Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

119 Views

The big news of the past couple of weeks has been the corona virus, mostly because the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) keep talking about it. While a lot of heat surrounds President Donald Trump because of the way the Left has framed his actions and his use of the term “Chinese flu” to describe the corona virus, there is another player who needs to feel the heat a lot more than the President.

I’m speaking of China, the little country that could…be responsible for the corona virus. Of course, the Left doesn’t want you to remember that because…Orange Man Bad, I guess. But we shouldn’t take our eyes off China because they hold a lot of cards.

China

What the Left thinks it means – a country that is being unfairly maligned for the corona virus and is being used by President Trump to stoke racism and xenophobia

What it really means – a country that has a long history of shadiness

It wasn’t that long ago the media were using “Chinese flu” or “Wuhan flu” to describe the corona virus. I’m talking, say, two or three weeks ago. Now, they’re saying using “Chinese flu” is racist. (Of course, they’re not because they’re the good guys! Just ask them!) Oddly enough, it was also around this time, say two or three weeks ago, that China started saying how racist the term was.

And just like that, the Left became the official American mouthpieces of the Chinese government. Given their proclivity to hate America and especially Trump’s America, I’m guessing it didn’t take thirty pieces of silver to get them to jump.

Of course, this overlooks a tiny little detail: the first cases of the corona virus came from Wuhan, China. Whether it came from a lab or from bats is still being hotly debated, but we won’t delve into that because 1) it distracts from the main subject of this edition of the Lexicon, 2) I don’t know what to believe, so I’m staying silent, and 3) it reminds me too much of Champ Kind’s restaurant from “Anchorman 2.” Chicken of the cave, indeed!

In recent years, China built a reputation as a global economic superpower, due in no small part to having Hong Kong as well as a place for cheap products and even cheaper labor. Also, they were starting to ramp up their industrialization and using more coal and oil than they had in previous years. Now, who could be helping them with that? Could it be…Russia?

Yep.

Over the past century or so, China and Russia have been mortal enemies and convenient allies, but lately they’ve been the latter more than the former. And they both have a burning desire to see America go the way of Betamax. Having Russia and China being chummy is a bad sign, as anyone who remembers the former Soviet Union and communist China can tell you.

What is also troubling about China is the fact they own a significant portion of our national debt. All it takes for them to send us into an economic F5 that would make the 2008 mortgage crisis look like forgetting a can with a nickel deposit when you go to the recycling center. To put it more crudely, they have America by the short hairs.

Then, the corona virus happened. Not only has it caused medical and economic distress, it has exposed China as a bad faith player in global affairs. They hid the outbreak, told the world everything was under control, and downplayed the severity. Of course, they have a vested interest in lying to us because they don’t like us very much and feel no responsibility to look out for anyone but themselves.

And now, they’re blaming America for their screw-ups and the “racist” language of using “Chinese flu” or “Wuhan flu” to describe the corona virus. Nothing like a little scapegoating and virtue signalling between enemies, right? But the more information that comes out about the corona virus, the more it seems China is neck deep in the quicksand.

As I’ve said with Russia, I’ll say with China: they cannot be trusted and should treated with the Ronald Reagan “Trust but verify” approach. Given how China has bungled or mislead its way through the corona virus situation, we cannot afford to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Of course, the Left will point to Donald Trump and say we can’t trust him because he’s lied about the corona virus. This is a diversion from the actual issue and provides cover for China while at the same time advancing an ideological end. And, for now, it seems to be striking a cord with Americans. Depending on what poll you read and/or believe, up to 60% of Americans don’t think the President has done a good job handling the corona virus. The Left hopes this will make the President easier to beat in November.

The problem is, like the corona virus, this too will pass and we will have to deal with the reality of the situation. China is still a major player in this situation, and no amount of blaming Donald Trump will change that. The sooner we can find a way to get out from under China’s thumb, the better.

Considering they’re the ones making our vaccines, that will be easier said than done. Neither the Left nor the Right have a good enough handle on China to take the steps to that end. As we’ve seen, the Left wants to be propaganda partners, while the Right wants to be business partners. In order for us to make any progress, we need leadership who understands China is as trustworthy as a Bill Clinton wedding vow. I’m not convinced President Trump quite gets it yet, but I get the feeling he’s starting to get it.

In the meantime, we should keep an eye on China and how often they lie to us in the name of national self-preservation, but we should also temper our reaction to them lying. The corona virus is no excuse for attacking people who appear to be Chinese. It’s also not an excuse to stock up on toilet paper, but here we are. And we need to focus our criticism on the Chinese government, not the people themselves. The citizens are just as much victims in this situation as we are.

But we should still mock the media and the Left for swallowing China’s lies so easily. These are the same people who call Trump supporters dumb, so any backlash they get for being taken in by China is something they’ve earned. And far be it from me to deny them the ridicule they’ve so richly deserved!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

141 Views

As the dust from Super Tuesday settles, there are still matters to be resolved, as in picking which of the remaining members of the Democrat Clown Car gets to run against President Donald Trump in November. However, there is a common thread within the Left that has been making the rounds as we get closer to Election Day: Trump has to go.

As with all great (and not-so-great) things in modern America, it started with a hashtag, #votebluenomatterwho. The idea, much like the people who seem to be putting the hashtag on anything they Tweet from political observations to tuna noodle casserole recipes, is simple. No matter who the Democrat candidate is, the Left has to unite behind that candidate if he or she (but most likely he) is to beat President Trump. As a rallying cry, it’s effective. It’s short, has a nice cadence to it, and you can dance to it.

So, put on your dancing shoes and read along (unless you get motion sickness, then you don’t have to do both simultaneously) as we delve into the Twitterverse again.

#votebluenomatterwho

What the Left thinks it means – a slogan to unite Leftist voters behind any and all Democrat/Leftist candidates in November 2020

What it really means – a slogan that encourages lazy knee-jerk thinking to benefit the Left

Back in the good old days when men were men and women were men and everybody was really confused, we didn’t have political parties. We just has people considering the facts of an issue, weighing their beliefs against the beliefs of public officials, and voting for the best candidate. Then, somebody came up with the idea people couldn’t be trusted to do all of that, so political parties were born, or spawned from the depths of Hell if you prefer. Nowadays, all you need to know about a candidate is if he or she had a D or an R behind his/her name to determine whether the candidate gets your vote. It’s made things simpler, for sure, but it’s also made us simpler in the process.

Somewhere along the line, we were told if we belonged to Party A, Party B was less trustworthy than CNN’s reporting, and those were your only two choices. That’s like saying the only two ice cream choices are chocolate or vanilla. And if you decided to vote for, say, Rocky Road, you were throwing your vote away or, even worse, your vote other than for chocolate or vanilla was actually a vote for chocolate or vanilla. (Yes, folks, that’s just as stupid as it sounds.)

Well, the #votebluenomatterwho comes from the minds of those who came up with the idea that not voting for one of the two major parties means you voted for one of them. It’s a nice little shortcut that takes the pressure of getting informed before voting for a candidate off your shoulders, so now all you have to do is go to the voting booth and pull the lever, mark the box, or touch the screen so only Democrats get your vote. Or you can make it easier and just assume room temperature. Then, you don’t even have to come back from the dead to vote because the Left will do that for you!

Meanwhile, we the living (an interesting and depressing book by Ayn Rand that’s worth at least one read-through, by the way) are left to figure out why we should follow the hashtag’s instructions in the first place. Are Democrats/Leftists better capable of addressing matters of state? Not really, as evidenced by the Iowa and Nevada Democrat caucuses this year. The fact they made a simple process of counting votes into a living modern art piece that not even the participants fully understand should disqualify any Democrat/Leftist from ever holding office higher than city librarian, and that’s with the added stipulation that they are closely supervised so they don’t eat and/or sniff the glue. And if that isn’t enough justification for you, let me point out that of the handful of candidates remaining, only two of them can remotely be considered mentally stable enough to assume the Presidency, and one of those is Joe Biden. In a race where your safe candidate is a guy who at any moment could start a nuclear strike because he thought the red launch button was an Easy Button from Staples, you know you’re screwed.

That underscores one of the major flaws in the idea behind the hashtag: it assumes the eventual candidate can’t do any worse than Donald Trump. Given the folks still vying for the Democrat nomination, that’s a pretty big assumption.

Another major flaw in the #votebluenomatterwho is it buys into the two-party idea. I haven’t always voted for Republicans or Democrats, but when I have it’s because I believe the candidate was the better person for the job. As I’ve gotten older and much more cynical about the two-party system, I’ve decided to keep the voting-for-the-best-person part of my strategy and dumped the party model altogether. And I’m proud to say I’ve written in candidates when I wasn’t convinced anyone else on the ballot was up to the task. If you want to vote for a Democrat/Leftist for President, go for it, but do it because you think he or she is worthy of your vote. If you still have qualms, don’t just relent in the hopes the next talking head with delusions of adequacy can do the job. In the end, the only way anyone is going to know who you voted for is if you tell him or her. That’s the beauty of a private ballot: you’re not required to report on your vote and justify it. This isn’t the former Soviet Union where your choices were a Communist who already had the job and a different Communist who wanted the job and the Party made sure you voted for one or the other. You can vote for who you want. If you hate Trump and hate the eventual Democrat candidate, seek out the other parties’ candidates and see if you like them or even just hate them less. Then, the only one you have to be accountable to is yourself.

This last major flaw, and this is a big one, is it strips away voters’ freedom to choose. For an ideology that claims to love choice, the Left gets mighty prickly if your choice isn’t what they want. Now, consider how many women vote for Leftists because of abortion on the basis of “my body, my choice.” Well, if it’s a woman’s body and a woman’s choice, why should she be forced to vote for a Democrat? If you think she’s perfectly capable of terminating the life of a child inside her womb, you can’t turn around and say she’s not capable of deciding on who to vote for, and of the two scenarios, only one guarantees the death of one of the participants. Take a break from your Handmaid’s Tale cosplay and try to reason this out. Or, if you don’t mind spoilers, you can’t, not because you’re not capable of doing it, but because it makes zero logical sense. It’s infantilizing women to think they can’t make up their own minds about whether to vote for a candidate. Why vote blue if you lean more Green, as it were? And why should anyone, let alone women, be subjected to the No True Scotsman of ideological litmus tests?

While the Left tweets #votebluenomatterwho as a means to rally the troops, it’s something far harder to justify and remain consistent. Then again, if the Left worried about being consistent, they would have dumped the lot of the candidates they had running in the first place. 

The Real Losers of Super Tuesday

212 Views

With Super Tuesday rapidly becoming a thankfully fleeting memory, political pundits (and cranky curmudgeons like yours truly) are naming winners and losers. One of the more prominent losers, however, isn’t being discussed, mainly because I don’t think the people who get paid the big bucks to come up with tepid takes with good PR have even considered it.

I’m talking about progressivism.

Whether it was in the Presidential race or local races, progressives took a beating up and down the ticket, even in California where you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a progressive, self-professed or otherwise. Or if you’re a member of PETA…you’d be providing the dead cats.

One race that really stood out for me because of who was involved was the race to replace former Representative and nude hairdressing aficionado Katie Hill. Among the candidates was founder of The Young Turks and progressive internet celebrity, Cenk Uygur. If you listen to him (and to be fair, why would you), he was the progressive candidate in the race. He talked the talk, walked, the walk, and promptly wound up getting stomped by his Democrat opponent…and two Republican candidates. Mr. Super Progressive pulled down 5% of the vote. Put another way, I didn’t even run and I came within the margin of error of tying and/or beating him.

And again, this is in California.

If that doesn’t signal how disliked progressivism has become, we can look at the Super Tuesday results. Of the active Democrat candidates at the time, two of them (Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren) were the clear progressive choices. And how many states did they win?

Zero. Zilch. Nada. Goose egg. The big donut/bagel. One fewer than Michael Bloomberg.

Up and down the ticket, progressives saw defeat after defeat. Even candidates backed by the Socialist Socialite couldn’t propel them to victory. And now other progressives like the aforementioned Uygur and Representative Ilhan Omar (who just happens to be a vocal and visual Sanders supporter) are offering up excuses. It was the media! It was the lack of a unified progressive movement! It was comments taken out of context! It was everything and anything except for the real reason progressives lost.

Progressivism isn’t that popular.

When I think of progressives these days, there are two ideas that come to mind. One is they tend to be more grassroots and people-driven than the Democrats. And two is they’re bat-crap insane. Where they excel in the former is on social media. Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook (to some degree) are filled with progressives expressing themselves to the masses and getting noticed. You can’t log on without seeing someone you know retweeting a hashtag or putting it in a post or message to show you and the world how they feel about an issue.

The problem is social media isn’t the real world. The best way I can describe it is social media is like the elementary school playground where you can find any number of ways to get attention. Hanging upside down on the monkey bars, eating worms, or getting into fights will get you noticed and may keep you popular for a time, but eventually the novelty wears off. Pretty soon nobody cares how many worms you eat because there’s another kid on the other side of the playground who eats bugs. And eventually no one cares about what you eat because they’ve all grown up and figured out new ways to get and maintain popular status, like having a cool car or being good in sports or having a lot of money.

Right now, progressives are still on the playground hanging out with themselves because everyone else “sold out”, i.e. grew up. And instead of taking the hint and figuring out what type of car gets the most attention, they’re clinging to those bug/worm eating days as though they were the best years of their lives. (If Greta Thunberg gets her way, though, you folks will be totally cool again!) Meanwhile, those who gave up that kind of life to enter into a more adult environment are doing well, or at least not sucking as much as progressives have. And that makes progressives mad, mad enough to want to tear down what Democrats have built just so everyone will be equally miserable.

And that makes for great content for me, so…I guess it’s a win-win.

In the meantime, progressives will be on edge after Super Tuesday put a major kink in their plans to take over the Democrats and may lack the introspection to realize why they failed. Oh, they’ll have reasons, but none will be the right one because they don’t want to admit their ideas, and subsequently they, aren’t as popular as their echo chamber says they are. Until they realize where they went wrong, we will be in for a lot more progressive tantrums.

But, like I said, more content!

I Got a Fevah…

184 Views

After weeks of speculation (and days of hyping it more than a new Lady Gaga CD), I’m finally breaking down and writing about the coronavirus. For those of you who have been living under a rock lately and aren’t familiar with the story (and for that I am eternally jealous), the coronavirus is a viral strain that appears to have started in China and has the potential to wipe out all life on Earth for centuries to come…or maybe it’s just like the flu. There are certain symptoms related to it, such as coughing, fever, shortness of breath, being overly pessimistic about the way the government is handling the situation, and being enough of a jerk to wish people of different political ideologies would contract it.

The first three are symptoms of people who have coronavirus. The latter two are symptoms of people who watch waaaaaaaay too much cable TV and Internet.

Seriously, the coronavirus has turned seemingly normal people into frothing-at-the-mouth lunatics whose humanity is more in question than Shawn King’s lineage. (As an aside, Shawn, I’m a Midwestern guy, and have more legit street cred than you do. Take your cul de sac cred and admit you’re Edgar Winter with some blush applied.) I have seen people on the Left wishing this on President Donald Trump and people on the Right wishing it on Nancy Pelosi, and few people outside the ideological Thunderdome are calling it out because then they would get targeted by these groups.

If that wasn’t bad enough, the media are hyping the story at every turn, even managing to put a little top-spin on their reporting to make the coronavirus outbreak look like it’s President Trump’s fault. Granted, some of the actions he’s taken on it have been slow and seemingly ignorant, but for someone who is thought of as being a fighter, the President hasn’t really been fighting back. He’s let the media paint a narrative that makes him look like, well, Donald Trump, or at least their version of him.

And when the media aren’t trying to Simon Bar Sinister up the President, they’re rushing out stories that would make H. P. Lovecraft cower in a corner asking for a plush C’thulu to hold. In turn, this worries people who still trust the media and sends them into a panic, buying up surgical masks at prices that could only gouge you more if they were literally screwed onto your face. And when there are shortages, the media report the shortage, which drives even more hysteria and worry. It’s gotten so bad, people are on record (seriously, I fear) as saying the coronavirus is caused by Corona Beer. If this is what the media are doing now, I can only imagine what will happen during Sweeps Week!

In trying to wrap my head around the various moving parts of this story, I came to one conclusion: this is not normal, kids. This is as far away from normal as I am from winning Mr. Universe, unless they start judging dad bodies instead of musculature. Then, I might have a shot. And after reading what people post online, I need a shot of booze to steady my nerves. And remember, a good number of these people can legally vote in the upcoming Presidential election. The tension is mounting to real-estate-brokers-trying-to-sell-property-along-the-Gaza-Strip-for-nothing-but-commission levels.

In fact, I’ve coined a term for what’s going on right now on the Left and Right where they treat each other worse than Ike treated Tina. I call it Coronavirus Fever. Put simply, it’s hypochondria with multiple social media platforms on blast. To determine if you have Coronavirus Fever, answer these simple questions:

–  Do you find yourself Tweeting every single news item you hear about the coronavirus to people who are friends of friends of friends so they can be up on the latest hot takes?

– Are you boycotting Panda Express, not because their food sucks, but because you’re afraid they’re in league with the Chinese government to spread the coronavirus here?

– Are you checking WebMD every 15 minutes to determine if you have the coronavirus and being relieved when you think it only says you have cancer?

– Have you started drinking hand sanitizer to fight off the coronavirus?

– Has the CDC blocked you on social media for “asking too many questions”?

If you’ve said yes to any or all of these, you have Coronavirus Fever. Oh, and you’re an idiot. Do you know the most effective way of fighting coronavirus or a good chunk of illnesses for that matter?

Wash your hands.

I’m not saying to take it to Howard Hughes levels, but use a little common sense, soap and water, and hand sanitizer (on your hands, not your innards). And if you feel sick, even a little, stay home and rest. Whatever it is you think you have to do today will still be there tomorrow. And for the love of Pete, think before you post! Not every nugget of what passes for news these days is important, and not everybody in what passes for news is trustworthy. Read up a bit, take a breath, figure out if what you’re intending on posting will help or hurt the situation, and act accordingly. (No, this does not mean post anyway.)

If you do these things, we will find a cure for the Coronavirus Fever in our lifetimes. Just in time for something else to kill us all. Cheers!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

149 Views

Politics isn’t touch football, as recent Presidential campaigns have shown. When you decide to run for President, your life goes under the microscope so your opponents know where to attack you for maximum effect.

With Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, that seems pretty easy, but the Left can’t quite bring themselves to attack him directly on substantive matters. Instead, the focus is on his supporters, colloquially called “Bernie Bros.” Not every Bernie supporter is the same, but there seems to be a common thread with the Bernie Bros that doesn’t help the candidate nor make the Left look good.

Which is why I’m bringing it up in this week’s Leftist Lexicon!

Bernie Bros

What the Left thinks it means – a group of primarily male Bernie Sanders supporters who act like violent, racist, misogynistic goons whenever anyone criticizes their candidate

What it really means – a group of Bernie Sanders supporters acting like, well, Leftists

Recent populist Leftist movements seemingly come from diverse backgrounds, but beyond the outer wrapper, they share many traits, ranging from a belief capitalism has failed worse than Joe Biden’s ability to know what state he’s in to universal health care to a $15 per hour minimum wage, even suggesting the rich in this country should be held accountable for economic inequality. Some groups like ANTIFA or Occupy Wall Street don’t publicize all of their beliefs, but they’re there in the fine print.

So, which candidate of the past few years has found a way to coalesce the various groups with the same or similar beliefs? Why, it’s Bernie Sanders, America’s favorite Grandpa (next to Grandpas Jones, Simpson, and Munster, of course)! And with that combination of grassroots support comes the various negatives of said groups. You know, like violence, sexism, and general buffoonery?

This is not to say all Bernie supporter act like the Bernie Bros. Many are good people who just want a new direction and fairness for all across the board. (Oddly enough, many of them also haven’t passed Econ 101, but that’s not important right now.) As with any group of political supporters, there are going to be scumbags and bad hombres. Donald Trump has them, Joe Biden has them, even Hillary Clinton had them. (This latter group was called “Hillary’s 2016 Presidential Campaign Staff.”) And now Bernie has them, thanks to the Bernie Bros.

And just like with ANTIFA and Occupy Wall Street, the Left has little or nothing to say about the Bernie Bros because these group represent potential Leftist voters. So, they plead ignorance or try to deflect the criticism by invoking Donald Trump and MAGA supporters who “did worse.” The problem is…well, the Bernie Bros have not only done worse, but more frequently and with larger political implications. The Left paints Trump supporters like uneducated troglodytes who are threatened by anything that could interfere with their ways of life. They’re set in their ways and have to be dragged kicking and screaming into a better (i.e. progressive) future. In some cases, the Left has Trump supporters pegged. Now, what if I told you the Bernie Bros are a variation on that theme?

Bernie Bros have verbally attacked women, blacks, gays, and others who either disagree directly with Bernie’s positions or who don’t actively agree with them. They paint anyone who isn’t slurping the Kool Aid like the enemy. There is no middle ground with them; it’s their way or the highway.

Hmmm…sounds eerily like…the way the Left describes Trump supporters! Dun dun DUNNNNNNNNN!

The politically damaging part comes at the ballot box. The more Bernie Bros act up and get called out on it, the harder it gets for Bernie to gain traction in the communities affected by the Bernie Bros’ behavior. If the choice in November is between Trump and Sanders, there will be a number of voters in the aforementioned blocs that would either not vote or vote for someone other than Bernie. If the former occurs, it hurts Democrats down ticket by siphoning votes away from preferred candidates. Want to keep the House and take the Senate and White House in November? That ain’t the way to do it!

On a larger scale, the Bernie Bros present a unique challenge. As much as the Left tries to brush boorish behavior by trustworthy Leftists under the rug, they really can’t do that with the Bernie Bros. For one, the Left still doesn’t understand internet and social media culture as well as they think. Just having a Twitter handle and an Instagram account doesn’t make you PewDiePie. Just because you have the tools doesn’t mean you know how to use them, and as we’ve seen with the 2020 Democratic Clown Car, they’re treating everything like a nail (which would be great if their only tools were hammers, but they’re packing Whiffle bats).

To his credit, Sanders has disavowed supporters who treat others poorly (albeit he didn’t call them out by name like President Trump did with white supremacists). But until the Bernie Bros realize the jerks he was disavowing were themselves, they aren’t going to change, and the Left isn’t going to make them because they value the White House more than the rhetorical structural integrity of their platform. No matter how much the Left hates Donald Trump, it’s hard to defeat him when the guy running against him has supporters who actively dissent from stated Leftist ideology when it suits their needs.

Leftists not being good long-term thinkers. Who saw that coming?

In the meantime, it will be interesting to watch Bernie Sanders simultaneously support progressive causes while accepting support from people whose support for said causes are tied more to him than to the causes themselves. Bernie Bros aren’t the albatross around his neck; they’re the millstone around the neck of the albatross around his neck, and Bernie’s wearing cement galoshes. 

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

200 Views

There is a phrase that has been batted around lately more than a tennis ball during a long rally at Wimbledon: rule of law. But for once, it’s not the Right that is doing the batting. It’s the Left. It seems they’ve become acutely aware of the concept after claiming President Donald Trump believes he’s above the law due to his recent impeachment acquittal in the Senate. On top of that, the President has also suggested the Department of Justice look into the conviction of former Trump associate Roger Stone (and with good reason if the recent news around the judge and jury in his case are accurate). Now, the Left is on their outrage soapboxes demanding the President and the Right respect the rule of law.

As you might guess, I take the rule of law seriously, or at least seriously enough to write a weekly blog post highlighting the Leftist take on the phrase.

rule of law

What the Left thinks it means – following the letter and spirit of the law

What it really means – following the letter and spirit of the law even when it’s politically inconvenient to do so

The Left may have the trial lawyers in their back pockets (and their hands in the back pockets of the trial lawyers for that matter), but that doesn’t mean they have a healthy respect for the law. What they do have is a healthy respect for those who can create laws through rhetorical or contextual devices that judges who are already predisposed to agree with the outcome will allow to stand in court. From the bizarre arguments from Roe v. Wade to the more recent, yet equally bizarre, legal arguments requiring Christians to act against their faith to accommodate same sex marriages, the Left figured out how to get what they want without consulting the voting public: file a lawsuit! Then, it’s just a matter of crafting a legal argument so seemingly air-tight that no appeals court could overturn it and, voila, you have a law and the rest of the country has to go along with it.

Of course, once that happens, the Left demands everyone follow the letter and spirit of the law with no deviations whatsoever. On the other hand, if it’s a law they don’t like, they feel it’s morally justified to defy the law. Sanctuary cities, anyone?

It’s this duplicity when it comes to the law that rings hollow when the Left talks about the rule of law. The recent impeachment fiasco…I mean trial is a nice microcosm of this. Remember when the Left jumped all over Mitch McConnell and other Republican Senators to recuse themselves because they already made up their minds on impeachment? On the surface, it seems like a reasonable and legally justifiable position. Of course, that same argument could have been applied to Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, and a whole host of Democrat Senators who had not only made up their minds to impeach the President, but made it a part of their regular communication with followers, constituents, and fawning media types.

And let’s not forget one of the articles of impeachment had zero basis in law, but it didn’t bother Senate Democrats enough to make them vote with the law and not with their party. But hey, party over country is a Republican thing, right?

If you haven’t recognized this Leftist tactic, it’s right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. They are trying to hold the Right to the rule of law (or at least the Leftist version of it) while ignoring it themselves, and until recently it was virtually foolproof. Then, as more conservatives and Republicans began to educate themselves on the Left’s tactics, they started to call out the Left and flip the script on them. Not only did the Right flip the script, but the Left flipped their lids, as well as their talking points, to the condition we’re in now. To use a more modern bit of terminology, we’re in the Upside Down.

Or at least some of us are.

Although it’s nice to hear Leftists take the rule of law seriously for a change, it’s based on the politics of the situation, not out of any core principles they have. In fact, the same Leftists going after President Trump for alleged violations of the rule of law were conspicuously absent when President Barack Obama took similar action on matters more pressing than a Tweet about Roger Stone.

This is where it’s important to take the politics out of the rule of law. President Obama violated the law on several occasions and many, including your humble correspondent, were justifiably outraged. President Trump, I feel, has violated the law as well, and only some of us are outraged. By letting our politics guide our decision-making, we can justify poor behavior for the sake of rooting for “our team.” But wrong is wrong, no matter whether we love or loathe the criminal. An eye for an eye may be a boon for the eyepatch industry, but it’s a poor way to enforce the law. It has to be enforced across the board for the rule of law to have any weight.

That is why Lady Justice is blind. Either that or it was an unfortunate recreation of a scene from 50 Shades of Gray, but in either case, we need to be absolutely sure we are standing for the rule of law in every case. Donald Trump isn’t my cup of Earl Grey (not of the 50 Shades variety), but I want him to be extended every legal opportunity I would get as an American citizen. The Left doesn’t want that, though. They want to prosecute first and ask questions never, all under the guise of defending the rule of law from the man they’re trying to prosecute. Call me crazy, but doesn’t that sound a lot like abuse of power? And, if so, where are the Left’s rule of law hawks on impeaching Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, Jerrold Nadler, and the whole cast of characters involved with the impeachment process? I’m sure they’re working on it, right after they try to impeach President Trump for something else that may or may not be against the law.

After all, it’s not like Leftists are known to be hypocrites, right?

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

224 Views

With President Donald Trump being acquitted by the Senate on both counts of impeachment, the Left has gone crazy…well, crazier than normal…and normal is relative when it comes to the Left. Let’s try this again. The Left hasn’t taken the President’s acquittal by the Senate very well. Some have gone so far as to say we’re on the verge of a dictatorship, while others say we’re already there. After all, the Left has all this evidence of President Trump acting and sounding and looking like one, so how come nobody else can see it?

Well, to paraphrase a former President, that all depends on what your definition of dictatorship is. Which is great for me because it gives me this week’s Leftist Lexicon topic!

dictatorship

What the Left thinks it means – a form of government where there is an all-powerful leader, what we are experiencing now or will be experiencing soon

What it really means – the go-to excuse for when the Left fails in imposing their will, used interchangeably with fascist

The Left thrives on oppression, real or imagined, as a means to control how people think. Most of the time, this oppression is imaginary, but it’s just as effective at getting mush-minded people to agree with them and act accordingly. After all, if you feel you’re oppressed, it means you are and, thus, can claim victimhood, which is the coin of the Left’s realm. Of course, the more boxes you can check off on the Oppression Checklist, the more oppressed you are. After that, there’s a whole hierarchy of oppression that is an M.C. Escher/Rube Goldberg/Pink Floyd’s “The Wall” flowchart, and there isn’t enough booze or drugs to make heads or tails out of it. Needless to say, you shouldn’t even try unless you want to end up like Keith Richards and be 1000 years old.

That need for victimhood drives the Left’s perception of the Trump Administration being a dictatorship, more so after the Senate acquittal. They complained about the Senate trial not allowing witnesses (in spite of the fact the House Managers called 17 witnesses and didn’t bother to do even a little legwork to enforce the subpoenas filed against members of the Trump Administration so they might get home for Christmas break sooner). They said it wasn’t right for Senate Republicans to coordinate with the President on a defense. They screamed about how it wasn’t fair some of the jurors in the Senate trial said they would vote to acquit before the trial began (while saying nothing about the multiple Democrat Senators who said they would vote to convict before the trial even began). All of this and much more is proof the President is now a dictator and above the law, and it has the Left protesting loudly on social media and in public.

Let that last sentence roll around in your heads for a moment. Leftists say we’re in a dictatorship while they complain online and in public…without the President arresting them for speaking out against him. Either Donald Trump is the most incompetent dictator in world history or, now hear me out here, he’s not a dictator. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say the President isn’t a dictator, and not because he hasn’t arrested me for making fun of his haircut. In fact, has anyone been arrested for just making fun of President Trump? Not that I’m aware of. Even most of the people who have openly opposed him haven’t seen the inside of Gitmo or any other prison for that matter. It’s only the extreme cases that get a visit from the Secret Service because that’s their job. Even if you humor the Left on this, the lack of incarceration for protesting the President is hard to overlook when making the case we’re in a dictatorship.

Good luck trying to convince Leftists of that, though. They are bound and determined to be under a dictatorship even if it doesn’t kill them. The odd thing is they aren’t opposed to being in a dictatorship as long as they’re in control of it. Some of the same folks who paint Trump as a dictator are strangely quiet on actual dictatorships in the Middle East or try to whitewash Leftist dictators like Pol Pot. For some examples closer to home, check out some of the antics the Left pulls on college campuses to stifle conservatives. That’s what makes their vocal opposition to dictatorships so disingenuous to me. You can’t pick and choose when it comes to dictatorships. Once you allow one to curry your favor, you lose the moral high ground.

Let’s just say the Left ceded that moral high ground a looooooong time ago.

In the meantime, we have to stay on our toes to ensure we don’t become an actual dictatorship. For all of the faults I find with President Trump, wanting absolute power doesn’t seem to be one of them. I understand he likes to be in control of situations based on the way he’s conducted business, but I’m just not seeing where he’s enacting anything that would lead to him becoming President for Life. If anything, he’s acted better on improving things at home by removing government regulations and making a positive impact abroad by expanding gay rights protections in countries that don’t have them. You know, like those Middle Eastern dictatorships the Left conveniently overlook?

Just because President Trump was acquitted by the Senate of two of the weakest impeachment articles in our history doesn’t mean we’re becoming a dictatorship or that we’re already there. It simply means the House Managers didn’t give the Senate much to work with. Even in real criminal trials, you can’t try to prosecute someone for a crime and expect the defense to prove your case for you. And no amount of screaming, pouting, fuming, or general jackassery will change that.

Of course, it makes it easier for us to spot the loonies, so at least we can be entertained.

In Defense of the Iowa Caucuses…Or At Least Some of Them

195 Views

Well, it happened, pretty much as I predicted. The Iowa Caucuses are over, the candidates have moved on, and the Hawkeye State is the center of some controversy because we don’t know who actually won the caucuses on the Democrat side. As a result, the country is looking down at Iowa for being disorganized and incapable of counting beyond ten without taking off our shoes.

But here’s the thing. There were two sets of caucuses going on, not just the one for Democrats. The Republicans had one, too, which was more of a formality than anything else. President Donald Trump won the Iowa Caucuses for the GOP with 97% of the vote. How do I know?

Because the Iowa Republican Party has its shit together.

I’ve participated in the Republican caucuses and observed the Democrat caucuses, so I have an idea of what the internal processes are. The Republicans take their time, but not in excess because they’re there to complete the tasks before them and get out. Democrats, on the other hand, play a game of Red Rover where they try to attract/bully other potential voters to abandon their first choices if they’re not considered viable and add them to the roles of those supporting viable candidates. This process can be quick, and other times it’s more painful than watching the Socialist Socialite trying to explain how gum works.

Last night was the latter on steroids.

And it was made worse thanks to an app developed by the totally non-scary-sounding Shadow Inc. with a website listing none of its board members or leadership and made up of people who worked on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Then again, given how her campaign turned out, I’m not sure I’d want my name out there on anything. Maybe there’s a Witness Relocation Program for failed Presidential campaign staffers, especially ones that couldn’t even win a rigged election….

Adding to the intrigue is the fact Shadow Inc. is associated with Mayor Pete Buttigieg, who just happens to be one of the Democrats running for President. Let’s not forget what the DNC did to Bernie Sanders in 2016, too, in understanding the magnitude of fuckitude we’re dealing with here. If the DNC were trying to exorcize the demons of 2016, they didn’t do a very good job of it here because these little niggling issues make it look like there is someone or something pulling the strings. I’m not usually one to indulge in conspiracy theories, but let’s just say I’ve made a tidy profit after investing heavily in tinfoil.

So many moving parts, and so many fingers being pointed at the wrong people, namely President Trump, Russia, and Iowa in general. The Iowa Caucuses are run by the Democrats and Republicans, and the President and Russia have nothing to do with the chaos that occurred with the Democrats. Iowa as a whole isn’t to blame, either. Remember, the Republicans didn’t seem to have trouble reporting the outcome, only the Democrats did. (Maybe the non-Democrats in Iowa need a hashtag, #NotAllIowans?) As such, the slings and arrows of outrageous commenters should be pointed not at the entire state, but at the Iowa Democratic Party.

But that can’t and won’t happen, thanks to the Leftist mindset. The Left hates Iowa and Iowans (but, surprisingly, not their votes and money). They consider us to be ignorant hicks lacking in the sophistication that can only come from living on either coast. They see us as a roadblock to progressive success and want us to take a back seat to what they want and what they feel we need. The caucus debacle only helps to make their case.

Or so they think.

When you dig a little bit deeper, you see this was a self-fulfilling fuck-up. The Left needed the Iowa Caucuses to fail so they could better make the argument why Iowa shouldn’t take such a prominent role in determining who gets to be the Democrats’ nominee. Just like with Obamacare (with a healthy hat tip to Tammy Bruce for making and inspiriting this same point), the solution to the problem was meant to fail so a larger objective could be achieved. In this case, the Iowa Caucuses served many purposes, including a continuation of the “Russia hacked our elections” narrative that has become gospel to the Left since Hillary Clinton lost. If the Left can repeat the notion our elections aren’t secure, they will cast doubt on whomever wins in 2020 (except, of course, if it’s a Leftist who wins because that only proves we were able to overcome Russian interference). Funny how that works, isn’t it?

Yet, the failures of the Iowa Caucuses only point in one direction, and it points to the party that claims to be smarter and more moral than we are. Oh, and who want us to adopt Medicare For All as a solution to what they think is a health care crisis. If they can’t run a caucus that they control, that makes the best argument for why they shouldn’t be allowed to run anything come November.

It’s (Not) Dead, Jim!

202 Views

If you haven’t noticed from all the death of the Republic talk going on out there, the impending acquittal of President Donald Trump is going to signal the end of the Republic as we know it and usher in an age of authoritarianism. You know, like the totalitarianism the President has already put in place, only much bigger and scarier?

A Facebook friend of mine and I had a civil discussion about the end of the Republic. While she was lamenting the end of our great experiment, I posted a YouTube video of the scene from “Ghostbusters” (the good one, not the 2016 “woke” version) where the guys were talking about the apocalypse coming if they didn’t stop Gozer, the part that talks about “human sacrifices, dogs and cats living together, MASS HYSTERIA!” She asked me to indulge her, which I did.

But for the rest of you Leftists, I won’t. Not anymore.

For as much as you lament about the impending Senate vote proving your fears to be justified, you ignore one of the obvious duplicities of your arguments. On the one hand, you claim Donald Trump is an idiot. On the other hand, you say he’s heading up a cabal of villainy worthy of a James Bond movie. I haven’t heard that strange dichotomy since…why, it was George W. Bush! Same plays, same playbook, same overreaction, different President. It’s almost as if you guys are recycling your squawking points! And it composts quite well.

But here’s the thing, and it’s something I pointed out to my Facebook friend. The President didn’t cause the current alleged weakness in the Republic; he’s just the easy scapegoat. Since the turn of the century, we’ve seen any number of threats to the Republic coming from our elected officials. The PATRIOT Act, although passed with good intent, contained a lot of mandates that undercut individual freedom and privacy. The Arab Spring? That remains an existential threat on a global scale. Using the IRS to go after political opponents? Certainly not innocuous to the Republic when you consider the incredible (and law-defying) power they have.

And where were you Leftists when this and other actual threats to the Republic were being rolled out? With the exception of the PATRIOT Act, you were scarcer than the food at an all-you-can-eat buffet after Rosie O’Donnell and Michael Moore leave. And even with the PATRIOT Act, your opposition was targeted at the wrong parts.

That’s how I know your current freak-out is faked. You don’t give one-one hundredth of a damn about the health of the Republic. If you did, you wouldn’t be Leftists. Instead, you’re breaking out the American flags and red, white, and blue bunting to attack the Senate Republicans for voting in favor of acquitting the President and doing so in a way that draws the most amount of attention to you. While you fawn over Adam Schiff’s weaker than Mormon Irish coffee presentation, you ignore the fact he a) didn’t present a case that resembled the alleged crimes, b) has some apparent ties to some of the particulars of the investigation that would have gotten him thrown off the case due to conflicts of interest, and c) only got his pathetic case to the Senate after a rushed and extremely flawed process that defied existing precedent, and then expected the Senate to do the job he failed to do.

The House failed the country, not the Senate, and not the Senate Republicans. And if you are being honest with yourselves, you would pin the blame for the downfall of the Republic on…well, you. By your silence when it mattered because you liked the man in power undercutting the Republic and by your hyperbolic overreaction over something that doesn’t threaten the Republic because you hate the man in power, you have become the monster you have tried to create for your own ideological purposes.

Instead of hyperventilating over what you see at the death of the Republic, take account of the fact we’ve survived people in power I wouldn’t trust to run a marathon, let alone the United States, and we will continue to do so. Why? Because we’re stronger than one President or one group of people.

And we will continue to be as long as people are willing to be honest with each other. The Left isn’t interested in this because they know they will be called on the carpet for the stuff they’ve let loose on the country, just as the Right would be. Face it, there are no white hats here, just hats that are varying shades of dark gray. If you really want to save the Republic, start with cleaning up your own house, or House of Representatives if you prefer. The fact Adam Schiff is being lauded as a hero instead of run out of Washington, DC, on a rail for pulling the crap he did isn’t a sign of honesty. It’s a sign you are willing to sell out the Republic if you can justify the cause and the Republic be damned in the process.

For all the crying you do about Republicans putting party before country, you shouldn’t have such a blind spot for doing the very thing you pin on the GOP.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

196 Views

Ah, early February. The sun is on the verge of shining. The birds are still wintering in Boca, and the nation’s attention focuses on my home state of Iowa because, for a little while, it becomes the center of the American political universe. Front-runners, also-rans, and never-should-have-been-allowed-to-runs show up in big cities, small towns, and various eateries in an attempt to persuade potential caucusers to support them.

And after the votes are counted, they disappear like Bill Clinton’s pants at a sorority sleepover.

As a native Iowan, I wanted to give a bit of insight into the caucuses, especially from the standpoint of the Left, who aren’t fans of the state or the caucuses in general.

the Iowa Caucuses

What the Left thinks it means – a pointless venture that eliminates potential Presidential candidates before more important states get a chance to vote

What it really means – an excuse to pretend to give a damn about Iowa every 4 years

As a native, I can tell you Iowa isn’t exactly the epicenter of excitement, especially for people who don’t come here on a regular basis. The media tend to treat Iowa like an undiscovered country where they are the ones to make first contact. Coming from people who refer to Iowa as “flyover country,” it’s not surprising. The Left doesn’t like people who aren’t from the upper East Coast or the West Coast, and it comes out in how they try to approach people like me to get statements for their fluff pieces masquerading as hard news.

Once you get beyond the media coverage and the Leftist derision, the Iowa Caucuses are a pretty interesting dichotomy in how the two major parties operate. The Republicans gather in their precincts, hear from supporters of different candidates, hold votes for the candidates, elect delegates to the next level of the party nomination process, maybe vote on planks for the state party platform, verify who will submit the results to the party, and adjourn. The process usually takes an hour or two depending on the contentiousness of the debates, which is to say they’re as contentious as an IBM management meeting. It’s focused, allows for discussion, and efficient.

For the Democrats…let’s just say herding cats is more structured than their process. They get together in a room and gather in groups depending on who they favor. After some candidates are eliminated due to lack of viability, the other groups can persuade the supporters of the “non-viable” candidates to caucus with their candidates. This process can go on for hours because sometimes it can take quite a lot of cajoling to get someone caucusing for a candidate to get him or her to switch teams.

On a side note, I’m surprised that doesn’t cause more chaos given how emotional Leftists get. I mean, if you spent months canvasing for Joe Blow only to have Joe not win the nomination, how likely would you be to put your full support behind one of Joe’s opponents? And on the other side of the equation, how pissed would you be if you did the same for Joe’s opponent and to have to give up a delegate spot to someone who didn’t support your candidate from the jump? (And for the record, this is typically what happens on the Democrat side to secure a “viable” nominee gets proper representation.)

And remember, kids, these are the same people who want the government to provide for us because they think we’re too dumb to look out for ourselves.

Underneath the shaking hands and kissing babies is a media whose job it is to cover the campaign for people outside of Iowa. And make no mistake, I would say most of the media folks hate being here. Granted, when they come here it’s usually cold, windy, and snowy, so it’s hard to put our best foot forward without getting frostbite. Even so, with the kind of attitude Leftists give off, it’s not unusual for Iowans to still be friendly and genuine. That can be off-putting for someone who is used to having to be wary of people who will stab them in the back, figurative and possibly literally. This happened to a friend of mine from New York City who came to cover the Iowa Caucuses for a website I used to run many many years ago and she was struck by how nice everyone was. And before you knew it, she and her husband moved to St. Louis and are now enjoying the Midwest niceness.

Maybe that’s why the media think we’re uneducated rubes. In their cynical minds, no one can be that honest about their intentions, so it’s obvious we’re the defective ones and we need the Left to tell us what to think and do because that’s what they do! But here’s the thing: Iowans are what we are and we’re smarter than you think. Granted, it can be argued the Democrats’ caucus structure proves otherwise, but that’s the outlier here.

Along with the condescending Leftist attitude, there’s an idea in Leftist circles that the Iowa Caucuses shouldn’t be first in the nation because it prevents bigger states like California from voting for who they want when it gets to be their turn. They also mention Iowa is mostly white and doesn’t represent the diversity of the country, so naturally Iowa isn’t a good place to start a Presidential campaign. Try telling that to campaign financiers. For all of its faults, Iowa has media markets that are far cheaper than the media markets just in one community. And, if you really think about it, the sheer expense of running a single 30 second ad on a TV station in, say, Los Angeles would prevent other states from voting for who they want because it would knock out or prevent lower-tier candidates from getting votes.

Funny how the Left doesn’t think about that, isn’t it?

This year, the Iowa Caucuses are going to be a chance for Democrats to showcase their clown car of candidates, while the Republicans should be able to go home early. And after the confetti and the parties, the campaigns and media move towards New Hampshire and Iowa becomes a political afterthought until Election Night.

And you know…that’s the way we like it.