Leftist icon Linda Sarsour proved that when it comes to looking to advance her career, she’s as opportunistic as they come, as she can, chameleon-like, simply change the color of her skin at will so she can identify as whatever oppressed group fits her fancy.

There was a time when Sarsour claimed she was white:

But that apparently wasn’t enough for her to launch her rise among leftists; she had to widen her range:

Sarsour’s here today, gone tomorrow approach to reality is endemic among those on the Left, for whom “self-identification” trumps biological reality (gender theory, anyone?) or the truth about one’s ancestry. The idea for many on the Left is that by identifying with a supposedly-oppressed group one can claim they share that group’s experiences (see, e.g., Rachel Dolezal).

Yet if anyone can claim to identify as a member of another group, why were the owners of a Mexican restaurant, who were white, hounded out of business for their “cultural appropriation”? In fact, how do leftists reconcile “cultural appropriation” with “self-identification”? And why shouldn’t whites simply “self-identify” as people of color in order to take advantage of affirmative action avenues?

If Sarsour can climb the ladder of political power by being all things to all people, does truth matter anymore?

Silly question.