performance bond requirement that the visa applicant must satisfy as part of the application process. The higher the assessed risk of an overstay, the higher the face amount of the bond and the higher the bond maker's fee. Set it so the visa applicant is taking out a bond to cover all of the welfare, incarceration and administrative costs associated with finding and deporting them should they deliberately overstay. Create an incentive for the home country insurers to ensure the potential visa overstayers come back home. Show some scalability in the terms and when the policy/bond is deemed forfeit to incentivize the insurer to actively seek and return overstayers.
Forget "la migra," the home country insurance investigators/bond recovery agents are after me! Bail recovery agent vs deportation proceedings; which do you think would get an overstayer out of the country faster?
I'll bet you could initially implement it through Executive Order. Yeah, Congress wouldn't like it and there would probably the lawsuits and court stays. But we wouldn"t be talking solely about the caravans coming up from the south anymore.
She started out as a fat bag of racist hate to begin with.
These are sick twisted people to constantly contort everyone and everything said into racism. Disgusting.
All of those racist lib reporters should go and pound sand. Any “Normal” in the country knows they are all racist, because I have been told that being white automatically makes me a racist.
Yet another lib circular argument.
We're sending all these students to college to learn how to hate us, and we can't understand why so many hate us.
Black women with bad attitude — one of America’s cancers.
It's impossible to have an intelligent discussion with someone who can only view the world through the lens of race.
I love that he just cuts them off and does not even accept the premise of their questions. He needs to go one further and start questioning them after they state their stupid premises. In this situation, something like:
“Can you name me a President who wasn’t a nationalist?”
“Why does nationalism have to be associated with racism?”
And then just tell them, I reject your premise. Putting America first is not racist, it’s American and it’s American nationalism.
I don’t usually type so much, ever, and especially at 0730 or whatever time it was .. lol !
Just struck me as something that needed sayin’.
However I feel represents “the truth” no matter the reality of your logic or intentions in what you say. /sarc
I truly don’t know how these people even get through a day. They have to be awake all night conjuring up what they are going to come up with to complain about when daylight arrives.
Don’t most of us just listen to speeches no matter who the speaker is and move on without picking out one or two words that offend us? I don’t know if I heard the president say “nationalist” but if I did, it didn’t mean anything to me other than he is the president of this country and proud of it!
Now if the president said, I’m going to issue an Executive Order making the USA a WHITE ONLY COUNTRY - I could see getting upset but until then, they just need to stop picking and choosing what offends them which anymore seems to be everything and it is REALLY, REALLY getting old!!!
When liberals don't like something but can't specifically identify their objection, they call a "code" for something they CAN identify.
She NOW has a residue of hate?
She was racist when she asked the question, and she is racist now.
The residue of hate seeping out is just because she is upset she got called for it.
Thanks for your last statement. I think it fits our times perfectly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.