Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


I know I shouldn’t do this, but occasionally I read articles from the Huffington Post. Most of the time, the articles make me laugh because it goes to show you get what you pay for. But sometimes, the HuffPo articles are thought-provoking.

In this particular case, the thoughts provoked were ones of “How in the Hell did this person get a job anywhere, let alone HuffPo, the Vox of the media?”

The writer talked at length about the online harassment American gymnast Gabby Douglas received by not putting her hand over her heart while the National Anthem played at the Olympics after her female gymnastics team took gold. Then, she compared it to the alleged lack of criticism for American swimmer Ryan Lochte for lying about being robbed at gunpoint. The cause, according to the writer? White male privilege.

I wish I were making it up.

But at least, we get a nice intro to this week’s Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week!


What the Left believes it means: an unfair advantage given mainly to whites, straight people, and males because of their race, gender, sexual preference, among other things

What it really means: another excuse for lazy Leftists to explain their failures

Leftists scapegoating others to cover up their faults? Why that’s…completely expected!

I had heard this concept being tossed about like a frisbee at a stoner convention on April 20th, but I wanted to learn more about it. Naturally, I went to a Leftist, since it was Leftists who kept using the word. Here’s how it went.

Me: What exactly is privilege?
Leftist: You should know. You’re a white male.
Me: That’s true. And devastatingly handsome, too.
Leftist: You got me there. (Editor’s Note: The Leftist didn’t actually say this.)
Me: So, I have privilege because I’m a white male.
Leftist: Exactly.
Me: Can you show me an example of this privilege?
Leftist: It’s not my job to educate you.
Me: So, you can’t show me where I have privilege?
Leftist: Get away from me, you cisgender white male asshole! (Editor’s Note: The Leftist actually said this.)

So, apparently privilege is like Bigfoot: only a fraction of people see it, and those who do swear it exists. Actually, I take that back. There is more proof Bigfoot exists.

Yet, no matter how many times someone questions the existence of privilege, it seems more people want to believe they have it. And the funny thing is the people who tell us we have privilege don’t know us from Adam. Unless, of course, they know an Adam, then it all kinda goes to Hell. Either way, we need to do a better job in challenging the concept at its core. And here’s how you do it.

Mock the hell out of it.

Seriously, how can someone who doesn’t even know you tell you what breaks you’ve gotten in life? And to say you have privilege because you don’t see it is like saying you’re eligible to be President without having done anything worthy of it. Of course, we would never let that happen, right?

But here’s the thing that gets me more than the absurdity of the concept. It’s who is being targeted as having privilege. Whites? Yep. Males? Uh huh. Straights? Bingo. Now, what would happen if someone like me would target, say…oh, I don’t know…Raven Simone of “The Spew”…I mean “The View”? I would be called racist, sexist, and homophobic.

See where I’m going with this, kids? The concept of privilege is…racist, sexist, and even homophobic in some cases, but more often than not it’s heterophobic. (I know it’s not really a word, but I figure if the Left can make up words, so can I.)

The way the Left sees success (or privilege, if you will) is the same way it sees economics: as a zero-sum game. They believe there is a finite amount of success, and if someone has it, it’s at the expense of someone else. Of course, this isn’t the case. The fact Joe Biden is Vice President doesn’t mean I can’t be successful. If anything, the fact Joe Biden is Vice President makes me more successful…at making jokes at Joe Biden’s expense.

So, if there isn’t a finite amount of success in the world, why should you feel bad about what you’ve earned? The short answer is you shouldn’t, and you shouldn’t let people who don’t know you make you feel bad about it. I mean, they’re racist, sexist, and heterophobic. How valid can their opinions be?

A Musical Interlude


As you might have guessed, I love the English Language, but what you might not know is I am also passionate about music. I can sing a little, can’t play an instrument, and can’t read music to save my life. Yet, music has been a big part of my life for as long as I can remember.

One of the things I like to do is write new lyrics for existing songs, usually with a humorous or political bent. I present to you one of these songs for your enjoyment.

Time of the Season 2016(Sung to the tune of “Time of the Season” by The Zombies)

It’s the time of the season
When we protest guys
In this time, cisgenderists are easy
To mock and try to call them scum

We’ll protest on your campus
Protest lots
We never go to class much
It’s the time of the season for fee-fees

What’s your name? (What’s your name?)
Who’s your daddy? (Who’s your daddy?)
He’s cis, but his pronoun is Zi
Has he taken (Has he taken)
Any time (Any time)
To ditch, to ditch all of his white privilege?

Tell it to him slowly
He’s so dumb
He really has to know
It’s the time of the season for fee-fees.

What’s your name? (What’s your name?)
Who’s your mommy? (Who’s your mommy?)
Is she, is she oppressed like me?
Has she taken (Has she taken)
Any time (Any time)
To strike, to strike against the patriarchy?

Tell it to them always
Never quit
Now run off to your safe space
‘Cuz it’s the time of the season for fee-fees…

The Price is Wrong


President Obama has set the price … for an American Citizen. That price is $100,000,000. The amount paid for each of 4 hostages held by Iran.

After a long denial the State Department has finally stated that the $400,000,000 payment to Iran was used as a “negotiating tool” to free the captive men. This is a complete reversal of policy dealing with hostages for more than 200 years of American history. And it is both shameful and sad.

This action by President Obama is not only appalling. It is criminal. Yet another violation by this President and his disregard for the Rule of Law. If a Republican President did this, the Left would be calling for his resignation. But not so with He-who-can-do-no-wrong.

Barak Obama should resign the Office of President immediately or face impeachment for his high crimes against the United States of America. His lawlessness must be brought to an end and justice must prevail.

Once you start paying these pirates, they will all come to your door seeking more money to free hostages. It will become an epidemic. We had this issue with the Barbary Pirates in the 1800’s. For those that don’t know history, the Barbary Pirates were Muslims terrorists preying on others taking property and hostages. Forcing captives into slavery and worse. We put a stop to it back then and we must never again pay to have a hostage released.

In Defense of Capitalism


In the past couple of years, we’ve seen young men and women rethinking their positions on capitalism and socialism, and…well, let’s just say capitalism is faring worse than Bill Clinton at an abstinence only rally put on by Playboy Playmates. More and more, young people think socialism is the way to go. After all, on paper, it’s the most fair system out there.

Unfortunately, that paper and $3.50 will get you a cup of coffee-flavored steamed milk at Starbucks.

Where did we go wrong that socialism is faring better than capitalism in the United States, the bastion of capitalism? There are so many culprits, it’s hard to point fingers at them all, but let’s start with one that we might have overlooked.

Us. We, the people, failed to make the case to the young skulls full of free range soy based granola that capitalism is the best socioeconomic system out there, bar none. Oh, sure, we lived like we believed it, but somewhere along the line we decided capitalism didn’t require excellence. We settled on the mediocre, and in some cases the below average, because it was easier than demanding more. Why do you think Starbucks can charge $3.50 for a cup of coffee-flavored steamed milk instead of making a good cup of coffee with only a little milk? Because it was just too hard to demand more, so we swallowed our pride (and a lot of burnt coffee beans) and settled.

But that’s not capitalism is about. Capitalism gives you a choice because there will always be a market for a product or service other people and companies don’t offer. In America, if you don’t like Starbucks, you can go to Caribou Coffee or Seattle’s Best or Dunkin Donuts or any number of other places to get a cup of java (or at least a cup of java with less steamed milk in it). It’s not like you have to get Starbucks, kids.

In a socialist economy, choice isn’t one of the options on the menu. You may want a triple mocha espresso with a shot of butterscotch, but what you get…is watery sewer sludge in a broken cup, and that’s if you’re lucky! As neat as socialism seems to look, the reality is far less rosy.

Let’s say there’s a Justin Bieber song you really like. (Granted, that may be impossible, but play along for the sake of an example, k?) You grow to love that song, no matter how many times you play it and no matter how many friends and family members you drive away with it. Then, after a while, you get tired of that Justin Bieber song and you want to listen to something else. You know, like Gordon Lightfoot, Triumph, Rush, or even William Shatner.

Under socialism, you really don’t get to skip ahead on the “Canada’s Greatest Musical Acts” CD. You wouldn’t even get to listen to Anne Murray! You have to keep listening to the same Justin Bieber song over and over again. (Provided, Amnesty International hasn’t determined such a feat would be considered torture.) Yes, kids, socialism is just like listening to a Justin Bieber song only with more rhythm.

At least with capitalism, you get to push the Skip button on your CD player or MP3 player and find another song. And if you don’t like the next song, you can move to a different one until you find one you like. Capitalism, for all of its faults and misuse today, treats you like an adult and assumes you can make good choices for yourself. Socialism not only treats you like a child, but assumes you can’t make good choices for yourself. Then again, if you think socialism is still viable in the 21st Century, the socialists might be onto something.

Two of the words that keep getting thrown about by socialists are “free” and “equal,” such as “free college for students” and “equal pay for equal work.” When you really think about it, these words have psychological power over us. America was built on the high-minded concepts of freedom and equality (even though some of the slaves in the Colonies might disagree). Yet, these aren’t the same concepts socialists use. When they want something to be free, they mean free for them. They don’t want to pay out of pocket for what they want; they simply want it.

If any of you reading this are parents of young children, you’ve seen this concept in action.

As far as equality is concerned, socialists see it in terms of tearing down the rich and powerful and propping up the poor and powerless. I’m sure a number of you wouldn’t mind Bill Gates dropping off a few hundred grand to your doorstep, but it doesn’t mean you’re equal. He will still be Bill Gates, and you will still be you. And not even a few hundred grand will change that.

And where does that leave people in the middle, neither rich nor poor, neither powerful nor powerless? Right where they are. Don’t try to excel; just skate by like Dorothy Hamill on truck stop speed. At least socialism guarantees equal doses of pain for everyone, so there’s that.

Listen. Thanks to people like Bernie Sanders, socialism may seem to be the next big thing, but it’s really the socioeconomic equivalent of the man bun. Not only does it make you look stupid, but it is harmful in ways you don’t comprehend yet. But, in America, you are free to believe socialism is the cure for all of our ills. I won’t stop you. After all, the more socialists there are out there, the more people I get to mock relentlessly.

Capitalism, as imperfect as it may be, still grants people a lot of leeway, including whether to be a socialist. Try being a capitalist in socialist society and see how that turns out for you. Spoiler Alert: I hope you enjoy your new prison cell because there’s a chance you’ll be in there for a while.

This is not to say capitalism can’t use a bit of sprucing up by any means. When we have people like George Soros, Donald Trump, and Michael Bloomberg raking in the cash through various means, the moral core of capitalism gets overlooked a lot. But, without a moral core, capitalism can easily be the worst idea in the world. Yes, even worse than letting Hillary Clinton store our nuclear codes on her home server. If we let the want of stuff overtake the want of a better future, we run the risk of letting stuff become the entirety of our being.

And, no, that’s not unfettered and unregulated capitalism leads to, folks. That kind of behavior results from greed. Capitalism with a moral core comes from enlightened self-interest. For example, how many times have you heard the Left complain about lumber companies ruining forests through their desire to cut down every tree? Any lumber company worth its sawdust will tell you they wouldn’t engage in that kind of behavior. Why? Because if there are no more trees, the lumber industry goes the way of the third season of “I Am Cait.” (Too soon?)

Even if you’re not big on capitalism and aren’t seeing how bringing up the bad parts about socialism actually defends capitalism, there is one element to consider. Under a capitalist system, we get to be governed. (Not well these days, I grant you, but still governed.) Under a socialist system, we get to be ruled. There is a big, big difference, folks.

In closing, I have to say socialism and its various related movements may have already given up Lenin’s ghost when it comes to their ideology. The fact you can buy a Che Guevara t-shirt, take a selfie of yourself wearing it using your iPhone, and post it to social media sites like Facebook and Twitter using the hashtag #socialismrocks makes the best argument for capitalism ever.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Are you a man (or play one on TV)? Then, you might be guilty of…toxic masculinity! Which is…well, I don’t actually know, but it has to be bad. I mean, it has the word “toxic” in it, and there aren’t that many good things that are toxic. So, naturally, we should be against toxic masculinity.

Wellllll…let’s just do a bit of digging and find out, shall we?

toxic masculinity
What the Left thinks it means: when men act like sexist, ignorant jerks

What it really means: assuming men are sexist ignorant jerks, even when they aren’t

As you might have guessed, toxic masculinity comes from the wonderful world of modern feminism. And, as you might have guessed, it’s as full of crap as modern feminism is.

Recently, a YouTuber named Jonathan McIntosh put out a video explaining toxic masculinity and how pop culture pushes it. What were two of examples? Biff from “Back to the Future” and James Bond. Let’s see…a fictional character in a movie set in the 1950s…and a fictional character in a movie set in the 1960s…and on these, we’re to make a correlation with life in the 2010s…yep, seems legit!

Now, we should be fair to Mr. McIntosh and give his position the thoughtful consideration it deserves. Okay, now that we’re done with that, let’s continue with the mocking.

In the video, many of the characteristics of toxic masculinity could apply to women. Let’s take competitiveness, for example. In McIntosh’s view, men compete with each other out of fear of not being seen as masculine enough. After all, if you don’t win, you’re a sissypants. Then again, Tom Brady is a winner and he’s definitely a sissypants.

Here’s the thing. Women compete, too. The Rio Olympics going on right now are a great example of women showing off their competitive nature, but you don’t have to go to Rio to see this. All you need to do is go out on a weekend. Women squeeze into the tightest dresses, the highest high heels, and the skimpiest outfits just to try to land the hottest guys in the bar. And when another woman tarts herself out like that, the claws come out.

If you think that’s sexist, you’re only partially right. Not all women do this, but there are enough who do that would skew the results just a tad. Women compete with each other all the time, especially when they’re young. The same applies to men, especially when they’re young, old, or drunk. Yet, we’re supposed to believe the masculine version is toxic while the feminine version is okay? Sorry, Jonathan, but I’m not buying it.

But surely that’s not his only point, right? Nope! He also includes emotional detachment as a trait of toxic masculinity. Apparently, he’s never dated some of my ex-girlfriends.

The rest of McIntosh’s list isn’t much better. Additional traits include aggression, intimidation, violence, sexual objectification, and predatory sexuality. Or as most college students call it, the weekend.

Now, what do all of these traits have in common. If you answered “they were compiled by a dumbass,” you’d be right, but that’s not the answer we’re looking for now. The common thread is they’re practiced by both genders. (And, yes, I mean both genders, meaning two. Got it Tumblr Toddlers?) Aggressive? Ronda Rousey comes to mind. Intimidation? See Ronda Rousey. Sexual objectification? Magic Mike. Predatory sexuality? Isn’t that what “Sex In the City” was?

So, if the traits of toxic masculinity can apply to both genders, why is it only considered toxic masculinity? That’s the way current feminism works. When a man does it, it’s horrible, but when a woman does it, it’s empowering. And if we had a way to turn all that BS into energy, we’d be energy independent in microseconds.

Look, being masculine isn’t perfect, but it’s a hell of a lot better than hating yourself for being male. And, no, it’s not toxic, at least not until you drink enough beer and eat enough beans.

The Nature of Homosexuality


This is a brief post on the nature of homosexuality. This is not a post on the morality of homosexuality or any other aspect. Maybe another post will reflect more on these items and/or on additional aspects.

Homosexuality is not found in nature. There are no homosexual animals in the animal kingdom. Any act that resembles homosexual behavior in animals is unrelated to homosexuality among humans. Generally with animals, such behavior is a show of dominance over others of the same gender. Or a means of having a passive-aggressive contest between members of the same gender. And lastly, it is just confusion. The scent of a female who was in heat on the male that just mated can cause other males to attempt to mount each other. None of these issues are the pleasure stimulation gained by humans who engage in homosexual activities. Animals do not have sex for pleasure. And humans are not animals at all.

Homosexuality is a choice. Now there are many who will read that last sentence and just scream at me for stating it. And justify themselves or their loved ones with such comments like, “I didn’t choose to be a heterosexual. So it can’t be a choice to be gay.” But I say you did choose to be heterosexual. This choice was made at a subconscious level. We make these choices by the 1000’s every single day. Just by doing something. Our subconscious makes choices based on our life experiences and knowledge.

No one is born being homosexual. Now there are people born who have a higher degree of engaging in homosexual behavior than others. Just as everyone has traits stronger or lesser than someone else. But the choice is still made at some point, to cross that bridge or that line. However one wishes to envision it. The “first time” was a conscious choice.

What causes someone to choose a homosexual path? There we are dealing with the age old combination of nature vs nurture. Even if someone is more inclined to be homosexual, they don’t do to their nurture. While another identical person and circumstances may take that path. Just the same for the majority who are heterosexual leaning, may encounter something that causes them to choose to become homosexual later on.

These are debates for psychologists to discuss. I am sure there are hundreds of possibilities and they do not apply to everyone. Even many of those who experiment in homosexuality go on to be heterosexual. While others who have their first homosexual encounter become homosexual or even bisexual. The human mind is a very complex thing as is human sexuality.

But the true nature of homosexuality is that, although complex, it is a behavior and a choice. One that is made every day by everyone. And after a while like many of our choices it becomes automatic. A habit. And then it is hard to break.


The State Fair


The Iowa State Fair is in full swing. 11 days of everyone converging on the Eastside of Des Moines. Now I will say that the Iowa State Fair is well known.

The old movie “State Fair” is based off the Iowa State Fair. It does attract visitors not only from every corner of Iowa, but from across the nation and from around the world. It does boost the local economy during it’s nearly two week run.

But I hate it. I’m not a big crowd person. Especially when most of it happens outside in the heat and humidity of an Iowa summer. If it was all indoors, in the A/C, that would be OK.

The fairgrounds area doesn’t have adequate traffic access for the traffic it generates. Major roads around the fairgrounds are almost parking lots during the Fair. What would take normally 5-10 minutes to drive, takes closer to an hour or even more. That is how congested the roadways become at this time. This means significant rerouting if you must drive thru the area or around it.

At the Fair, everything imaginable is available on a stick to eat. Including deep fried butter. That is a stick of butter, battered, deep fried, on a stick. And yes people will eat it. Now I love funnel cakes but I’m not going to pay Fair prices to eat one. The food it just highly over priced for what you get there.

I am not tolerant of drunks. It’s one of the worst things to be around. And the fairgrounds are full of them. The later it gets in the day and into the night. The more drunks will be encountered there. Some spend all day in the “Bud Tent”.

With summertime you have insects. At night one must battle a barrage of mosquitoes. In the day there are swarms of flies, biting flies, bees, wasps, and hornets. They are everywhere around the fairgrounds.

So this time of year I have my calendar marked out for the 11 days of the Iowa State Fair. To remind and warn myself to stay away from it as much as possible. Which is hard to do since I live just a couple of miles from it and must drive past it on my way to most anywhere.

I have no childhood memories of going to the fair. I cannot recall ever going or liking it at all. And yes I am a native Iowan. As an adult. I have only been to the Fair 2 or 3 times. And I generally will not go unless I have a free place to park. Free admission and I’m going to a concert at the Grandstand with a free ticket for a band that I like.

So I can’t wait for these 11 days to get over with and the Fair becomes a bad memory for another year.

Interview With a Leftist


For those of you who don’t know, I used to be a Leftist in my younger days. I learned all about environmentalism, abortion, feminism, and other causes through the filter of Leftists hell-bent (or whatever their version of Hell is) on getting me to believe in their version of the truth. After getting out on my own, however, I learned Leftists only told a portion of the truth, and when confronted lashed out in anger, fear, and general disdain that anyone would dare to question them.

Needless to say, I’ve done that a lot.

Although I walked away from the Leftist utopian mindset, I still see a lot of people who can’t seem to find their way out of it, even with a map, GPS, and a kiosk with a You Are Here arrow. This happened to me recently.

It started with a meme created by a Leftist on Instagram, stating Owsley County, Kentucky, has the highest rate of Food Stamp usage in the nation. Then, it goes on to say it is over 99% white and 95% Republican. Seems to be a slam dunk for the Left, right?

Not so much.

After I did a bit of research, I found out the meme had only part of the story. I know, I was as shocked as you are when I found out a Leftist lied by omission. It is true Owsley County leads the country in Food Stamp usage, but the part that was missing was why there was such a decline in their economy that would necessitate the use of Food Stamps. It turns out that county’s economy revolved heavily around three industries: tobacco, lumber, and coal.

Now, aside from the connection referenced above, what is a common thread among those industries? They have all been targets of Leftists in recent decades. Heavy regulatory burdens, media onslaughts, and other Leftist tactics have hamstrung these industries and caused the plight the meme revels in while blaming Republicans for it.

After I pointed that out, a Leftist responded in a way that made it seem I had punched his grandmother in the face like she owed me money. (For the record, I don’t punch women under any circumstances, mainly because my wife is a woman and she knows where I sleep.) The Leftist in question started off as Leftists typically do: accuse you of being ignorant to the facts, talking down to you like you were Paris Hilton trying to understand particle physics, and generally belittling you.

Guess how well that worked.

After a protracted back and forth where I calmly provided details and advised the Leftist to do more research (a phrase he used previously to me before I produced hard facts he didn’t seem to want to address), he continued his barrage of insults. Then, I did the unthinkable.

I called him dishonest and proved it.

After that point, the Leftist’s tone changed from aggressor to victim. “That really isn’t very nice,” he replied, promptly ignoring all the venom he had typed previously. Another Leftist debate tactic is to “forget” what is posted or said shortly after it’s posted/said and then claim you/they didn’t post/say what you/they did. (Good thing Chris isn’t paying me by the slash for this post.)

At the end of it all, I posted to the Leftist his hypocrisy and how his actions before the half-hearted attempt to offer an olive branch while at the same time telling me he thought I had “trust issues.” To be fair, I do have trust issues, especially when someone treats me like crap, lies to my face, and then tries to smooth things over with a diagnosis reeking of more quackery than a duck convention.

So, what was the point of this exercise in futility? First, I did this so you don’t have to walk into a discussion about politics without being forewarned and forearmed. This political season is proving to me one of the nastiest in my memory with both sides taking on similar debate tactics. Second, I wanted you to see how the Left operates when presented with facts they can’t spin away or lie about. There is no question Democrats and Leftists have made it a point to go after certain industries they don’t like, but they’re quick to blame Republicans at the first sign of trouble.

And third, I wanted to showcase what a little knowledge can do in the hands of those who don’t care what they’re called. If you know something, feel confident in that knowledge and don’t let others try to dictate reality for you.

Leave that to me.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Recently, Hillary Clinton tweeted the following:

We’ve got to stand up against climate deniers.
There isn’t a problem we can’t solve if we put our minds to it.
The first problem Hillary needs to address is her bad grammar. But this week’s installment doesn’t have anything to do with English, but rather a concept behind Hillary’s tweet: science. Democrats and Leftists like to portray themselves as the Party of Science, as opposed to the Party of Superstition (according to them, of course). But how much does the Left actually know about science? Let’s find out!


What the Left believes it means: a system of proving phenomena in nature in a way that cannot be refuted

What it really means: a system of proving phenomena in nature in a way that can be manipulated by Leftists

The Left loves to throw out science to support their ideological positions as though it were the ultimate shield. Polar bears dying off due to climate change? There’s a scientist for that! GMOs causing human mutations that make the family from the original “The Hills Have Eyes” look like the Von Trapp family? Grab a scientist! Want to prove gun ownership kills more people than Hitler, Mao, Stalin, and playing Led Zeppelin backwards? Look, there’s a scientist!

Or so we’re lead to believe. With climate change alone (a topic I may or may not have covered yet, but I’m too lazy to look right now), we have a number of people with impressive-sounding credentials pushing the notion man is responsible for global warming. Here’s a short list of them.

Neil Degrasse Tyson – Probably the most sciencey of the group, Degrasse Tyson is an astrophysicist and cosmologist, as well as a “science communicator.” And if you’ve read his Twitter feed, he’s also someone who posts more weird crap than Tommy Chong smoking some high grade weed.

Bill Nye – Best known for his 90s TV show “Bill Nye, the Science Guy”, Nye has attempted to beef up his scientific street cred by talking about global climate change. And he has the cred, what with his vast backgr…wait. Nye has a Bachelor of Science in mechanical engineering. Although he worked for Boeing for a time, he has more screen credits than academic credits when it comes to science.

Michael Mann – Mann may rival Degrasse Tyson in academia, but he’s not as well known. Probably for the best, considering he’s one of the masterminds behind the now-discredited “hockey stick graph” and is currently in litigation against Mark Steyn because Mr. Steyn dared to question his scientific prowess.

Al Gore – Yes, Al Gore is considered by the Left to be one of the scientific geniuses because he made global warming/global climate change a thing in Leftist circles. And much of his efforts have been in conjunction with the aforementioned Mann and, thus, have been mocked mercilessly by people who understand real science.

Of course, Leftists will throw out the accusation anyone who disagrees with them is a) ignorant, b) too controversial to be believed, c) dishonest, or d) bought off. You know why? Because Leftists scientists are all of the above.

See, what the Left doesn’t want you to know is their scientists are on the take. Grants from wealthy donors don’t go to scientists who don’t say “the right things.” (Meaning, who don’t subscribe to the Left’s doom and gloom predictions.) And when you get big money from donors, you tend to want to keep it flowing, so you will do whatever they want.

Of course, the Left doesn’t see the problem in this, unless scientists who are more concerned with facts than financial gain start disputing the findings. And it’s not fair that the scientists disputing them are using actual science!

The Left has cornered the intellectual market on science due to its ties to academia. Yet, with all of that firepower, the Left knows next to nothing about science.

Take the Left’s opposition to genetically modified organisms, for example. To listen to the Left, GMOs are an abomination, a step towards the misuse of science out of Mary Shelley’s worst nightmares. Yet, they overlook one simple fact: most crops today are genetically modified. Whether it’s to make plants more disease resistant or to allow them to grow in various conditions, there are ways plants can be modified for the betterment of mankind. So, instead of worrying about Frankenstein’s Farm, the anti-GMO crowd could be learning more about the ways GMOs can be good for people.

Ah, but that would take away from their feels, and when it comes to Leftists, fee-fees trump facts. So, what happens when the facts don’t match up to the fee-fees?

The Left makes up the results it wants. And with the star power (if you’ll pardon the pun) of people like the four people referenced above, it gets harder to overcome.

The thing about science, though, is facts always find a way to win out in the end. Remember cold fusion? Neat idea until no one could reproduce the experiment. It may take a while, but science finds a way to overcome even the brightest smile and the neatest graphs.

And then people like Degrasse Tyson, Nye, Mann, and Gore can get real jobs instead of pretending to be smart.

Unfit to be President


President Obama has done the unthinkable. We are near his last 6 months in office and he has declared the Republican nominee to be unfit to become President of the United States. I think he is still working on his stated goal to “fundamentally rebuild America.”

I once stated after reading his policies and beliefs that Obama could very well be the last President that we elect. And I made that statement back when he won his first term election. Now nearly 8 years later, we have the foundations for a new kind of America. The kind our Founding Fathers warned us about.

By declaring Donald Trump unfit to hold the highest office. President Obama has sown the seeds of a Constitutional Crisis when Mr Trump wins the November election. And sadly those who oppose Donald Trump from the Republican and conservative sides are being played right into it. Something will have to be done about the crisis.

With the Constitution in Crisis, President Obama as the great hero, can step in with the solution. Obviously Hillary Clinton cannot be President as she lost the election. And the “winner” Donald Trump cannot be President because he is unfit. So that means the only choice is to allow Obama to continue as President until the crisis is resolved.

And that means now we have basically suspended the Constitution and our government is no longer bound by it. Pandora’s Box has been flung wide open and Obama’s Socialist Amerika continues full speed ahead. Our rights will not be protected and they will come for our guns and our Churches too.

Those who were neverTrump will have been blindsided. Because we all know it can’t happen here in America. But we are and have been letting it happen slowly for years. We are the frog being slowly boiled alive.

Or to quote the character of Ambassador Kosh from the sci-fi series “Babylon 5”:

“The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote.”

This is of course an extreme, worse-case, scenario of coming events. And with all things in the future it isn’t written yet. We can still change the stream. The close we get the harder that change becomes. And this potential future really isn’t that far fetched. Look where we already.

Donald Trump not only is fit to be President of the United States. He must be President. As the alternatives are far worse for our country, our hopes for a better future, and for the American Dream.