It’s near the middle of April (check local listings for the date in your area) and that means one of two things. First, the Chicago Cubs are mathematically eliminated from the postseason. And second, it’s tax day.
Along with December 7th, April 15th is a day that will live in infamy, mainly because the Internal Revenue Service makes the TSA look like gentle lovers as they probe you in ways that make proctologists wince. And Leftists think the rich need to pay more. After all, the rich make more money and have more loopholes, so they’re literally cheating the rest of us by not paying their fair share.
Which brings us to one of my favorite topics. No, not the mathematical elimination of the Chicago Cubs, but the concept of “fair share.” Seems it’s a lot more complicated than the Left makes it sound.
fair share
What the Left thinks it means – making sure everyone pays their portion of the tax burden
What it really means – a meaningless term Leftists throw around to get people to hate the wealthy
Before we get into the “what constitutes fair share” discussion, we have to go through some numbers. In the fiscal year 2023, the IRS collected over $4.7 trillion in tax revenue. To put it mildly, that’s a shit-ton of money. For those who use the metric system, that’s a shit-kilo of money.
As big of a number that is, it’s overshadowed by a smaller number: 97.7%. That’s the percentage of the tax burden paid by the top 50% of taxpayers in 2020. Granted, there’s a significant difference between 2020 and 2023 or 2024 for that matter, but the numbers haven’t changed very much since 2020.
The Tax Foundation did a breakdown of the 2021 numbers, which are the most recent we have to work with. And that’s where we find the 97.7% of the tax burden I referenced above. If current trends match the 2021 numbers (and I have no reason to believe they wouldn’t given the glacial pace at which the federal government adopts change), that means the top 1% paid over $12 trillion in federal income taxes.
Now, let’s look at the other side of the equation. The bottom 50% chipped in a little over $108 billion. I think we could scrape that together from the change in our couches, right?
Seriously, though, the Left doesn’t see anything wrong with this, except for the part where the rich are only paying a paltry $14 trillion. To hear Leftists talk, the rich are using the tax code to their advantage to get out of paying what they owe.
In other words, they’re doing what most taxpayers do. Even Leftists who tell us paying higher taxes is our patriotic duty. But fortunately we would never let such a mouth-drooling idiot to become President, right?
The problem with the Left’s approach is it doesn’t exactly have a foundation in facts. The numbers give us a vastly different story: there are a shit-ton (or shit-kilo) of people who are riding on the tailored coattails of the wealthy. And guess who the Left convinces the rich aren’t paying enough taxes?
If you need a hint, check out Bill Gates’ coattails.
Of course, people like Gates, Warren Buffett, and (surprise surprise) Leftist politicians like Elizabeth “Chief Running Mouth” Warren are all on record saying the rich need to pay more. And why? Because they make more! Once the rich pony up a few trillion more, then maybe…and I do mean maybe, things will be more fair.
Actually, it will never be fair enough for Leftists. Every time a group negotiates with Leftists and comes closer to their side, the Left moves the goalposts a little bit further out, requiring the group to do more to come closer to the new goal. But it’s never at the expense of the Left, mind you. If you want compromise, it has to be on their terms and their terms alone.
Which means this whole “fair share” bullshit is dishonest at its face. I was as shocked at you were to find out Leftists are liars.
What the Left really means when they demand the rich pay their fair share is for the rich to pay more. Once the top 1% is taxed to infinity and beyond, then the focus will shift to the top 2%. Then the top 3% and so on. And at every step, Leftists are counting on gullible poorer people and useful rich idiots to justify their actions. Of course, anyone with a lick of sense (which means Leftists won’t get it) sees this eventually getting to a point where anyone with $1 above the average is seen as the rich and has to be taken down a peg or two. Or fifty.
Then where will the money come from exactly? That’s right, kids, it will have to come from the people who were cheering this shit on from the jump. And since they don’t have as much to start with, it’s going to be damn tough to get any more blood out of that turnip.
And here’s the funny part. And by funny I mean grotesque and sad…which isn’t all that funny, but work with me here. If the Left gets what it wants and taxes the rich more, it’s not even going to solve the major issue that it’s allegedly supposed to fix: the national debt. In fact, it’s not going to do anything but give Leftists more money to spend on stupid shit we don’t need and only a handful of people demanded in the first place. There’s a reason some Congresscritters come out every year with examples of wasteful government spending.
One such Congresscritter is Senator Rand Paul. I don’t always agree with him on policy matters, but he has been consistent in his commitment to reducing government waste whenever possible. His 2023 “Festivus Report” showcased some pretty absurd expenditures, like paying dead people. Although I have to admit I’m down with the funding of “Monkey Island” because, well, monkeys are awesome!
That being said, raising taxes makes it easier for people who don’t care about how the money gets spent to spend the money it gets. If it were being spent on infrastructure (which Leftists have said is just about everything except Donald Trump), that would be one thing, but the very fact we paid for Monkey Island tells me it’s not.
But there are ideas floating around that truly are closer to fair than the current shitstorm…I mean system. Two such ideas are the flat tax and the national sales tax. With the former, everybody pays the same percentage with fewer deductions. The latter only taxes items and services purchased. In both scenarios, the rich are paying more by virtue of what they take in or spend depending on the system. And both of them make more sense than what we have now.
Which is why Leftists hate them.
One of the great many paradoxes the Left operates under is how conservative they are when the system works for them. The minute something changes their status quo to the point it jeopardizes it, the Left goes into complete lockdown, can’t change a damn thing or it will be utter chaos with dogs and cats shacking up together mode. When the system doesn’t work for them, they are the most liberal (dictionary definition, not ideological) people out there. Then, they go into complete open up the flood gates, change every damn thing or it will be utter chaos with dogs and cats shacking up together mode.
And right now, they’re not happy with the rich being able to keep more of what they generate by…following the tax code. I could go into all the problems with the tax codes, but then this piece would be longer than the tax code itself and I don’t want to bore you any more than I already do. If Leftists were truly serious about making sure the rich pay more, they would look at the tax code and try to close up some of the legal loopholes.
But that would mean some of them might be subject to the same “tax the rich” arguments they’ve been making for decades. We can’t have that, can we? So, instead, we have to put up with more “the rich need to pay their fair share” talk for the foreseeable future.
But remember these are the assholes who think a flat tax or a national sales tax wouldn’t work to make things fair when they’re arguably the very definition of fairness. Why, it’s almost as if Leftists want the tax system to remain unfair while proclaiming they want it to be fair!
Good thing we aren’t electing total dumbasses who play this stupid game, right?
Category: Guest Author
All Guests Authors use this Category in addition to others.
Party of Science, My Ass!
It wasn’t that long ago that politics and science were kept apart like men’s and women’s prisons. That was until Leftists decided to mix the two for the purposes of ideological advancement.
It started with global warming…ummm climate change…uhhhh climate catastrophes…or whatever the fuck they want to call it this minute. The point is climate science met someone who was willing to bring it into the limelight, but only after it became politics’ bitch. Enter Al “More Boring Than the Color Beige” Gore, a know-nothing know-it-all whose academic accomplishments were more underwhelming than my dating life. Prior to meeting my wife, of course!
Well, looks like I’m spending another night on the couch.
Anyway, Gore brought climate change into the forefront of American consciousness due in part to his book Earth in the Balance. Since I care about you and don’t want to bore you with a lengthy analysis, let me give you a summary.
Global Warming bad. Government good.
Here’s how bad it was. I had essentially a high school level knowledge of science and I was poking holes in ManBearPig’s arguments. But since he sounded like he knew what he was talking about, people believed him. And they still do even though he’s neck-and-neck with Paul Krugman on the idiot who can be the most wrong in modern American history.
But since the advent of the Internet, which Gore took credit for taking the initiative in creating it, surely we’ve become more scientifically literate, right? Not so much. And it’s usually the Left who is advancing the most unscientific bullshit. Here’s a sampling of “the Party of Science” and their greatest shits…I mean hits.
– Trans women can get periods.
– Trans women can get pregnant.
– The COVID-19 vaccine stops the virus.
– Climate change caused the recent eclipse.
– Climate change affects earthquakes.
– Guam could capsize.
– The moon is mostly made of gases.
– There are more than two genders.
– Math is racist.
– Science is racist.
– Physics is racist.
– Trans women athletes have no advantage over biological women.
– Gender-affirming care is health care.
– Abortion is health care.
– Children can choose their gender.
– Gun violence is a health care issue.
– Conservatives are dumber than liberals/Leftists.
I could go on, but you get the idea. Leftists are quick to believe science is on their side…except when it isn’t. When the science proves Leftists are full of shit, Leftists pull out all sorts of excuses. The findings weren’t peer-reviewed. The study was founded by [insert name of Big Something-Or-Other]. Nobody should take these scientists seriously because they defy the established science.
And when the Left can’t use those excuses, they blackball the scientists and memory-hole their findings so no one else can know the truth.
As a fan of science, I’m disgusted by how Leftists have abused science to advance political ends. It’s gotten to the point Leftists have turned what should be an apolitical advancement of knowledge into a cult. And, really, that’s what the Left has done. Just look at this Anthony Fauci devotional candle. That kind of shit doesn’t come from a place of science. It only comes from a place of religious fervor.
And it’s not like Leftists raised incompetent or dishonest people to god-like status in recent history. I mean, aside from Robert Mueller. And Jack Smith. And Fani Willis. And Letitia James. And Adam Schiff. And Nancy Pelosi. And Barack Obama. And Michelle Obama.
On second thought, maybe they do.
By deifying science, Leftists have hindered real science by making it harder for people to accept what they’ve been told from the people Leftists say we need to trust without question. Science works best when that doubt is undercut by the actual process, a little thing the kids like to call the scientific method. As we’ve seen with climate “science” since ManBearPig’s time, the Left has flipped the script. Instead of letting the process confirm or reject the hypothesis, they’ve made it fine to start with the conclusion and work backwards so the science seems to support the conclusion.
But the thing about pseudoscience is it always gets exposed by the sunlight of actual science. All the shit the “Party of Science” told us about COVID-19 has all but been discredited to the point they’re asking for amnesty from their lies. After all, science changes over time, so we should forgive and forget, right?
Nope. Not when you’ve made science your bitch (and not in a good way).
Extremist Makeover: Feminism Edition
Since the 1970s, women have been striving to be seen as equals to men and have used feminism as a conduit for change. During the past 50 years or so, we’ve seen feminism take a more prominent role in our discourse. Then, within the past 5 years, feminism as we knew it has gone quieter than Hunter Biden during a drug bust at a crack house.
Turns out feminism has been replaced by a new ism, transgenderism. Even the National Organization for Women has bent the knee to its new transgender masters…or would it be mistresses? Either way, feminism has taken a bit of a beating recently, so I’m here to help. We need to make over feminism so it can stay afloat long enough for people to come to their senses.
And failing that, at least to recognize the irony of biological men telling biological women what womanhood is and women just accepting it.
The first thing we need to address is the elephant in the room: feminism has been ruined by feminists. One of my Immutable Truths of Life is “A cause’s worst enemy is the members of the cause itself.” And this is no truer than with feminism. What started out as women asking to be treated the same as men evolved into women demanding to be treated better than men. Yes, they want to both be seen as highly competent and strong individuals, but don’t want to give up the perks of being seen as the “weaker sex.”
And that’s why transgender women want to dictate what a woman is. To them, being a woman is like playing a video game on Easy Mode. They want all the perks of womanhood without having to be one. But it takes more than a dress and makeup to be a woman, and that’s exactly what feminists need to do to reclaim womanhood for those who were born women.
Don’t worry about being called a “bad ally,” either. The fact is trans women like Lia Thomas and Dylan Mulvaney aren’t allies to feminism. If anything, they want to replace women while simultaneously mocking them. As of this writing, Thomas still has her…twigs and berries, if you know what I mean, so she’s not even trying to pass as a woman. She’s still just a long-haired man who says she’s trans so she can dominate swimming.
Because that’s what employers are looking for these days: athletic prowess.
And Mulvaney…well, let’s just say she’s on the other side of the equation by playing up the “women are bimbos” trope.
Some allies they are, amirite?
Once womanhood is reclaimed from the Left, the next step is going to be a bit easier. One of the biggest complaints about feminists in recent years is how annoying and judgmental they’ve become if a woman doesn’t do what the feminist ideology of the microsecond demands. The thing is feminism isn’t one-size-fits-all. There are stay-at-home mothers who are just as strident as the rainbow haired harpy screaming about abortion rights, and it’s time the feminist movement recognizes that. The goal should be female empowerment, not female subjugation under a single banner.
And third, dump the “third wave” feminists. These nozzleheads are the ones who have not only made feminism unpopular, but lead the movement to kowtow before our new trans masters…errr, mistresses. They’re the feminist version of the Karen, but without the charm and warmth. And they will not be denied in their quest to turn feminism into their personal sword and shield. The movement as a whole would be better off without them. Let them go off and create their own version of feminism, and you’ll see your membership numbers soar.
Or at least they won’t be embarrassed to call themselves feminists.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In case you were wondering what disturbed the calm of celebrating the resurrection of Jesus, it was the sound of conservatives and Republicans screaming angrily at President Brick Tamland issuing an official declaration recognizing Transgender Day of Visibility, which occurred this year on Easter Sunday. Granted, this is going to happen occasionally since Transgender Day of Visibility has been on March 31 since it was created, so for once President Tamland didn’t fuck up as much as he usually does. Instead, he fucked up trying to avoid looking like he fucked up.
Instead of focusing on the fuck-up (which would make this one of the longest Lexicon entries in site history), I want to focus on the focal point of this controversy, Transgender Day of Visibility.
And, yes, I’m sorry we have to go there again.
Transgender Day of Visibility
What the Left thinks it means – a day when transgender people can be recognized and celebrated
What it really means – a redundant, unnecessary holiday
Admittedly, I don’t know much about Transgender Day of Visibility (also known as TDOV by the kids), so I decided to go to an authoritative source on all things trans, GLAAD. I’m not sure where the T fits into the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. Maybe it’s a silent T.
Anyway, TDOV started in 2010 because a trans advocate felt the community was victimized by the rest of society due to negative portrayals in the media and news stories focused on violence rather than the accomplishments of trans people. Which shows how little the founder knew about the media, by the way. Since then, it flew under most people’s radar because…now get this…most Americans aren’t transgender.
Trans advocates will argue this proves why TDOV is necessary. After all, the goal of this holiday is to raise awareness of the trans community. My counter to that is with people like Dylan Mulvaney, Jeffrey Marsh, and the “It’s Ma’am” woman, we’re well aware of trans people. It’s like having a Vegan Day of Visibility; we know they’re out there because they can’t shut the fuck up about being vegan.
I didn’t provide a link for Dylan Mulvaney media because if I did, it would be the longest Lexicon post in site history.
Furthermore, TDOV isn’t the only observance of trans people during the year. Here is a list of the other trans-specific days observed throughout the year.
Day of Silence
International Day Against Homophobia, Transphobia, and Biphobia
LGBT Pride Month
Transgender Awareness Week
Transgender Day of Remembrance
And since trans people have inserted themselves (phrasing!) into the gay community, the list includes even more. At this rate, the trans community will be competing with the Postal Service for number of recognized days.
The issue at hand isn’t that trans people are invisible, not recognized for their achievements, or are only known for negative stereotypes. There are relatively few people who don’t acknowledge the existence of trans people or who actively hate them for being trans. Where most people are concerned about the trans community is when members of that community acts in ways that are at best morally questionable, and the community rallies behind the potential offender instead of calling out the bad behavior.
Take the case of Audrey Hale, a transgender woman who identified as male and shot and killed 6 people at The Covenant School in 2023. While most people condemned the mass shooting, the trans community…well, let’s just say they weren’t so visible following suit. In fact, the Trans Resistance Network mourned not only the loss of lives at Hale’s hands, but mourned Hale’s loss as well.
Furthermore, the trans community got worried about the backlash from the shooting by one of their own. I get that, but for the love of fuck maybe don’t lead with that shit. Six people died because a transgender person decided to shoot up a school, but you collective fucknuggets couldn’t figure out the “poor us” strategy wasn’t the right way to go?
Of course, the pronoun police had to get involved. They weren’t outraged at the carnage, but the “deadnaming” of Hale and the confusion around what pronouns to use.
And people wonder why aliens don’t visit Earth that much.
This is the biggest stumbling block to trans people being accepted or tolerated by the majority of Americans. The majority of the vocal transgender people getting the attention hold themselves and their community above everyone else. They are never wrong; they can only be wronged by others. And they have the egos to flaunt it. I mean, when you can get CBS to not use the term “transgender” in news reports about a transgender shooter, that’s some real power, kids.
I honestly think it’s this power the Left is most scared of, and also the power it most wants to control. It’s like a more flamboyant street gang, complete with utter loyalty to itself and willingness to win at any cost, no matter how down and dirty it will get. The trans community has the Left cowering in its collectivist Doc Martins because they will turn on Leftists who don’t bow to their transgender masters/mistresses.
And the trans community needs several days to be recognized?
Bitch/bastard please! We see you well enough, but we don’t see you when it counts. When Lia Thomas started dominating women’s sports (because, well, he’s a man), you assholes said “get good” to actual women. What would have been a better strategy is to have a good faith conversation about whether biological men competing in women’s events under the guise of being transgender is safe, warranted, and above all else fair for all parties involved. But you’re not ready for that conversation. It’s your way or the high heel way.
And that’s not what you want us to see, is it? You have a lot of power, but still claim to be victims whenever anything bad happens, big or small. Most often small. Minuscule, even. We outside the trans bubble see that all too often, and we see when you folks can’t even bring yourselves to make the right decisions. Like telling Dylan Mulvaney his new song sucks. How fucking hard is that?
Sorry, trans people, but I don’t think you need Transgender Day of Visibility. You need a Transgender Day of Accountability, where you fess up to the shit the bad players in your midst do on the regular and distance yourselves from them. In fact, I think I have the perfect place they can go. Maybe you’ve heard of it.
It’s called Antarctica.
How Good is “The Public Good”?
There’s a general concept within Leftist circles designed to get people to think in communal terms instead of individual terms. I call it “the public good” argument. Basically, whatever a Leftist wants gets argued in terms of the bigger picture for the greater good (or at least their version of it). I ran into this recently and decided it would be a good concept to explore. Oh, and make fun of.
As with so many things these days, it started with a meme…
A Leftist Facebook friend posted a meme with the “public funds should go to public school” idea Leftists have advanced in the past few years in response to parents taking their children out of public schools and either sending them to private schools using vouchers or homeschooling. Because who doesn’t want to send their kids to a school system that even Leftists think suck ass? (I mean, aside from Leftist politicians with kids. They get to go to private school without so much as a mumble of protest from these public school fans.)
Anyway, the original post mentioned “the public good” to praise public schools and to denigrate school vouchers. Being the smartass I am, I started off with a simple premise: both public and private schools serve the same public good, that being a well-educated population. From there, I asked why there is such an uproar over public funds going to private schools via vouchers when they serve the public good I referenced earlier.
To date, I have yet to receive anything resembling a real attempt to answer the question. Oh, I was called “misinformed” by someone promising (and failing) to deliver facts to counter my viewpoint, told I needed to volunteer at a public school to really understand what’s going on (after citing friends and family who are currently teaching, as well as linking to an article showing other public school teachers saying what I was saying), and told “you just want to argue.” But still no answer.
This is the real problem behind the Left’s “public good” argument, whether it be for public education, gun control, or any other Leftist idea they want to promote. Their solutions only go one way, and it’s always the way that favors the Left’s ideological ends. In the situation I experienced, the only way to fix public schools was whatever the Leftists said was the right answer. Which, as it turns out, is exactly the same thing we’ve been doing for decades to a steadily declining standard of education.
Which explains why the Leftists I encountered couldn’t answer the question I posed. If the true goal of public and private schools is to produce well-educated students, there is no logical conclusion where only public schools should get public money. But the Left can’t admit that because it would mean their entire premise of “public funds should stay in public schools” is based on discrimination.
Or should I say bigotry?
One of the big problems the Left has with private schools is how many of those schools have religious ties. They love to cite the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment as justification to deny public funds to private schools, but it’s a real stretch to equate public school funding with a law. I mean, unless there’s a public school that has a seat in Congress, it’s pretty much a non-issue. The real issue the Left has with these schools (and only a few openly admit) is the possibility students would be indoctrinated. And Leftists think that’s their job!
More to the point, the Left hates any entity that offers an alternative to government as the sole provider of everything. Which, if you really think about it (and I have because I get bored easily), is a religion of sorts, but…okay, let’s not go too far down this rabbit hole of utter hypocrisy. Let’s just say the Left’s religion includes the holy doctrine of…wait for it…the public good. And their solution? More of the shit that’s failed before, just with a bigger price tag.
That’s where I diverge from the public school fans in the Facebook thread I was on. They say they want public schools to be funded for the public good, but they don’t want to address the problems even public school teachers are seeing today. To them, the funding of public schools is a greater public good than producing a well-educated population.
Which means nothing will get done, but we’ll still be paying for subpar service. If this were a company or a restaurant, we could go elsewhere.
Oh, wait. We can! As public schools continue to see a decline in enrollment, private schools are seeing an increase. No longer are parents subject to the slavery of the public school monopoly, which threatens the pipeline of future Leftists. And because private schools depend on financial donations from donors, they have a vested interest in maintaining and improving educational standards. And that, boys and girls, tends to lead to better results. With better results, these evil private schools are closer to fulfilling the public good public school advocates say they want.
That’s why Leftists are so intent to “prove” public schools are superior to private schools. If parents actually see public schools are shitholes that make Detroit look like Paris in springtime, they are going to demand answers and start looking for alternatives. And thanks to people like LibsofTikTok, we’re getting to see the absolute freaks getting into education and what they’re teaching. Spoiler Alert: the three Rs ain’t too high on the list, but you damn well better learn the teacher’s pronouns!
And somehow public school advocates don’t seem to see this as a problem, but as supporting the public good. The pubic good, maybe, but not the public good.
So, we’re left with the question in the title: how good is the public good? When Leftists define it, not very. When people who actually care about results over politics define it, well it may not be the best, but it’s a damn sight better than the bullshit the Left tells us is the public good.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
To put it mildly, the mainstream media tend to be rather…how can I put this delicately…secure in their beliefs, which just so happen to coincide with Leftist beliefs. Rarely will they even entertain someone from a different ideology to penetrate the bubble they inhabit, and usually it’s done to show how superior they are to that person.
Most of the time, this doesn’t end well. Just ask Sonny Hostin of “The Spew”… I mean “The View.”
It’s because of this the Leftist media tend to hire milquetoast Republicans/former Republicans to nod approvingly at whatever insane shit the Leftist squawking heads say. Such was the case when NBC News/MSNBC hired former Republican National Committee Chair Ronna McDaniel as a contributor. And then promptly fired her.
Sometimes when a Leftist sets itself on fire to get my attention, I just have to give it to them.
NBC/MSNBC
What the Left thinks it means – two news outlets known for solid journalism and an honest, tireless pursuit of the truth
What it really means – reliable stenographers for the Left
Granted, the latter definition could apply to a lot of mainstream media outlets, but since we’re focusing on the two-headed monster that is NBC and MSNBC, it fits as well as any.
Back in the day, NBC had some journalistic giants in their employ. Chet Huntley, David Brinkley, and John Chancellor, just to name three. These were the faces and voices people depended on to deliver the news on a nightly basis, and they became the gold standard in the network news industry among so many others.
But as the 70s and 80s came along and new journalists with standards looser than a customer’s stool after eating the new Prune and Ex-Lax Burrito at Chipotle, the newsrooms turned into breeding grounds for ideological PR. Ethical standards, basic reporting, and even conflicts of interest became secondary to advancing the “right” ideas. Which, not surprisingly, got them in a bit of trouble. Repeatedly.
As bad as NBC’s news division got, it wasn’t until MSNBC came into being that the Leftist media utopia could be realized. And, as anyone with an IQ anywhere approaching a heat wave in Antarctica could tell you, it was and continues to be a dumpster fire. The worst part about it is the President of NBC News at the time Phil Griffin allowed it, chalking it up as a natural progression and pointing to ratings as justification. I don’t know who thought becoming a Mirror Universe version of Fox News was a good idea, but I’m sure they were with the same consulting agency that got Air America off the ground…and then right back onto it.
This brings us to the McDaniel hiring and firing. As soon as it was announced she was hired, Leftists within MSNBC threw a temper tantrum because…McDaniel didn’t stop Donald Trump from perpetuating the notion the 2020 election had issues. We can’t have differing opinions in a newsroom, as chairman of the NBCUniversal News Group Cesar Conde wrote in an internal memo:
No organization, particularly a newsroom, can succeed unless it is cohesive and aligned.
But I’m sure that doesn’t mean ideologically aligned, amirite kids?
Not so much.
The Left says they welcome all voices, but the voices they approve are of the controlled opposition variety. Look at the Republicans and former Republicans on MSNBC’s payroll.
Joe Scarborough
Michael Steele
Nicolle Wallace
Charlie Sykes
Steve Schmidt
Along with guests like Liz Cheney, George Conway, and Adam Kinzinger, it’s pretty clear who MSNBC trusts as “real Republicans”: people who are anti-Trump and marginally Republican. Although it can be argued the GOP is the Party of Trump thanks to his daughter-in-law Lara Trump becoming RNC Co-Chair and subsequent house cleaning within the RNC, the point is there are more Republicans than just the anti-Trumpers out there, and MSNBC is doing a disservice to its viewing public by ignoring or “otherizing” them.
Then again, maybe that’s the point.
The idea behind controlled opposition is to give the illusion of a counterbalance to the prevailing powers that be while secretly knowing this counterbalance is working for the powers that be. From a media perspective, this allows news networks to put on people from opposing political parties to make the reporting/commentary look and sound balanced. But if you can reasonably predict what the opposition is going to say and do…it’s not really opposition. Fox News does the same thing with its Left-leaning commentators, so it’s not just a Leftist activity.
How NBC News gets looped into this is when they perpetuate the “otherizing” of Republicans, particularly pro-Trump Republicans. MSNBC does most of the heavy lifting here, but NBC isn’t shy about helping out when necessary. They just aren’t as rabidly partisan in appearance.
At least, they weren’t until McDaniel was hired. “Meet the Press” host Chuck Todd ripped into NBC for hiring her…and he did it on-air. That act alone showed me NBC and MSNBC are no longer variations on a theme; they’re the same fucking song.
And it’s being sung by the same Leftist lunatics.
To watch NBC’s history go up in a fireball that would make the Hindenburg look like a wet sparkler is sad to an old school journalism fan like your humble correspondent, but it’s a self-inflicted injury. The people who made the decision to have both NBC and MSNBC go so far left they see Karl Marx as a poseur created this environment where someone who allowed Donald Trump some leeway is not worthy of hearing from, in spite of the fact this woman ran (albeit poorly) one of the two major political parties in America. To someone like me, that’s not just doing a disservice to McDaniel, but to anyone who watches NBC or MSNBC.
Yes, I know Michael Steele was a former RNC Chair, but he’s been out of power long enough that his perspectives may be obsolete. McDaniel is fresh out of the position, so her insight on the party right now and how Trump has operated as a Republican candidate should be highly valued. Especially going into a Presidential election where Donald Trump is the presumptive fucking Republican candidate.
But, best not to offend Leftist fee-fees in the name of actual political and newsworthy commentary, right? You keep that hugbox alive, dammit!
At this point, there is no coming back for NBC. The Faustian deal they made by joining MSNBC on the lunatic fringe can’t be undone, and the Ronna McDaniel hiring/firing only shows how close to the cliff’s edge they are. It’s gotten so bad Republicans are thinking about limiting NBC’s access to the Republican National Convention this year. If they go through with it (and with more Trump loyalists at the helm, they might), that’s going to hit both NBC and MSNBC right in the pocketbook.
Fucking brilliant.
I’m sure they’re working on their bullshit excuse to claim victimhood status, but it’s just that: bullshit. They made this bed and now they’re going to lie about it. And I will be here to laugh as they get frozen out of one of the biggest stories of the year, all because their fee-fees couldn’t handle a Partially-Trump Republican.
Children’s Crusade
There are a few reasons I have held off from talking about the Nex Benedict suicide, but the biggest one is because I wanted to get the facts straight in my own head before committing keyboard to blog site. This caution has come from years of watching early narratives taken as gospel getting blown out by facts that took a while to come forward. Even then, you can’t always count on the facts to get equal or even equitable treatment as the early, more salacious details.
Unfortunately, the Nex Benedict story falls into this category. As time and observant people went along, the initial story about Benedict’s death changed more than the TV channels with me in control of the remote. That’s when I start looking more closely at the details. Not only is it a good way to get a grasp on what happened, but it can reveal angles that haven’t been touched on yet.
And I came across a real doozy.
The LGBTQIA2XGLORIAGLOOOOORIAAAAA community had a lot riding on this story as a means to garner support/sympathy/unwavering positive media attention for the cause, even if it meant they had to lie about it. (Spoiler Alert: they did, and are still lying as we speak…or as I write and you read.) What they banked on more than the lies was the fact Nex was a cute kid, almost childlike in appearance. Draw whatever conclusions you want, but I want you to think about the power in the image of a young person involved in a personal tragedy. It’s pretty damn powerful.
And it works over and over again.
Trayvon Martin, David Hogg, Greta Thunberg, Tawana Brawley, all of these young people and many more have been used by Leftists to perpetuate an ideological goal because of their age, actual or apparent. Adults have this internal need to protect younger generations or feel for them when they deal with problems we feel they shouldn’t have to address. Leftists know this and use that to play us for suckers. Any time the Left wants to get us to back a piece of legislation or adopt one of their stupid ideas, bring out the kids!
After all, one of their favorite lines is “think about the children.”
That is, unless the children don’t agree with the Left’s agenda or if it’s more beneficial to use them as a punching bag. Just ask Kyle Kashuv, Nicholas Sandmann, Kyle Rittenhouse, and Riley Gaines. And they should have plenty of time since the Left isn’t knocking down their doors for interviews.
But they’ll spend all sorts of time lying about Nex Benedict’s death to blame transphobia, LibsOfTikTok, the GOP, Donald Trump, the 1993 Denver Broncos, or anyone/anything else that is the go-to for blame these days. Even though Benedict’s death has been ruled a suicide, it’s still because of the aforementioned things because Leftists say so.
One thing Leftists aren’t so quick to talk about, though, is why they see children and teenagers as ideological pawns. This isn’t to say the Right doesn’t do the same thing, but the Left has a longer and more prolific history of using children as the swords and shields for their crusades. And as long as it keeps working, the Left will keep using kids with zero fucks given as to whether it’s a good or ethical idea.
To any Leftists reading this, it’s not good, nor ethical. The ends don’t justify the means, especially if those ends are as a result of the end of a human life. You can hate whomever you want, but it doesn’t change the fact you’re using a dead trans youth to achieve an end that youth will never see and has zero input on participation. If you care so damn much about Nex Benedict, you would leave this situation alone. Since it’s clear you don’t, I’m pretty sure this story will fade into our collective memories and dragged out once or twice a year to “remember” Benedict. You’ve turned a trans youth’s life into a commodity to be discarded once it’s no longer useful.
For that, you’ve earned a hearty and well deserved Fuck You. Enjoy it.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Although I tend to focus on stuff going on in America, there are times when I do have to train my gaze elsewhere just to see if their Leftists are as fucked up as ours are. Given what I just read, I can say they are.
The Globe and Mail, a Canadian newspaper that has its origins in two newspapers established in the 19th Century, published an opinion piece with the scorching hot take…excessive free speech is bad. I would chalk this up to frostbite affecting Canadian Leftists’ brains, but it’s harder to do so when American Leftists seem to have taken on a similar viewpoint.
Hoo boy. This is gonna get messy.
free speech
What the Left thinks it means – a right that has become too dangerous not to be curtailed by government
What it really means – a weapon the Left doesn’t want you to have so you can’t call out its bullshit
It wasn’t that long ago that liberals and even Leftists held free speech in high esteem, mainly because they were the ones exercising it the most at the expense of the Establishment. Recent First Amendment pioneers like Lenny Bruce, George Carlin, Norman Lear, Richard Pryor, and so many others made their livings off thumbing their noses at those who would seek to control their speech. To them, free speech wasn’t just a proverbial hill to die on; it was their jobs.
Then, something happened. (Sorry, I was cribbing notes off Rep. Ilhan Omar for a second.) It’s hard to pinpoint when Leftists decided free speech was a bridge too far, but I would say it had something to do with Ronald Reagan spearheading the repeal of the Fairness Doctrine. In theory, the Fairness Doctrine required controversial topics get an equal hearing, and it was good at the time mainly because the most controversial topics during the bulk of the time the Fairness Doctrine was in place was whether mayonnaise or Miracle Whip made better egg salad.
But as the Left went nucking futs and media companies started to concern themselves with financial viability more than principles, the Fairness Doctrine started to be more one-sided towards more “mainstream” opinions (which would exclude most of Leftist ideals then and now). So Leftists did what they normally do: overwhelm the system to the point they took it over. Then, they didn’t give one-tenth of one shit about fairness because they could run whatever opinions they wanted while simultaneously bashing Reagan for repealing the Fairness Doctrine.
So, a win-win for them.
And with the kind of power the Left has within the media comes the temptation to use it to quiet the opposition. That’s why they demanded conservative talk radio show hosts like Rush Limbaugh be forced to comply with the Fairness Doctrine (even when they didn’t believe it). After all, what good are rules unless you can fuck over someone else in the process, amirite?
That’s one of the fundamental differences between a liberal and a Leftist. A liberal will work within the system to address inequity through compromise. A Leftist will warp the system to created inequity in the name of equity through force. The latter is often the quicker option, which benefits Leftists on many levels (mainly because they don’t want to wait for people to come around to their point of view). And let’s not forget the satisfaction of near-instant gratification. But as it too often occurs with microwave popcorn, it starts to stink if you’re not paying attention to it.
This brings us to the current state of Leftist hatred of free speech. To them, the only people who should have free speech are those who parrot Leftist squawking points. But that’s not free speech; it’s controlled speech. Free speech requires the ability to have pushback, which is something Leftists hate. They need to have control of the not just the narrative, but the means by which any narrative gets disseminated.
But in a world where there are people who have more ways to communicate than Baskin Robbins has flavors, it’s getting harder for the Left to dominate like they once did. That’s why they’re trying to rebrand anything they don’t agree with as “misinformation.” Even when it’s not. This goes into Leftist delusions about being fucking brilliant when they’re dumber than a bag of hammers, but that’s a blog post for a different time.
In the interest of transparency (and to fill out this Leftist Lexicon entry a bit more), I am a free speech fan. I mean, how couldn’t I be when being able to express myself is my gig here? To me, the solution to bad speech is more speech, not less. You want to shout racist sentiments at a black family? Yell more tolerant sentiments back, or at the very least tell the other party their hood’s on crooked. Yes, there are some limitations to that (the whole “with great power comes great responsibility” thing), but I would prefer to live where I can be shouted down instead of where I can be shot or beaten.
And, yes, that’s where the Left really wants to take this. There are Leftists out there who would think nothing of bashing someone’s head in with a brick for the crime of…not agreeing with them. If you thought the “fiery but mostly peaceful” Summer of Love was bad, just wait until Leftists decide to turn your words into their actions.
For my Canadian readers, you may be fucked. After all, you have Justin Trudeau at the helm and he’s about as sensible as Hunter Biden on a meth binge. Fortunately, The Globe and Mail is getting soundly roasted for its insanely stupid “excessive free speech” take, so all may not be lost yet. Keep on them, and remind them that without free speech, they wouldn’t have a newspaper. Tell ’em I sent ya.
As far as America is concerned, we still have some time before things go tits up. For one, Leftists aren’t handling the free speech tide going against them, especially on social media. By the way, how’s Mastodon doing? Are you finally up to double digit users yet?
The other thing that hinders Leftists when it comes to fighting for free speech is…well, they’re pussies. The only way they can be brave is by ganging up on weaker targets and being better armed than said targets. Any group that can match them, they avoid. That’s why you see very few Leftists at Girl Scout cookie sales.
More to the point, Leftists are classic bullies, and the best way to beat a bully is to show no fear. And if you really want to pour salt in the wound, mock the bully.
Let’s just say I’m investing heavily in Morton Salts right now.
On a grander level, free speech is vital to our nation’s health. Debate is healthy, even if we aren’t. When Leftists think free speech is dangerous, that’s when we know we’re hitting them where it hurts the most.
And that’s when we keep speaking.
Going From Bad to Worse
Since the advent of COVID-19, the world has been a weird fucking place. Things that would have been inconceivable even 5-10 years ago are ho-hum today. You know, like having one of the most popular social media platforms today run by the Chinese Communist Party, allegedly. Well, now that politicians from both sides of the political aisle wanting to ban or force a sale of this social media platform, or as the kids call it TikTok, it’s time for something really, really fucked up.
I’m going to defend TikTok.
As anyone who’s read my blogs can tell you, I’m not a fan of TikTok. The popular content makes me want to rip my head off and put it in a Tupperware container in the back of my freezer until Armageddon or people get better taste in entertainment (you know, whichever comes first). There are some really creepy asshats out there making said content, too. I’m talking people you would purposely avoid if you ran into them in public because they give off a skeezy vibe. Put into geek terms, TikTok is Mos Eisley with worse music.
My defense of TikTok isn’t based on it being the second coming of the Library of Alexandria. In fact, there isn’t anything resembling intellectualism within 100 light years of TikTok. So, why am I sticking my neck out for it?
Because the proposed solution is worse than the disease.
Name a time in recent history when the federal government got more power and then voluntarily gave it up once it was no longer necessary to have it. Considering the TSA is still giving away free rectal cancer screenings with each security patdown at the airport, I’m guessing it hasn’t happened yet. But I’m sure there’s no threat of government overreach with the proposed TikTok law, right?
Not so much.
Even if the proposed law is written so narrowly as to not be misconstrued, Congresscritters will find a way to muddy the waters just enough to allow for unintended applications. Take the US PATRIOT Act, for example. Since its passage, we’ve seen what can best be called questionable applications that haven’t really moved the needle on national security. But it’s been a boon to national surveillance agencies. All you have to do is claim there’s a national security interest and you have carte blanche.
Now, consider the recent push to make white supremacist groups into domestic terrorists, even when their most violent action has been pounding beers while spouting racist rhetoric. All it takes is for one Leftist bureaucrat to consider using the PATRIOT Act against these groups and before you can say “David Duke is a doodyhead” anyone who could reasonably or unreasonably connected to these groups can be investigated.
But I’m sure the federal government wouldn’t prosecute people for relatively minor crimes because of who they support politically, right?
Damn. 0 for 2.
Anyway, the federal government’s track record on respecting our rights during times of societal outrage isn’t that good. Much like the President Brick Tamland Administration, it’s confusing, contradictory, and often muddled. I have no reason to suspect any law restricting TikTok would wind up any differently, but I have no doubt it would be abused in short order.
So, what’s the alternative. Being a big fan of the free market, you can guess where I think this TikTok situation should play out. But I would include a warning like on packs of cigarettes. Let’s try some of these on for size.
Warning: Use of TikTok is known to drop your IQ by at least 25%, and given the average fan, you can’t spare to lose any more.
Warning: The Surgeon General warns TikTok may lead to doing stupid shit for attention.
Warning: Really? You want to waste your time doing this shit?
Warning: TikTok is connected to the Chinese Communist Party, which means jack shit to you, but is really, really bad.
Warning: Have you considered going outside?
Warning: Even the best TikTok video is like taking a ball peen hammer directly to the brain pain.
Warning: There is nothing on TikTok that is worth your time.
Warning: TikTok is not recommended for the young, the old, the marginally intelligent, the pregnant, the rich, the poor, the middle class, or anyone, really.
I think you get the idea. Regardless, the free market is the best place for TikTok to succeed or fail on its own merits because letting the government make that call is a recipe for government overreach, and there are enough nozzleheads in government to make it an expensive and ineffective overreach. Remember, a good chunk of the people in favor of passing a law banning or restricting TikTok thought Obamacare was a good idea.
Now, imagine how fucking horrible TikTokcare will be.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
The buzz around Washington DC this week was around the Congressional testimony from Special Counsel Robert Hur and his report about President Brick Tamland. The report itself is here, but the short version is the President violated the law, but the Department of Justice didn’t think he could be convicted because he’s a sympathetic doddering old fuck.
The Left has done a great job in making it seem like the Hur Report exonerated President Tamland, even going so far as to make the case Hur overstated the President’s memory problems, among other failed attempts to discredit the report and the Special Counsel. Regardless, the Hur Report and its impact on President Tamland’s Presidency (as well as Leftist sanity) is worth exploring further.
the Hur Report
What the Left thinks it means – a report from a moron that exonerates the President from hiding classified documents in various locations
What it really means – a disappointing political paradox that we should have seen coming
The life cycle of a modern political scandal is as predictable as the ending of a mystery novel written by your average social media “star.” The politician breaks laws that would get anyone else outside the ruling class thrown in prison for years. The media find out about the crimes committed and either attempts to hold the politician accountable (if he/she is a Republican or conservative) or downplay it in the hopes the scandal goes away (if he/she is a Democrat or a Leftist). People outside the media bubble find out and start asking questions. The politician and his/her handlers hold off on explaining anything until the questions get too close for comfort. Then, the politician and his/her handlers address it without actually addressing it, thus pissing off some people (namely those who think the laws should apply to everyone) and pleasing others (namely people who are a short skirt and pom-poms away from being full-blown cheerleaders). And after a little while, it all goes away, save for the gnashing of teeth who really wanted something done.
There are some variations to this framework that pop up from time to time, but it’s pretty much the same from Ronald Reagan to Brick Tamland. I mean, how long have we known Eric Swalwell slept with a suspected Chinese spy and he’s still not spending his days getting a tan at Gitmo? How many politicians wound up on Epstein Island and are still running around free? That may be the most disturbing, disgusting, and disheartening thing about all of it: no matter what, you’re more likely to get Dylan Mulvaney to stop being an attention whore than you are to get a politician to see any time on the business end of a conviction.
That brings us to the Hur Report. First off, how dare you assume the report’s gender? More importantly, th0ugh, is what the report lays out in stunning detail is just how fucked we are with President Tamland at the helm of the ship of state. Here are some choice cuts.
– The President remembered the month and day of his son’s death, but aides had to provide him with the year.
– Aides would provide information when the President seemed to be having trouble.
– The President admitted to having documents he wasn’t authorized to have, albeit with some chronological difficulty.
– He forgot when he served as Vice President.
– The President admitted to memory issues after the fact, citing his long history in government as the reason.
But I’m sure it was just his stutter.
Wait, why does the ship of state say Exxon Valdez on the side?
Seriously, these issues (among the several he’s had this year alone) paint a vivid picture of a man well past his prime trying to do a job that taxes men decades his junior. If there were ever a case for invoking the 25th Amendment, the last year or so of President Tamland’s performance would be it. On the one hand, it would get spun as a political move (which it would be anyway because Leftists). On the other it would lead to President Word Salad (which would make for worse decisions, but a better 2024 outcome for Republicans). So, pick your partisan poison, I guess.
The problem the Hur Report creates for Republicans is how weak the aftershocks make them look. President Tamland is clearly mentally diminished due to age, the onset of Alzheimer’s, or him just being dumb as a stump to begin with. Yet, Leftists keep saying he’s mentally sharp as ever. So, either he shouldn’t be President because he’s no longer capable of performing “Three Blind Mice” on a children’s toy flute let alone the country, or he shouldn’t be President because he’s corrupt as fuck.
And Republicans can’t stop tripping over their own dicks to make either case, which gives the Left an open field to make whatever case they want, such as the bullshit “he was exonerated” line that’s been repeated ad nauseum.
More to the point, though, the Hur Report and Hur himself makes the argument why President Tamland shouldn’t be allowed to be in an Office Depot, let alone the Oval Office. For all the talk he’s done about white supremacists being a major threat to the country, the biggest threat is Tamland himself. Think back to the days when Leftists called out Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump for being mentally unfit during their respective Presidencies. I’m not sure how many fucks they gave at the time, but I’m guessing it was pretty close to zero.
Now, their past is coming back to haunt them. That is, if the GOP would hold them to the standards they set. The Hur Report gives them the tools they need to put away a pretty big tool, but for some reason they’re happier making broad statements in Congressional hearings and creating viral moments than putting on their Big Congresscritter Pants and doing something other than voting for more money for Ukraine and Israel.
And people wonder why I’m voting for C’thulu/Sweet Meteor of Death 2024.