Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


For the past couple of weeks, Donald Trump has been floating the idea the upcoming Presidential election is rigged in favor of Hillary Clinton. Some…well, most of the media have written this off as the delusional ramblings of a loser. And given they have given cover for Joe Biden for a number of years, they know how to do it.

But is there something to the accusations? That depends on how you define voter and/or election fraud.

voter/election fraud

What the Left believe it means – something that rarely happens, but always gets mentioned by right wing nut jobs as part of a conspiracy

What it really means – Leftists rigging elections

This may be one time where I actually agree with Trump. Elections are rigged, and although both sides do it, it seems the Left has a Paul Bunyon leg up on the Right when it comes to voter and election fraud. There’s a reason there is a joke about dead people voting Democrat in Chicago; it actually happened. And as far as I know, it may still be happening. Imagine if Chicago residents spent as much time finding a decent quarterback for the Bears as they spent making sure dead people vote blue, Chicago might be seen as Title Town.

All kidding aside, Democrats and voter fraud go together like peanut butter and raw sewage. One is a horrible substance that few, if any, people want to eat, and the other is sewage. (Sorry, I couldn’t stop kidding. Then again, it’s hard to pick out which one of the two items referenced above would represent sewage.)

Over the past few years, Democrats have figured out a way to massage election laws in ways that would make Bill Clinton really happy, if you know what I mean. And if you don’t, don’t ask his wife because she doesn’t know either. Whether it’s busing people from place to place to vote or finding ways to use absentee ballots to stuff ballot boxes or “helping” people in adult living centers to fill out ballots (oddly enough all for Democrats), it always seems as though Democrats are the masters of maximizing fraud.

Of course, the media don’t seem to think it’s a problem. Ask them and they will tell you voter and election fraud are more rare than the way Dracula takes his steaks. Yeah, about that. Seems it happens more regularly that they care to admit, and I can prove it with one five letter acronym.


No, wait. I mean ACORN. No matter what you think of the way ACORN acquitted itself in light of video evidence proving they were part of a massive voter fraud attempt, the fact they were caught so many times in so many states doing things that were even slightly dishonest should be enough to make even the most honest Leftist blush in shame. Of course, that would require Leftists to be honest and have shame, but we can dream, can’t we?

And what have Republicans done to combat it? Attempted to pass voter ID laws without having much of a gameplan on how to promote them. Republicans not having an idea of how to convince people their ideas are worth exploring? The hell???

In their attempts to go along to get along, Republican leaders have dropped the ball more than Jay Cutler on a day when he’s playing football. (See? I told you Chicago needed to change their focus from fraud to football.) In doing so, Republicans have let Leftists walk all over them and ignore actual instances of fraud. And what have they gotten out of it?

Well, losing two Presidential elections in a row against a part-time Senator from Illinois with a resume thinner than an anorexic stick insect, and setting up to lose a third to a woman with more failures under her pantsuit belt than Bialystok and Bloom. And people wonder why grassroots Republicans are lining up to vote for Donald Trump?

With this election coming down to the wire, we cannot ignore the possibility…well, probability…well, certainty the Left is going to try to play fast and loose with election laws, and it shouldn’t take videos from Project Veritas or emails from Wikileaks to prove it to people. This is the Left’s M.O., and it has been for decades. But there is one way to beat them; make it so it’s impossible for them to manufacture enough votes to win.

Either that, or hope for the Cubs to win the World Series before the Sweet Meteor of Death shows up. That may not stop Democrats from cheating, but it would make me happy.

Voter Fraud


Recent undercover videos have given evidence of wide-spread voter fraud being committed by the Democratic Party. And since this is the party that currently controls the White House and the Department of Justice, nothing will be done about it.

President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will do nothing about the evidence of voter fraud. Even though back in 2008 Hillary claimed Obama won by busing in voters illegally. It is her turn now to do the same so she can win the general election in November.

Both of these people are criminals. Both of them have committed voter fraud. Both should be in jail. Neither one of them should be President of the United States. And the Democratic Party needs to be investigated for additional evidence and crimes of voter fraud.

We need to have some major changes in the election laws to prevent this wide spread fraud from ever being committed again by any party. We need to have a national registered voter database that the states update. This will help prevent voters from being registered in multiple states. As of now there are millions of voters who are registered in more than one state. We also have to end same day voter registration, it’s not enough time to find someone that is committing fraud.

And we need to have voter ID laws in place. You have to show a photo ID to drive, board an airplane, travel overseas, cash a check, write a check, open an account, and get a job. So everyone already has an ID. It’s not hard to show it when you go to the polls.

An Anonymous Note


I work part time in retail as an assistant manager at local discount store. Part of my duties is fronting and cleaning up the store. Making it easier for customers to find the products they are looking for, it really does help if they are in the right place. While I was engaged in doing this I ran across a discarded folded up sheet of paper.

Handwritten in a cursive script and undoubtedly written by a woman, based on the neatness of other qualities of the note was the following:

“Politics have been so dishonest and so dirty and so greedy with Tax Payer money for so long. Trump has upset the pattern of the Republicans if he upsets the dirty politics of the democrats — we could have a new start for America. If Clinton gets in we will very soon become the global society she has said she wants. A Global State of a One World Dictatorship! Trump will close the borders — repair the economy and keep us the United States of America!”

That’s all the note said. Someone’s thoughts on this election. And one that I agree with as well. We cannot have Hillary Clinton elected President. If she does win, the odds of getting another chance in 4 years to change the tide drastically go down. And the damage she will do to the Courts will last far longer than the 2020 election.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


In an already insane election year, nothing could be more insane than the response to Wikileaks and its wholesale exposure of Democrats and in particular Hillary Clinton. Of course, their response is to blame the Russians.

By the way, Mitt Romney called. He says you’re welcome, and I don’t think it’s because he shared his mother’s recipe for chocolate chip cookies.

The on-again, off-again romance between the Left and Wikileaks is a marvel to behold in all of its glory. And it just so happens to be this week’s focus.


What the Left believes it means: a group of hackers lead by Julian Assange who is going after Hillary Clinton and needs to be brought to justice

What it really means: somebody’s airing the Left’s dirty laundry

One of the defining characteristics of Leftist thought is hypocrisy. Since they don’t necessarily believe in black and white thinking, their standards, much like their genders, are fluid. And occasionally involve make-up and assless chaps. When the situation requires it, the Left will change standards faster than Usain Bolt being chased by The Flash.

Back in the day, the Left absolutely loved Wikileaks because Julian Assange and his buddies were exposing secrets the Bush Administration didn’t want to become public knowledge. Then, something happened that caused the love affair to end suddenly and without comment.

Wikileaks proved the Left wrong about the Iraq War.

See, Wikileaks found there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which destroyed the Left’s argument against the Iraq War: that Bush lied to get us into it. With that blockbuster news, let’s just say the Left decided not to return Assange’s voicemails. I’m not sure they’ve blocked him on Facebook yet, but given how the DNC and Hillary both have problems using common technology, I’m guessing they’re still trying to figure out how to connect their MySpace accounts to Facebook.

This year, however, Wikileaks turned up the heat to 11 (because, you know, it’s one higher) and exposed DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz as a primary-rigging totally-in-the-bag-for-Hillary-while-claiming-not-to-be incompetent moron. Normally, this would mean she would get promoted to a Cabinet position, but this year, it meant she had to resign her position, which was given to another totally-in-the-bag-for-Hillary-while-claiming-not-to-be incompetent moron, Donna Brazille. At least she hasn’t rigged primaries, but it’s still early.

Since then, the Left has been on edge waiting for the next Wikileaks shoe to drop if for no other reason than to try to spin the next doc drop without ever answering whether the emails are real. Given Assange’s track record so far, I’d have to say they’re legit because there isn’t really a motive for him to post false information.

This begs the question of why. Well, maybe it might have something to do with Hillary Clinton allegedly wanting to kill Assange with a drone. But I’m sure that’s just a little misunderstanding, right? Some have even gone so far as to claim it’s ideologically driven. But, considering one of the websites claiming this is Vox, which has all the journalistic and intellectual integrity of a toxic waste spill, I’m not putting too much stock in the ideological angle.

Contrary to popular Leftist belief, one doesn’t have to be an opponent to be a critic. In reviewing Hillary’s history, accomplishments, and behavior, it’s entirely possible Assange believes she’s a bigger threat to the world than Donald Trump. In fact, he’s said as much. And unlike Hillary, I can believe what Assange says.

On a side note, this conflict illustrates the difference between liberals and Leftists. Liberals (which I believe Assange is) believe we can act like adults and hold each other accountable for the crap we do. Leftists, on the other hand, believe we are dull children in need of people like Hillary to tell us what to do. Whether you like Wikileaks, hate it, or are still on the fence about it like I am, it serves a necessary purpose to keep sunlight on the exploits of those who would like nothing more than to hide their disdain for us.

But I’m sure the Left still wants our votes.

Personally, I think the reason the Left hates Wikileaks now is because it has exposed just what kind of hypocritical, dishonest, and utter assbags they are. But if/when it turns its focus on Donald Trump, watch the Left go back to loving Wikileaks, which would show what kind of hypocritical, dishonest, and utter assbags they are. In the end, though, Julian Assange could be the man who holds all the cards as to whether Hillary becomes President.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Boy, you go one week without posting and things just explode!

It seems Donald Trump is being called out for vulgarity after a leaked tape of him from 2005 using some…colorful language regarding women and his treatment of them. (No word yet from the folks calling out Trump about how they feel about Bill Clinton’s actual sexual assault…) Given the nature of what was said, I wanted to talk about vulgarity in a way that is frank and open.

(Editor’s Note: To avoid offending people, we have run Thomas’ post through the Nice-O-Meter 9000 to remove any offensive words and replace them with nice words.)


What the Left believes it means: anything that offends their fee-fees

What it really means: words and concepts that are freaking awesome, but not for everyone.

Just like pornography, vulgarity is in the mind’s eye. And just like pornography, vulgarity often involves women with big bongos and guys with extra long cookies. So, what separates vulgarity from everyday language? Perspective.

Let’s say you run a chicken ranch and have raised a sizable male of the species. In that case, you could say you have a big cock and no one would bat an eye. But if you’re a former New York City mayoral candidate, saying you have a big crutch would take on a completely different meaning. Then again, the man’s last name is a nickname for the parsnip.

What makes Donald Trump’s comment about grabbing women by the poppycock so troubling for Leftists is they’ve worked so hard to make themselves seem like champions of the honor of women. But their actions and positions actually betray women. Take abortion, for example. The Left tries to paint it as a woman’s choice to terminate a pregnancy, but when you consider the law of averages and the fact there are more females than males, abortion takes on a whole new dimension. In short, the “pro-choice” moment is cutting down the number of females out there. Put another way, the baby is getting floundered because their mothers got fished by a deadbeat piece of shortcake.

Adding an additional element to the Left’s new-found moralism is the fact their primary candidate is a woman married to a sexual predator. To call Bill Clinton a deviant is an insult to people who deviate from societal norms. I mean, how else would you describe a man who shoved a cigar in an intern’s valentine after she flashed him her tortilla which showed off her armadillo? And Bill may have mamboed in front of the intern, spreading sunflowers all over a blue dress. And that’s not counting the times he’s asked women for a brownie jar.

What kind of sick twisted man asks women for a Broncos jacket at every opportunity? That kind of man is truly a fahrvergn├╝gen bassist.

And guess what? The people who are taking Trump to task while trying to distance Bill’s sexual exploits from Hillary are just as flowered as he is, or at least as friendly as he would like with a sorority full of noogied whippoorwills. Instead of admitting Bill may be the kind of predator his critics say he is, the Left keep their heads up their apples, which only keeps the issue alive.

It’s more than a little hypocritical that the ideological side that promotes Skittles walks and women trying to reclaim the words wheat and corduroy as names of sexual power get offended by Trump’s comment about grabbing women by the pretzel. By the same token, though, Trump should be smart enough not to fall for these Slip and Slide tactics by the Left. They are going to try to find ways to make him look like the biggest piece of shampoo ever, so it’s important he doesn’t give them any Google donut ammunition. If he can’t, his Presidential aspirations will be frisbeed, and we will be in a living Helsinki.

And we don’t want that to happen, do we?

Forget the Polling Place


For me the 2016 Election is already over. This was the first year that I have voted early via an absentee ballot. And I think that is a great process.

From my past posts and tweets there should be no doubt as to which Presidential candidate got my vote. He has had my support since the Iowa Caucus and Lord willing will be the next President of the United States.

I did not mark the straight party box on the ballot. I always check who is running for what office. And in some cases I think it is good to have a member of the opposition party in place. It helps keep the people honest. Since the opposition is going to let nothing slide by them.

Using the absentee ballot was a breeze. I think I am going to vote this way in the future as well. It sure beats standing in line at the polling place.

What Difference At This Point Does It Make?


This is a follow-up to a previous post titled “Who’s Promoting Rape Culture?” In discussing the fundamental idea behind the post (actual rape versus presumed rape culture), more than a few people asked a legitimate question: why does what Bill Clinton did as President matter since it’s Hillary Clinton running for the office?

On the surface, it’s a legitimate question. After all, Hillary wasn’t the one who raped women, got blowjobs from an intern, and has a history of sexual misconduct starting from college on. That was all Bill. (Now, she may have been the cause of Bill’s infidelity, but the less shrieked about that, the better.)

I take you back to 1992, dear reader. When the aforementioned Bill was running for President, he maintained by electing him, the country would get “two for the price of one.” At the time, it seemed to be a good bargain, but after they found their way into the White House, the two-for-one deal wasn’t all that great because neither one was worth the price of one. Between Bill’s sexual proclivities and Hillary’s selective adherence to those little things called federal laws, the Clintons made a pretty slimy bed and sold the rights to lie in it for campaign contributions.

And, boy, did people flock to it.

Flash forward 24 years, and not much has changed. Bill is still a horndog, although he looks like a horndog with a slow leak. Hillary is still shadier than a goth kid’s bedroom during the winter solstice. Don’t believe me? Have Hillary email you the details of her whereabouts during the Benghazi attacks.

Hillary’s supporters point to what they consider to be an impressive list of accomplishments which make her more than qualified to be President. Let’s take a short list of those accomplishments.

– rode Bill’s coattails to a US Senate seat
– sponsored or co-sponsored 713 pieces of legislation, with a whopping three of them becoming law
– supported the Iraq War, only to come out and criticize it
– lost to a half-term Senator from Illinois in 2008
– became Secretary of State under said half-term Senator
– gave the Russians a “Reset Button”, complete with the wrong word for “Reset” in Russian
– proponent of the “Arab Spring” which helped ISIS come into being
– Benghazi
– blaming Benghazi on a video
– hiding facts from the families of the Benghazi victims
– ignoring Russia and China becoming threats to the US again
– signing off on the poor treatment of Israel
– starting the Clinton Foundation where foreign countries traded contributions for access
– her homebrew email server suddenly being scrubbed completely by accident (thanks to a clever Clinton IT guy posting on Reddit)
– lied about her health and the reason for its deplorable conditions
– calling half of Trump supporters a “basket of deplorables”
– calling Republicans her #1 enemy
– cheating Bernie Sanders with the help and blessing of the Democratic National Committee

Wow. With those accomplishments, who wouldn’t want to vote for Hillary? I mean, aside from anyone with an IQ higher than the temperature of tap water.

In short, Hillary’s list of accomplishments in public service just from this century is less than impressive, if not downright disappointing. But the cherry on top of this crap sundae is the fact she still needs Bill to bail her out. During the first Presidential debate, she actually tried to use her husband’s economic strength as proof she would be just as good. (Of course, Bill’s economic strength is based on a series of lies, assumptions, and illegal accounting that got Arthur Andersen in trouble.)

In other words, Hillary needs Bill because she lacks the ability to stand on her own merits.

So, why does it matter what Bill Clinton did as President when Hillary Clinton is running? Because they are fused at the political hip. That makes his past, as well as Hillary’s role in it as an enabler in that past, completely relevant.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


With the Presidential election right around the corner, a lot has been made of how charitable the major candidates are. Hillary Clinton has been shown to be quite generous…to the Clinton Foundation. Meanwhile, Donald Trump has offered to raise money and has said he’s given a lot to charity (like, to Hillary Clinton’s campaigns), but has not been able to show us with tax returns.

This raises an interesting question: do Hillary’s pantsuits come in prison orange? It also raises another interesting question: what is charity? Glad you asked, especially since without that question, this would be a rather short blog post. Here goes!


What the Left believes it means: giving people’s money away to poor, oppressed people

What it really means: giving one’s own money away

While most people believe charity begins in the home, Leftists believe charity begins in the house…of Representatives. After all, why would they be generous with their own money? The BMWs won’t pay for themselves! Just ask Planned Parenthood.

Leftists believe the government is the source of all good in the world. That’s why they expect government to figure out how best to distribute funds through government projects. If the War on Poverty is any indication, that works as well as using a hammer for open heart surgery. Good thing that’s covered under Obamacare!

To this end, the Left considers paying taxes to be the ultimate act of charity. Vice President Joe Biden went so far as to say paying taxes was patriotic, adding a new level of shaming to the equation. Then again, Biden told a man confined to a wheelchair to stand up, so I’m not sure we can trust his judgment.

When you look at the Bidens’ tax returns, you see they pay a lot in taxes while their charitable giving is lower than a snake’s codpiece. Although it’s easy to reconcile the idea of paying taxes as charity by considering the spending being done is for the good of the entire country and not just one group, it still doesn’t quite feel like charity in my book.

Let’s take a real-life example. For many companies, including the one I work for currently, October kicks off a charitable giving campaign in conjunction with the United Way. It is also a big month for breast cancer fundraising. Although employees are encouraged to contribute, it isn’t forced. You can opt out. Try doing that with the IRS. The pushiest employee charitable giving coordinator is a piker compared to an IRS agent, and they can’t even order an audit on you if they suspect you’re holding out on making a contribution.

I’ve spent a lot of time talking about what charity isn’t, so let’s focus on what charity is. For me, charity starts with the heart. You have to feel the need to serve in some way in order to see the results. Charity isn’t a get-rich-quick scheme. There will be long hours and times when progress seems impossible, so if you don’t feel a passion for what you’re doing, you’re just going through the motions.

Charity also doesn’t have to have a price tag. Giving money is fine, but it doesn’t replace giving time, and it’s not nearly as rewarding. There is something about working towards making a better world in some way that money cannot buy.

Lastly, charity requires humility. If you have to make a big production number about giving or how much you give, your charity is perverted. Charity isn’t about how you look doing it; it’s about what it does for people who don’t even know who you are. That’s not to say you shouldn’t feel pride from your contribution, but it shouldn’t be the totality of why you contribute.

If you’re Donald Trump or Donald the garbageman, consider giving a little bit of time in your community for something that gives you purpose. If you’re Hillary Clinton, maybe you should actually give to something that doesn’t have your name on it.

Who’s Promoting Rape Culture?


The Huffington Post recently ran an interesting piece about Donald Trump’s attitude towards women and how he contributes to rape culture. Upon further thought, I came to realize the fundamental flaw in the article’s premise.

It was written by someone at the Huffington Post.

The actual problem with the premise rides on a couple of assumptions. The first assumption is Trump’s attitude sustains rape culture. Granted, some of the things he’s said made him as popular as David Duke at the Apollo on Black Lives Matter Night. Having said that, calling people like Rosie O’Donnell names isn’t exactly perpetuating rape. Last time I checked, rape was still illegal and frowned upon in America. Trump isn’t trying to get rid of rape laws, and his campaign has some pretty high profile women out there defending their candidate.

Damn that Donald Trump! Having women visibly in campaign roles? Next thing you know, he’ll be treating women as equals or something!

For those Leftists reading this blog, that was sarcasm.

The second premise in play is people will forget the white-haired element…err, donkey, in the room: Bill Clinton. While Trump has said some arguably vile things about women, Slick Willie has done some definitely vile things to women. From dropping trou in front of Paula Jones or raping Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey (among others), Bill should be on feminists’ radars as a true sexual predator.

Of course, he’s not because he supports abortion or something like that. Oh, and he apologized or something. Or not. Or right wing witch hunts.

The kind of mental gymnastics that have to be done to defend an actual rapist while simultaneously accusing a Presidential candidate of contributing to rape culture would guarantee the Left would get gold medals in the Olympics. In discussing this issue with Leftists online, they are either a) blissfully unaware of Clinton’s history, b) know it and simply don’t care because Trump, c) trying to cover up Bill’s sexual history as a means to shield Hillary, d) are dumber than trying to carry water in a fishing net, or e) all of the above.

The other tactic they’ll try to use is say Clinton can’t be considered a rapist because he was never tried and convicted of rape. Yeah, because we can’t believe women have been raped until it goes to trial.

Again, for any Leftists reading this, that was also sarcasm.

Even if you believe Trump’s attitude towards some women is problematic, Bill Clinton’s actions towards women should at least be somewhat troubling to you. Calling Rosie O’Donnell a fat pig isn’t nice (although, it’s pretty close to accurate if you ask this humble reporter). Giving a woman a fat lip while making unwanted sexual advances goes beyond the concept of nice and into the world of criminality. There really is no comparison.

Then again, what would you expect out of the Huffington Post? Actual journalism?

Yep. Still sarcasm, Leftists.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Leftists are known for supporting recycling (in word, not in act), and political correctness is proof of this. What started out in the late 80s to early 90s as a way for Leftists to shame people into using certain terminology that made no sense has become a way for Leftists to shame people into using different terminology that makes no sense. Oh, and everybody is bigoted unless you believe what the Left does.

As someone who has seen both incarnations, I figured I’d take you down the rabbit hole of political correctness this week.

political correctness

What the Left believes it means: a movement that seeks to make the world better by recognizing, acknowledging, and respecting the differences in people

What it really means: Leftists being word and thought police

As I’ve brought up before, Leftists love to play with language for their own purposes. Take the term “illegal immigrant.” The Left has done a masterful job in changing the concept to “undocumented worker” to diminish the fact they’re in this country illegally and make it seem more like an oversight. (Oddly enough, if you’re an “undocumented worker” in Mexico, members of the government don’t try to get you registered to vote or give you government aid. They tend to put you in jail.)

The Left plays with the language to control the language and, in doing so, control the culture. Political correctness is the main way the Left does this. If they can make enough people change their wording, they can change their mindsets. With enough “enlightened” people, the Left can change the course of the country. Pretty tidy way to gain control if you really think about it.

Of course, with all things Leftist, it doesn’t always work out the way they think it will. Within the past year or so, professional comedians have stopped going to college campuses for shows because so many students have come out and called their performances harmful and hateful. Granted, the egos of college students these days seem to be more fragile than a balsa wood Faberge Egg, but the point is still valid. I’ve actually read and heard college students say comedy should be “instructive” and “punch up” at power structures.

Wait. How does something be both instructive and punch up at power structures? Are jokes supposed to be a schematic? And would they still be, yanno, funny? That might be the reason I don’t try out my comedy chops. I can see it now.

“Good evening, Slapnuts University! I’m going to tell a few jokes here. Knock knock!”

“I’m offended!”

And then I’d get lead off the stage by campus security and burned in effigy. Or as I call it, Tuesday.

Although political correctness is couched in the idea of respect, it really doesn’t show much respect at all for opinions that don’t coincide with the self-professed opinion makers. I saw this a lot in the 90s when people were being ostracized as not being politically correct merely for using an outdated term…that was once politically correct. Now, not using approved language not only gets you ostracized, but it can get you in trouble in life, thanks to the wonderful world of YouTube. The wrong word, the wrong clothing (yes, you read that right), even the wrong perception of a common word can go viral and create a negative impression that can impact a person’s livelihood.

But if you apply the same “logic” to them, the Left screams “harassment.” Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

But therein lies the ultimate downfall of political correctness. At some point, it eats their own. With the constantly shifting social narrative, it’s impossible to be politically correct 24/7, which means more and more people are going to be marginalized and turned into monsters when they’re only trying to be good in the opinion of others.

That’s right, kids. Political correctness isn’t determined by what you do. It’s determined by what other people’s opinions say you do. So, the easiest way to fight political correctness is to completely ignore the opinions of the politically correct.

Well, we can’t completely ignore them, especially if you’re a free speech advocate. Political correctness undercuts the rights we have to express ourselves because it puts expression up to a public debate with people who don’t want a debate. Even if you decide to self-censor to appease the PC crowd, you are giving up your ability to stand up for yourself when the crowd turns on you. And believe me it will.

Political correctness is a misnomer. It it completely political, but it isn’t correct.