Crenshaw: House resolution against Trump was “pure political theater”

Crenshaw: House resolution against Trump was “pure political theater”

Rep. Dan Crenshaw perfectly described the craziness that was on display Tuesday afternoon in the House of Representatives as “pure political theater.” Speaker Nancy Pelosi, usually the epitome of process and upholding the rules of the House, allowed herself to be swept away in her disgust with President Trump, only to find the House session devolve into chaos. That chaos led to her being ruled out of order and she was (briefly) forbidden from speaking on the House floor for the rest of the day. Go to your room, Nancy, and think about what you have done.

Crenshaw is right, of course. The drama in the House Tuesday was the kind of made-for-television drama that only Hollywood could aspire to write. Proving that Washington, D.C. is Hollywood on the Potomac, Pelosi allowed a vote on a resolution to condemn President Trump as a racist over some tweets. Tweets. Truth is stranger than fiction these days.

Pelosi erred in her overwrought speech leading up to the vote. She went too far when she labeled Trump’s tweets as racist. It turns out that it’s a no-no to call a president, any president, a racist on the floor of the House. Her own behavior was ruled out of order and announced by her right-hand man, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) announced the parliamentarian’s decision against Pelosi, stating that by calling the remarks by Trump racist, she had violated the House’s rules.

“The chair is prepared to rule. The words of the gentlewoman from California contain an accusation of racist behavior on the part of the president. As memorialized in Chapter 29, Section 65.6, characterizing an action as racist is not in order,” House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said on the floor ahead of the vote.

“The chair relies on the precedent of May 15, 1984, and finds that the words should not be used in debate,” he continued.

The House vote was 240 – 187, with four Republicans voting with the Democrats. Independent Justin Amash also voted yes. The four Republicans are Rep. Hurd (TX), Rep. Upton (MI), Rep. Fitzpatrick (PA), and Rep. Brooks (IN). Rep. Brooks is not running for re-election. It was a symbolic vote to virtue-shame President Trump and a fund-raising vehicle.

The largely symbolic resolution that passed Tuesday evening resolves that the House “strongly condemns President Donald Trump’s racist comments that have legitimized and increased fear and hatred of new Americans and people of color.” It now moves to the GOP-controlled Senate, which isn’t expected to take it up.

Add this toothless resolution to all the other votes taken by the Democrats in the House that go nowhere. Since the Democrats took back majority control of the House last January, there is no signature legislation to point to for them to tell the folks back home. All too often, they simply dwell on their hatred of President Trump and let personal attacks override the actual work of Congress. This resolution and what followed is a perfect example of the state of Congress.

Crenshaw voted no on the resolution.

As he noted in a tweet the day before, he checks Twitter daily to comment on the latest craziness. He said that no, Pelosi is not a racist and that President Trump shouldn’t suggest the women leave the country. In the current political atmosphere, he’ll never lack for something to tweet about.

Granted, the silencing of the Speaker of the House on the floor was quite unusual, but the most incredible part of this drama, for me, was when the chair was vacated by Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Missouri. It was a move I have never seen, that’s for sure, in all my years of being a C-SPAN junkie. He left in disgust over the bitter partisanship and bickering seen during the debate. He noted that the opportunity to escalate is taken too often. He’s over it.

“We want to just fight,” Cleaver, a pastor, said, balling his fists to demonstrate the exchanges. Then, in a move that House veterans said they had never seen before, he declared, “I abandon the chair,” put down the gavel and strode off.

Cleaver is normally a mild-mannered man who often talks about civility and both sides working together. He has a page on his House website devoted to his reflections and tweets on Fridays about the subject.

“Our differences only become virtuous when we discuss them with civility and statesmanship,” he writes on his website. “When we allow hyperpartisanship to control the conversation, what once was a virtue becomes the downfall of a divided nation.”

The problem for Democrats like Cleaver is that the far-left of his party has no intention of being civil or working with anyone but themselves. All you have to do is watch an interview with one of the Squad, or all four of them, as I did when I saw a part of their interview this morning with Gayle King on the CBS morning show. They proudly said they make no attempts to even speak with Speaker Pelosi. It is a show of weakness on Pelosi’s part, in my opinion, that she lets herself get in the middle of all the craziness as she did with this resolution. She desperately wants to keep control of the House in 2020 and she is reading the writing on the wall – regular American voters don’t like the Squad.


The Chris Pratt/Gadsden shirt nontroversy

The Chris Pratt/Gadsden shirt nontroversy

There was an attempt by a rather pint-sized rage mob to gin up anger at actor Chris Pratt for his choice of T-shirt. By pint-sized, I mean, five to seven people. By gin up anger, I mean claiming Pratt’s choice of wearing a T-shirt by – featuring an American flag with the Gadsden snake and “Don’t Tread One Me” slogan – was somehow a white supremacist slogan.

Yahoo Movies U.K. even wrote a round-up of the almost non-existent enmity towards the Guardians of the Galaxy and Parks & Rec star in hopes of giving the story legs. Here’s the original version from yesterday with the headline Chris Pratt criticized for ‘white supremacist’ T-shirt (thanks WaybackMachine!):

Chris Pratt is facing criticism over a T-shirt he was pictured wearing featuring a controversial symbol.

The Marvel star’s top shows the American flag with a coiled snake over the top and a message underneath which reads “Don’t Tread On Me.”

The writing and snake combo on its own is depicted on the Gadsden flag; a symbol created by Christopher Gadsden, a Charleston-born brigadier general in the Continental Army.

It came to prominence during the Revolutionary War of the US by colonists who wanted independence from Great Britain.

Although it is one of the symbols and flags used by the U.S. Men’s Soccer Team, over the years the flag has been adopted by Far Right political groups like the Tea Party, as well as gun-toting supporters of the Second Amendment.

It has therefore become a symbol of more conservative and far right individuals and, according to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission of the US, it also is “sometimes interpreted to convey racially-tinged messages in some contexts.”

The EEOC quote is heavily manipulated because the commission also said, “Importantly, the Commission did not find that the Gadsden Flag in fact is a racist symbol.“ Details, details.

Here it is today. Yahoo Movies UK decided to not only do an almost complete re-write of the article but they also stripped the original author’s name (italics original).

Update: This article was updated on 17 July with the initial headline, ’Chris Pratt criticised for ‘white supremacist’ T-shirt’ being amended to ‘Chris Pratt criticised for T-shirt choice.’ References to White Supremacism in this article have been removed.

Chris Pratt is facing criticism over a T-shirt he was pictured wearing featuring a controversial symbol.

The Marvel star’s top shows the American flag with a coiled snake over the top and a message underneath which reads “Don’t Tread On Me.”

The writing and snake combo on its own is depicted on the Gadsden flag; a symbol created by Christopher Gadsden, a Charleston-born brigadier general in the Continental Army.

It came to prominence during the Revolutionary War of the US by colonists who wanted independence from Great Britain.

Although the symbol has a non-racial history – it is has been used by the U.S. men’s soccer team and Metallica – over the years it has also been adopted by political groups like the Tea Party and some Libertarian groups, as well as gun-toting supporters of the Second Amendment.

Whoops! That’s a pretty big slap at the author – who is probably paid by the click – meaning they’ll never see a hint of cash. The fact Yahoo UK also bothered to re-write the piece deserves a bit of praise.

Yahoo still believes seven people counts as “many” – for some bizarre reason – still making it sound like there’s some controversy. Of course, there isn’t a controversy at all, except for maybe the seven people who were angered by Pratt’s T-shirt.

I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention Forged’s statement on the T-shirt and Pratt’s association with them from earlier today.

View this post on Instagram

🚨PLEASE READ AND SHARE🚨 We at @forgedclothing would like to address the ridiculous accusations that @prattprattpratt supports white supremacy because he wears our “Don’t Tread On Me” T-Shirt. First and foremost, we are a Navy SEAL-founded, patriotic, and military-inspired brand. Our CEO and members of our Forged team served alongside military service members of all races, cultures, and ethnicities. As we fought for our country, many of us wore the 1st Navy Jack flag on the sleeves of our uniforms, which the Gadsden military-authorized flag is based on. This incredibly powerful symbol was one of the first flags flown by our Continental Navy since 1776 and is still widely used by our military forces today. Secondly, @prattprattpratt has been a great friend and loyal supporter of Forged since our paths crossed back in 2011. Since then, his support has helped both @forgedclothing and the @murphchallenge raise millions of dollars for military and law enforcement families and foundations. He has never ONCE asked for a dime in return and has always used his own funds and resources to help promote these campaigns in honor of others. @prattprattpratt is by far one of the most humble and selfless Americans we have ever known. We will ALWAYS have his back. And finally, we are not @nike. The four tweets that have been posted by small-minded people with myopic views (one of which has already been deleted) DO NOT scare us. We will not back down and recall our Gadsden Flag shirts. Instead, we are going to re-release this design. So to the few ignorant critics offended by our patriotism and Chris Pratt’s patriotism…Standby. This one is for you! 🇺🇸 PLEASE SHARE THIS MESSAGE AND HELP US SUPPORT @prattprattpratt AGAINST THESE ACCUSATIONS. __ #Forged #ForgedClothing #IAmForged #GadsdenFlag #Patriotic #American #ChrisPratt #Navy #NavySEALs #USNavySEALs #VeteranOwned #VeteranOperated #StrengthThroughAdversity

A post shared by Forged® (@forgedclothing) on Jul 17, 2019 at 7:59am PDT

Smart work by those folks at Forged (who do make good T-shirts and come highly recommended by me).

Exit video featuring Reason’s Robby Soave discussing deceptive trends and stories.

Oh, for those wondering, Pratt gave to Obama in 2012.


Union Bosses Are Going Ballistic Over Trump’s Court Victory Curbing Government Union Power

Union Bosses Are Going Ballistic Over Trump’s Court Victory Curbing Government Union Power

Government union bosses have been seething ever since Trump issued executive orders limiting their power in the federal workplace. Now, they’re madder than ever.

On Tuesday, more than a year after President Trump issued three executive orders to curb government union power and save taxpayer money, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit reversed a lower court’s ruling last year striking the executive orders down.

One of the main goals of the executive orders has been to curtail the use of tax dollars to conduct union business, which the Office of Personnel Management estimated, cost taxpayers $174 million in 2016.

Additionally, as the Washington Post summarized last year:

“They require agencies to negotiate union contracts in less than a year. And they direct managers to move more aggressively to fire poor performers or employees involved in misconduct, limiting to one month a last-chance grace period for improvement that now can last up to 120 days. Agencies must also disclose details about an employee’s record to other federal offices considering hiring someone who has been fired or disciplined.” [Emphasis added.]

Not surprisingly, more than a dozen unions filed a lawsuit in district court challenging the orders.

Ironically, when polled on whether they support the administration’s efforts to make it easier to fire people, a slight majority of federal civilian employees polled last year supported the executive orders,

In Tuesday’s ruling, a three-judge panel ruled unanimously that the lower court lacked jurisdiction over the matter, reported the Washington Post, as “unions must first pursue such claims through an administrative process before seeking review by the appeals court.”

Now, the issue should go before the Federal Labor Relations Authority, which is, as the Post reports, “a small agency governed by a three-member board of Trump appointees charged with adjudicating federal labor disputes.”

However, the unions may appeal the Tuesday’s ruling on jurisdiction to the Supreme Court first.

Needless to say, union bosses are apoplectic.

“Today’s terrible decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia is a tremendous blow to federal employees and their voice in the workplace,” stated American Federation of Government Employees National President J. David Cox Sr.

“The decision is mistaken about the jurisdictional question, wrong on the law, and jeopardizes the rights of federal employees across the government,” Cox continued, “We will fight this decision using every legal tool available to us.”

On Tuesday afternoon, AFL-CIO boss Richard Trumka joined the chorus of condemnation on social media.

Sara Nelson, President of the Association of Flight Attendants—who does not represent any federal workers, but is reportedly planning a run for the AFL-CIO presidency—also tweeted her support for the federal unions.

Right now, the unions are evaluating their options and could appeal the U.S. Supreme Court.

If the unions do appeal the DC Court’s ruling to the Supreme Court, though, it is highly possible they will not fare any better than going through the Federal Labor Relations Authority.


“Truth isn’t mean. It’s truth.”
Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012)

Cross-posted from

Follow on Twitter.

Planned Parenthood Shows Its True Colors and Abandons the Title X Family Planning Program

Planned Parenthood Shows Its True Colors and Abandons the Title X Family Planning Program

P1130024. Unlabeled pro-abortion rally by ProgressOhio, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

Planned Parenthood showed its true colors yesterday. In a hastily arranged meeting, the Planned Parenthood board of directors fired pro-abort absolutist Leana Wen for being too moderate. She’d tried to rebrand Planned Parenthood from abortion mill into provider of health care services to women and she vocalized the radical position that only women could have babies which really torqued the anti-science left. (See Kira Davis’s Breaking: Planned Parenthood Terminates Director Leana Wen.)

The second thing that happened was that Planned Parenthood announced that it was leaving the Title X Family Planning program. Title X is a program that really shouldn’t exist and seems to have more in common with Margaret Sanger’s desire that the lower orders don’t reproduce in excess than it does with any legitimate federal interest. Regardless, Planned Parenthood had been at this trough. Even though federal regulations forbid the use of Title X funds for abortions, Planned Parenthood used the free health care as a marketing gimmick to draw in women, many of whom were pregnant, and up-sell them on getting an abortion. In short, Planned Parenthood used federal money to market its core service. The federal dollars that can’t be used for abortion helped pay the overhead expenses of dual-use facilities and the salaries of people who worked there.

Last May, Trump’s HHS reissued Reagan-era regulations (see Trump Administration Will Use A Reagan-Era Rule To Strike At Planned Parenthood’s Federal Gravy Train), which were never implemented because they were still being challenged in court when Bill Clinton won the White House which say that Title X grantees can’t share staff or facilities or corporate structure with any entity that provides abortion.

Planned Parenthood immediately toddled off to find a tame judge (Michael J. McShane, an Obama judge…and yes, Justice Roberts, there are Obama judges) in the tamest circuit (Ninth) in the nation who dutifully issued an injunction.

The only problem was that these regulations had been the subject of a Supreme Court case called Rust vs. Sullivan. That decision held:

Section 1008 of the Public Health Service Act specifies that none of the federal funds appropriated under the Act’s Title X for family-planning services “shall be used in programs where abortion is a method of family planning.” In 1988, respondent Secretary of Health and Human Services issued new regulations that, inter alia, prohibit Title X projects from engaging in counseling concerning, referrals for, and activities advocating abortion as a method of family planning, and require such projects to maintain an objective integrity and independence from the prohibited abortion activities by the use of separate facilities, personnel, and accounting records. Before the regulations could be applied, petitioners — Title X grantees and doctors who supervise Title X funds — filed suits, which were consolidated, challenging the regulations’ facial validity and seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to prevent their implementation. In affirming the District Court’s grant of summary judgment to the Secretary, the Court of Appeals held that the regulations were a permissible construction of the statute and consistent with the First and Fifth Amendments.


1. The regulations are a permissible construction of Title X. Pp. 500 U. S. 183-191.

2. The regulations do not violate the First Amendment free speech rights of private Title X fund recipients, their staffs, or their patients by impermissibly imposing viewpoint-discriminatory conditions on Government subsidies. There is no question but that § 1008’s prohibition is constitutional, since the Government may make a value judgment favoring childbirth over abortion, and implement that judgment by the allocation of public funds.

3. The regulations do not violate a woman’s Fifth Amendment right to choose whether to terminate her pregnancy. The Government has no constitutional duty to subsidize an activity merely because it is constitutionally protected, and may validly choose to allocate public funds for medical services relating to childbirth but not to abortion.

But liberal judge, liberal state, abortion and YOLO. Who cares about the Supreme Court? Amazingly, the three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit did and they set aside the injunction, the case was reheard en banc where the entire circuit agreed with the panel’s decision.

Now Planned Parenthood had to make a decision. Would it follow Wen’s vision of Planned Parenthood caring about women? Or would it follow the desires of its board and only care about killing babies? It has made its decision.

Planned Parenthood on Tuesday said it will forgo federal family planning funds rather than comply with new Trump administration rules that prohibit the organization from referring women for abortions.

The group announced it will no longer participate in the only federally funded program dedicated to providing contraception and other reproductive health services to low-income women, marking a victory for Trump’s conservative base.

Planned Parenthood will continue to offer services at hundreds of its sites across the country, saying it will draw on “emergency funds.” And by eschewing the federal funds, known as Title X, the group can still refer women for abortions.

In doing so, Planned Parenthood has deprived itself of a revenue stream worth in the hundreds of millions of dollars, it has defined itself and what it believes in. It can no longer hide behind the mammogram lie and the Pap smear lie and the contraception lie. It is standing foursquare for the ability to kill children in utero. This is going to cut into its ability to raise funds. It is going to make it less of a lobbying force. And it is going to make taking on the abortion industry much easier.

But it isn’t surprising. Because Planned Parenthood is chocked to the gills with would-be Josef Mengeles who exult in killing the defenseless under the guise of medicine.

Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.

A Woke Medical Doctor Was Asked Point Blank: What is a Man? His Answers Were Stunning

A Woke Medical Doctor Was Asked Point Blank: What is a Man? His Answers Were Stunning

Animals know a male when they see one. Same goes for a female.

Are human beings losing that ability?

One doctor has lost it.

As I covered Monday, noted anti-Trump physician Eugene Gu got wedgied on Twitter over his claim that “men can get pregnant and have abortions” (here).

How about the most woke people in America have a meeting over what defines male and female; and how about they have it naked?

It should be a short meeting.

Eugene had posted the following:

Subsequently, conservative writer Matt Walsh asked the good doctor a simple question:

Here’s what the medical man had to say:


Matt tried again:

It’s quite the doggone thing when, in a nation founded upon free speech, the strangling cultural Marxism of wokism has made a doctor — a doctor, for Pete’s sake — afraid to say there is such a thing as a man.



Relevant RedState links in this article: here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

Lesbian Couple Identifying As Straight Couple Prepares To Transition 5-Yr-Old Son Into A Daughter

Straight Texas Couple Identifying As Gay Male Couple Conceive A Baby Boy, But They’ll Never Do It Again

Comedy Central Writer Wishes For The Murder Of Justice Kennedy

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”