Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Memorial Day is almost upon us, and with it we are encouraged to remember those who have given their lives to preserve the freedoms we far too often take for granted. These folks are heroes to most people.

People…except for Leftists.

In fact, Leftists have a completely different viewpoint on what constitutes a hero, which makes for a perfect entry in the Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week.


What the Left believes it means: a person who fights injustice, intolerance, and other societal problems

What it really means: a person worthy of respect

When it comes to Leftist heroes, the bar is set lower than a snake’s appendix scar. Whether it’s someone well-known as Ted “I Let a Woman Die in My Car and All I Got Was a Lousy Senate Seat” Kennedy or someone like a leader for Black Lives Matter, the Left seems to hand out hero labels like they hand out participation trophies.

Yet, they’re reticent to recognize people who have actually done something to warrant the label. Police officers? Nope! They’re part of the controlling power structure! Some Internet hack who focused on portrayal of women in video games? Totes heroic! And why? She received unconfirmed death threats! That’s completely more heroic than men and women who risk their lives on a daily basis to protect us and receive actual death threats!

If this seems weird to you, it’s not just you. It’s because it is weird. The Left has double standards galore, and this is just another one. What makes this one different from the other double standards is the fact you don’t actually have to do anything to earn a hero label from the Left (unless, of course, you’re to the right of Fidel Castro). With today’s communication technology, you don’t even need to leave your Mom’s basement to be considered a hero. Just write a blog, upload a video to YouTube, or send out a Tweet the Left agrees with and you’ll punch a ticket to Leftist Hero Land.

Here’s a great case in point. The Left went head over heels when Bruce Jenner said he wanted to get a sex change and be called Caitlyn. (On a side note, Kanye West may want to be very careful around the Kardashians given what happened with Bruce.) He/she was so brave for coming out and owning his new gender.

Then, he came out as a Republican. You would have thought he/she ran over someone with his/her car…oh, wait. Too soon?

Seriously, when Caitlyn Jenner identified as a Republican, the Left turned on him/her. Now, Jenner isn’t a “real transgender” because he/she didn’t adopt the Left’s mindset. And you thought the Left lionizing Robert Byrd while telling blacks they were the only ones who truly represent blacks was insane.

Granted, not every police officer, firefighter, military person, and other traditional heroes are worthy of the hero title. Just like with any group of people, the law of averages says there is bound to be a scumbag in their midst. Yet, we cannot let the bad outshine the good. If anything, it should inspire us to work harder to find and lionize those who deserve to be called heroes.

And that starts with all of you reading this piece. Set those standards you refused to compromise and find those who exceed those standards. If they are as good as you believe they are and inspire you to be better yourself, then you’ve found a hero.

And that’s what the Left doesn’t understand. You cannot slap a label on someone who hasn’t done anything and suddenly make that label a fact, no matter how much you want to believe it to be so. You may think Joe Biden is a smart man, but at the end of the day, there are still people hired to spin whatever he says to make it sound less Bidenesque.

The Unhappiest Place on Earth


To put it mildly, 2016 has been a pretty weird year so far. From Donald Trump being the last Republican standing to the federal government going after fellow Leftists at Apple, it’s getting hard to believe there aren’t monkeys with typewriters pounding out Shakespeare as we speak.

But even typing monkeys aren’t as absurd as the current situation with the Veterans’ Administration. It started with wait times at VA hospitals being measured in ice ages. Instead of fixing the problem, the VA has done what government agencies with problems have done for decades: pretended the problem didn’t exist while getting more money to prop up the failing system.

But wait! It gets dumber!

Enter current VA Secretary Robert McDonald. Earlier this week, he responded to criticism of wait times at the VA by comparing them to wait times…at Disneyland. In the interest of fairness, let’s compare the two by the numbers.

Number of deaths attributable to delays in VA care: over 307,000 according to a report by the Department of Veterans Affairs released in 2015

Number of deaths attributable to waiting in line at Disneyland: 0, according to Wikipedia

Granted, Wikipedia is usually as reliable as Joe Biden, so I dug a bit deeper. Upon further review, I found…no deaths attributable to waiting in line at Disneyland.

But they’re totally the same, people! Especially if you use Common Core math!

Since McDonald’s fateful and, well, stupid comments, he has taken so much heat, Satan is suing him for infringing on the copyright of Hell. He has since tried to apologize, but it’s the kind of apology you’d expect from a politician trying to explain away an embarrassing situation. In other words, it’s the kind of apology you’d get from Hillary Clinton.

Put simply, McDonald’s career in the VA is probably going to be coming to a close very soon as a result of the Disneyland comparison, but it won’t be soon enough for me. The fact any veteran has to wait for a week let alone several months to get even basic care is inexcusable, and McDonald’s comments and subsequent attempt to walk them back isn’t going to do him any favors.

Of course, he might still have a great spot with the US Postal Service waiting for him, so he’s got that going for him.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Since 2013 or so, there has been a new creature lurking in the darker corners of the Internet, one that doesn’t seem threatening at first, but is ultimately a menace to society. I’m speaking, of course, of Grumpy Cat.

Actually, I’m speaking of Social Justice Warriors, or SJWs for short. Since they are going to be around for a little while, I figured it might be a good idea to define the term.

Social Justice Warrior (SJW)
What the Left says it means: people committed to equality for all, especially those who have been oppressed by society

What it really means: people who should be committed, period

I first became aware of Social Justice Warriors in 2014 due to GamerGate. Without going into too much detail, GamerGate started out as a criticism of video game journalism ethics (or lack thereof) and grew into a movement where gamers of all stripes attempted to defend their source of fun.

And as we’ve seen, the Left hates fun in any form. Enter the Social Justice Warriors, who took it upon themselves to uphold ethical standards in video games. Just kidding. These buzzkills wanted to force game companies to adjust their behaviors and practices to better match the SJW mindset because sexism…or something.

Fortunately, we’ve taken care of all of the sexism in the world except for those darn video games! Good thing there aren’t any countries where women are being put to death for…oh, I don’t know…wanting to be treated like human beings. Women being stoned in the Middle East? Nothing compared to pixelated women in video games! That’s where the real oppression lies!

For the SJWs reading this, that was sarcasm.

At the root of the SJW movement is the concept of social justice. To the SJWs, social justice can only occur when the current social, political, cultural, and power structures are torn down and replaced with social, political, cultural, and power structures of their preference. Of course, they don’t typically go into detail into what those structures look like, but I’m sure they’ll let us know just as soon as they’ve taken care of the whole women in video games thing.

This is where things get muddier than Pig Pen taking a dip in the Mississippi River. Without letting us know why the current structures are horrible and what they propose to replace them, SJWs can’t really compete in the free marketplace of ideas. So, they do what any good Leftists in their shoes do.

They retreat to Tumblr and create echo chambers…I mean safe spaces where everyone is brilliant and moral and right, and anyone who disagrees with them is a racist, misogynist, homophobic, transphobic, cisgendered doodiehead. Or whatever the Insult of the Month is on Tumblr.

Here’s the thing, though. SJWs aren’t interested in justice, social or otherwise. What they want and have gotten in a lot of cases is power and control. Just look at the situation with Target right now. Women and girls can’t take a gun into the store, but they can be exposed to men who self-identify as women in restrooms. And what’s happened? Target’s first quarter earnings have tanked worse than Mike Dukakis.

And it’s all because they’ve surrendered to SJWs. Congratulations, Target. Oh, by the way, K-Mart called. They want to know when you’re moving in to their condo in Failureville.

Target isn’t the first company to kowtow to SJWs, and they won’t be the last. Here’s the thing, though. SJWs only have the power you give them. If you are afraid of being called a sexist, you’re going to cave in. A lot. And, spoiler alert, it will never be enough. They will always demand more from you under threat of being called a bad name.

Really? You’re that scared of being called a name by a bunch of people with less power than a 2 watt light bulb? They’re like a chihuahua with a megaphone. They’re loud and will get a lot of attention, but they’re not much to handle. Oh, and they’re shrill and annoying, but I’m thinking you got that part already.

As GamerGate showed us, SJWs really hate it when you challenge them and don’t really care what you’re called. As it went on, public opinion solidified behind those who called out the SJWs, and they won because they had better ideas and better means to communicate them. Of course, it didn’t hurt that SJWs were as popular as VD in a brothel. That has changed, though.

Now, VD is more popular than SJWs and much less painful to deal with.

Strange Bedfellows


To put it mildly, I’m not a Donald Trump fan. However, the New York Times has put me into a situation I never thought I’d ever encounter.

I’m forced to defend Donald Trump.

It starts with a Times story that paints the Donald as a sexist monster that makes Bill Clinton look like Mitt Romney. Normally, a story like this would be right up the #NeverTrump movement’s alley…at least until you do a bit more digging into the story. One of the article’s primary sources came out on “Fox and Friends” this morning and said she never had any inappropriate sexual encounters with Trump.


To say journalistic standards have declined in recent decades is like saying Al Gore needs to work on his personality. It’s accurate, but it’s an understatement of epic proportions. And leading the pack as newspapers swirl down the drain is the Gray Lady. Although they’ve had their problems in recent years, taking on Donald Trump, especially with a story that seems flimsier than a toilet paper teddy, is not a smart move.

And if you thought Trump was bad before, Gray Lady, he’s only going to get worse. You’ve given him not just legal and political ammo, you’ve turned him into a sympathetic figure (or as much of one as can be made of him). Not to mention, you’ve given the Right yet another example of Leftist media bias that you can’t begin to deny without looking like buffoons. And considering you guys were the geniuses who hired Jayson Blair, that seems to be pretty easy to do.

But let’s say you’re right. Let’s say you have hard evidence Donald Trump is a misogynist and have no problem releasing it. That would be a major story, one that you could use to compare Trump…to the husband of a current Presidential candidate, former President, and documented rapist. Now, I can’t speak to Trump’s sexual history, but I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say he hasn’t actually raped anyone, unlike the aforementioned candidate’s husband.

But please, tell me more how Trump is bad for women. Oh, and while you do, make sure you give equal treatment to the Left. Wouldn’t want you to look like a partisan rag, right?

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


About a month ago, the University of Massachusetts hosted gay libertarian Milo Yiannopoulous, feminist scholar Christina Hoff Sommers, and conservative comedian Steven Crowder in an event called “The Triggering.” And trigger they did. Campus Leftists felt the need to not only attend the event, but to do everything in their power to try to disrupt it.

To put it mildly, it didn’t go well for the campus Leftists, but it made an unintentional YouTube star out of one of the participants, Cora Segal.

Or as she’s better known, Trigglypuff. (A word of warning. There are parts of her outburst that are not safe for work…or for rational human beings, for that matter.)

During Ms. Puff’s…I mean, Ms. Segal’s rantings, she mentioned two concepts that I felt would make great additions to the Leftist Lexicon Words of the Week.

free speech

What Leftists say it means: the freedom to say what you want when you want
What it really means: the freedom to say what you want, but the intelligence to know when to shut up

hate speech

What Leftists say it means: speech that is hateful and should not be protected as free speech
What it really means: any speech the Left can’t handle

Ah, nothing like college kids thinking they understand the nuances of freedom of speech to teach us about how things should be. I know I feel better about the future when I think of people like Ms. Puff…I mean Ms. Segal.

Yeah, and I’m President of the Bernie Sanders Fan Club.

Here’s a pro tip for Trigglypuff: a difference of opinion isn’t hate speech in and of itself. I’m sure they didn’t teach that in your Multicultural Albino Feminist Tap-Dancing Midget Postmodern Poetry and Basket Weaving class, but it’s true. In fact, there is no fixed legal meaning of hate speech which means it could be literally anything. Including…oh, I don’t know…making an ass of yourself at a public forum by lying about a gay man and a feminist woman. In fact, that could easily be a…hate crime!

Of course, I wouldn’t be the one to press charges because I happen to believe in free speech beyond the confines of the First Amendment. Yes, Ms. Segal, I want you to speak your mind for two reasons. First, it creates a healthy environment for all parties who want to say something to do so. Second, it creates a healthy environment for me to mock you mercilessly.

That’s right, Trigglypuff. Free speech includes mocking people who richly deserve it, and you, my dear, have earned every bit of derision you have earned. Of course, you’ll call this mockery hate speech because it hurts your feelings. That’s nice. Now, care to engage in some real intellectual discourse? No? Didn’t think so.

By trying to paint free speech as hate speech, Leftists try to silence anyone who disagree with them. When that doesn’t work, they resort to the kind of antics we saw at the University of Massachusetts: disrupting the actual speakers. Although you have every right to do that, you look like an ass doing it. That’s the thing about free speech; you’re not guaranteed an audience, and you might just wind up being the Jim Fixx of running gags.

You know, like you are now.



Right now, there is a candidate for President few party members like, but is the presumptive candidate for said party. This candidate has been accused of being out of touch with the grassroots, too extremist, and utterly unlikable. Of course, this candidate’s supporters say if we don’t vote for the candidate, the candidate from the other major party is going to win and do far worse things, so voters should hold their noses and vote for the candidate.

Of course, opponents to this candidate are holding out for someone they feel is better, someone closer to their ideals of what a President should be. They are being told to stop holding out for their candidate and line up behind the presumptive candidate to preserve party unity.

The aforementioned candidates are…Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, respectively. Although, these same sentiments are being used by Donald Trump supporters to get Republicans and conservatives to climb aboard the Trump Train.

If Clinton and Trump are using the same rhetoric to force unity within their respective parties, how different can they actually be?

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


Yeah, I know it’s a little earlier than usual, but I figured I would write this one for all the mothers out there. So, Happy Mothers Day.

And, no, I didn’t save the receipt, so you can’t return it.

This Kentucky Derby was this past Saturday, and along with the big hats and mint julips there was People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals alleging animal cruelty against race horses. It seems any time animals are in the news, PETA and other animal rights activists aren’t too far behind. So, what better time than now to discuss this week’s words?

animal rights

What the Left says it means: treating animals as equals to human beings

What it really means: putting the “crazy” in “crazy cat lady”

PETA and other animal rights activists come from a good place. They want to protect animals from being mistreated, and it’s not a bad goal. And if you’re expecting a but here, you’re right.

The problem is these folks have a very liberal definition of mistreatment, both figuratively and literally. If you eat meat, PETA says you’re mistreating animals. That may be, but it’s delicious mistreatment, especially if it’s a medium rare steak with a side of bacon. Mmmmmm…

Where was I again? Oh, yeah, animal rights.

To put it mildly, the animal rights movement is on the extreme edge of the Leftist Utopia (Leftist Utopia void in anywhere that understands basic economics). Although their numbers are smaller than Verne Troyer starring in a remake of “Fantastic Voyage”, their influence is much wider due in no small part to their pals in the media. Whether it’s the Kentucky Derby or the circus coming to town, the animal rights movement will make itself known, and when they show up, the cameras aren’t that far behind.

But here’s the thing. A car wreck doesn’t require you to crane your neck at the carnage. Just because a few people hold up signs decrying meat as murder, fur as murder, and basically anything that gives people even an iota of pleasure as murder, it doesn’t mean we have to pay attention. Sure, it’s a freak show that would make Tod Browning flinch, but it really isn’t that fulfilling. Think of it as a Twinkie with a liberal arts degree.

At the heart of the animal rights movement is the idea animals are worthy of being elevated to being mini-humans with fur. (Wouldn’t that mean PETA should be against animals? I mean, they are wearing fur.) I get it. There are animals who make better people than some of the actual people walking mostly upright. I’m looking right at you, Kardashian family!

Now, here’s the problem. Animals aren’t humans. They lack certain cognitive functions essential to being human. Ever see a porcupine try to hug it out with anyone? Nope, and that’s for two reasons. One, animals lack empathy, and two, the quills are a bit of a deal breaker for hugs. And along with empathy, animals are missing a few other higher brain functions that would make them closer to humans than they are now. Then again, it might just qualify them for Congress.

Animal rights activists see themselves as the voice of animals, which would be unnecessary if animals had the intellectual capacity the animal rights movement thinks they do. Maybe they’re bucking for job security after the liberal arts degree didn’t qualify them for a job other than…oh, I don’t know…animal rights activist.

And here’s the kicker. Human beings are animals. Biology 101, kids. We are mammals with higher brain functions that make us unique in the animal kingdom. We can reason, feel, express ourselves in any number of forms, and all sorts of other things you won’t find very often in the animal kingdom. Or in the animal rights movement, apparently.

Although the animal rights movement may think they’re motivated by love of animals, they’re motivated by something else: control. Like all Leftists, the animal rights movement wants to remake the world in their image, and that means you will have to do what they say or else you’re scum. That means you have to give up your free will, something else humans have that animals don’t. And, as much as I love animals, I’m just not willing to hand it over and start eating tofu. For one, tofu by itself isn’t that good, and for another, forcing me to abide by someone else’s will might be a bit…unethical.

If you won’t want to eat meat because you think it hurts animals, fine. I’ll be more than happy to pick up your slack. Just let me do it. That’s all I ask. I won’t harangue you for your lifestyle, and we can part as friends.

After all, if I eat more meat, that frees up more salad for you! It’s a win-win!

Party Foul


With Ted Cruz and John Kasich dropping out of the Republican race, the GOP finds itself with Donald Trump as its standard bearer. Now, comes the fun part: uniting the party behind the candidate.

Easier said than done, given the sheer amount of vitriol coming from most of the candidates on the Republican side. Now, the ante is being upped by the Trump Trainers, with Mike Huckabuck…I mean Huckabee, telling Republicans who don’t support Trump to leave the GOP.

Oh, and Mike? That sound you heard was thousands of Republicans heading for the doors.

On the other side of the aisle, Democrats are faced with a similar situation. The tensions between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are running higher than a Denver pothead on April 20th. Or Tuesday, for that matter. As Clinton seems to be closing in on the Democratic nomination, she is finding it hard to attract Sanders supporters. And why not? She’s only a untrustworthy, calculating, and shrill harpy whose successes can be written on a portion of a Post-It Note and still leave plenty of room for a grocery list.

Put another way, the two major parties have trouble on their hands, and it’s here in River City. That starts with T and that rhymes with D and that stands for douchebaggery. That’s right, kids. Both major parties are treating their party members who don’t support the candidate or presumptive candidate as the case may be like Bill Clinton treats female interns.

I can understand the desire for the two major parties to have their party members coalesce behind their nominees, but it not a given. Just like respect, support must be earned, and out of the three candidates from the two major parties, none of them have earned my support, and there are many more of us out there who feel the same way. Should our voices be silenced or disregarded because we’re not behind the party’s nominee? Maybe, just maybe, there is a reason for our hesitation.

Maybe, just maybe, we’re waiting for the candidates to give us a reason to vote for them. And, no, “Because the other party’s candidate is worse” isn’t good enough. A crap sandwich is a crap sandwich no matter what color plate it’s served on. I’ve gotten to the point where I want to vote for something and someone rather than against something or someone. The problem with voting for the lesser of two evils is you still wind up with evil.

I think I speak for a number of people, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, when I say if the two major parties want our votes, they’re going to have to earn them, and it’s not going to happen if they continue to take us for granted.

Hoosier Daddy


With tomorrow’s Indiana primary looming, the writing may be on the wall for at least some of the candidates still in the race for the Democrats and Republicans. Depending upon which set of polls you believe, Donald Trump or Ted Cruz will win the Hoosier State and, with it, a slew of delegates. Between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders…ah, who cares? They both suck.

Whomever wins for the Republicans will have done something important. They will have made later contests matter.

One of the big complaints from states like California is that smaller states have a much larger impact on who the candidates are by the time they get to hold their party conventions. This year, though, that narrative has been thrown out the window. Later contests are actually having an impact on who the GOP’s nominee is.

And that, dear reader, is a good thing.

When we started out the campaign cycle, the Republicans had 16-17 candidates (depending on whether you counted the Pat Paulsen of the GOP this year, Jim Gilmore). By far, that has been the deepest field in my lifetime. Although they took up various points on the conservative spectrum, the GOP had the political buffet from which to savor.

Compare that to the 5 major candidates the Democrats had to suffer through…I mean pick from. Although the Democrats could fit all of their candidates on the same stage, they really didn’t deviate too much from the script: Republicans bad. Democrats good. (Read that in a Frankenstein’s Monster’s voice for the best effect.)

With such a wide array of candidates, Republicans had a lot of choices, and that, in turn, lead to a longer campaign than usual. Previous years saw a Republican candidate sew up the nomination by May or sooner. But this year, voters had an actual choice. They had to weigh options carefully, line up their own values with those of the candidates, and really think for a change instead of being forced to have warmed over dog crap sandwiches this late in the primary season.

Regardless of whether you’re on the Trump Train, want to Cruise with Cruz, or take up space with Kasich, there are two things we can take from this year’s primary season. One, the Republicans have done a masterful job in making later contests matter.

And, two, Bernie Sanders really needs to put away the Flowbee and get to a Great Clips.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week


This past weekend was the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, or as it’s commonly called “Nerd Prom.” Typically, these kinds of events are as boring as a golf announcer doing commentary on paint drying, but this year’s event was newsworthy if only because the host, Larry Wilmore, called President Obama his…well, n-word.

Most people called Wilmore out on his use of the word as racist and disrespectful (that, and the fact he was as funny as Al Gore doing stand-up), but some on the Left defended him, saying it was okay because both Wilmore and Obama are black.

While we set this aside to let the irony/hypocrisy marinate, let’s look into the appropriate Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week.


What the Left says it means: a major problem permeating every aspect of life

What it really means: the ultimate “Get Out of Responsibility Free” card

It seems you can’t throw a rock in Leftist Land without hitting a racist institution, like universities and the media. Wait…don’t Leftists control those areas? Wouldn’t that mean…naaaaaaah!

To hear the Left talk, race relations are at an all-time boiling point, and it’s all because of racism. But if you’ve been paying attention, you see the Left’s narrative is full of more holes than a semi truck full of Swiss cheese caught in the middle of a gang war in Iraq. Are there racists out there? Absolutely. Are they as widespread as we’re lead to believe?


Take a look around. If things were as bad as the Left make them out to be, shouldn’t there be more chaos and destruction? Wouldn’t Beverly Hills look more like Detroit on any day ending in “day”? Shouldn’t there be more animosity between the races than the Hatfields and McCoys on PCP? If this is the racist tinderbox that is igniting fires across this country, I’d say we wouldn’t have enough fire to roast a mini marshmallow.

That’s the dirty little secret the Left doesn’t want you to know. The races in this country get along pretty well by and large. Once you realize that, you see the real problem isn’t racism; it’s assholism. It’s people doing reprehensible things and using racism as justification regardless of whether race is even a factor. Assholism knows no color. See Ferguson, Missouri, for proof of that.

Remember how the Left said the TEA Party was nothing but angry white people? Yeah, they completely ignored black TEA Party members, including Representative Mia Love of Utah. Now, correct me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t that be actual racism? Why, yes…yes it is!

But the Left doesn’t care about that actual racism. They would rather focus on the number of black characters on TV shows and in movies or the lack of black Oscar nominees because Hollywood is racist! (See my question above regarding who controls Hollywood because I believe in recycling.)

And guess what? They’re heavily invested in who can use the n-word.

So, why is the Left pushing a false narrative? There is money and power to be had in keeping the illusion alive. The longer we believe race relations are worse than Larry Wilmore’s hosting, the more the Left can take from from all races. At the end of the day, the only colors the Left doesn’t discriminate against are green and gold.

Now, imagine what would happen if we woke up tomorrow and actually got along. The Left would be more confused than Joe Biden trying to find a corner in the Oval Office. But America would be much better for it.

As it would if Larry Wilmore lost his invitation for future Nerd Proms.