Wait. ‘The national anthem itself is problematic.’ Here’s what’s being spewed now.

Determined to traffic in anti-Trump hate, CNN continues to give voice to radical left-wing elements discontent with the United States of America.

CNN political commentator Angela Rye denounced the national anthem on Tuesday as “problematic in and of itself” during a discussion of President Trump dis-inviting the NFL’s Philadelphia Eagles from the White House.

Rye used the occasion to rip Trump, saying he “has trafficked in bigotry, xenophobia and racism from the very beginning of his campaign.”

“This is not about the national anthem, that’s the side issue,” she said initially. “The real issue is Donald Trump’s issue with crowd size.”

The reference is to reports that most of the Eagles team would not be attending the planned White House celebration — in fact, the NFL Network reported that only one player had confirmed to attend, that being quarterback Nick Foles.

There was reportedly a team “delegation” set to attend, but a more critical eye might suggest this was a failed attempt by the Eagles to embarrass Trump.

Rye claimed this was all about Trump’s ego, before dissing the Star Spangled Banner.

“That’s what he can’t handle. The ego blow,” she said. “This is all about his ego, and we are now going to end up in a midterm where we’re talking about the national anthem.

“The national anthem is problematic in and of itself,” Rye continued to spew. “There’s a second verse that [former NFL player] Colin Kaepernick brought attention to that has yet to be discussed on broad platforms.”

The liberal commentator was speaking about the obscure third verse of the national anthem, which she erroneously named as the second verse — never mind that most Americans don’t know all the words to the first verse, let along the third.

Purveyors of the far-left’s radical “critical race theory” point to the lyrics, “No refuge could save the hireling and slave,” to claim it’s an expression of racial hostility.

But when the Star Spangled Banner was written in 1814, the choice of words may not have meant what the left interprets today, as explained by National Reviews’ Walter Olson:

To Americans, while “slave” was both a common descriptive word and an epithet, “hireling” — especially in contexts of poetry and literature — ordinarily carried derogatory connotations. It meant someone such as a soldier, official, or laborer who served for money rather than from some more durable loyalty such as to family or nation. Yet another Robert Burns song, “Parcel of Rogues,” describes Scotland as having been sold out for “hireling traitor’s wages.” “Hireling and slave” is not an accidental pairing; the two words often occurred together as epithets.

 

But then, in today’s hypersensitive age of collective outrage, there’s no time for such cerebral discrimination … as Angela Rye personifies.

Comments

Latest Articles