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.


The State of the Onion Address 2024

My fellow Americans,

After listening to parts of the most recent State of the Union Address, I came to a startling revelation, and I must apologize. For years, I have been calling the President “Puddin’ Head Joe” and even wrote a parody song about it. I was wrong, and I am sorry. From this point on, I shall refrain from calling the President Puddin’ Head Joe.

Because I found a much more appropriate name.

If you remember the film “Anchorman,” you should remember the character of Brick Tamland, the weatherman as played by Steve Carrell. To put it mildly, Brick was only a step or two from being a drooling idiot. If that doesn’t describe Joe Biden right now, I don’t know what does.

Anyway, President Tamland’s SOTU Address was full of shouting, gaslighting, divisiveness, and general what-in-the-Wide-World-of-Fuck that we’ve come to expect out of the guy. But at this point I have to ask whether he’s even up to be President of the HOA, let alone the United States.

This thought by itself would get be branded as ageist, ableist, or any other -ist the Left could muster to defend their guy, but it’s time we had an intervention. President Tamland is no longer capable of being President and no amount of water-carrying by the media will change that.

Especially when you consider the same assholes telling us how sharp President Tamland is were finding any excuse they could to make former President Donald Trump look like, well, the current President.

To be fair, though, Trump may not necessarily be the best alternative, either. By the time he would take the Oath of Office for a second time (should he be reelected), he would be 78 years old, only three years younger than President Tamland is now. Although Trump hasn’t exhibited the rate of mental decline his opponent has yet, maybe it’s time we start trending younger for Presidential candidates.

Not that the next generation of Presidential hopefuls is any great intellectual leap from the current crop, mind you. As our politicians skew younger, I swear they get dumber, as evidenced by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Marjorie Taylor Greene. You could combine the two and still not come up with a half-wit.

But in today’s political environment, it doesn’t matter if you’re dumber than Brittany Spears’ current social media manager. All that matters is you vote “the right way.” Then, you will get the public support of your party, even if it’s through gritted teeth and reddened faces.

This leads to the great paradox of leadership. Those who would be great at it don’t want to do it, and those who suck at it are always the first in line to run for higher office. And once they get into office, you need an act of God (or in the case of Leftists, an act of Soros) to get them out, which means the worst of the worst become our problems year after year, election after election.

And by problems, I mean embarrassments. Between Rep. Eric Swalwell sleeping with a Chinese spy (and still getting to keep his position on the House Committee on Homeland Security) and Rep. Lauren Boebert giving out handies during a musical version of “Beetlejuice,” I’m surprised we don’t need to supply DC with more cold showers or at least lengths of hose to keep these horndogs thinking more about their jobs than about getting lucky. Then again, if they’re too busy fucking each other, they won’t have time to fuck us over, so there’s that.

What I’m trying to say is America is being run by people who could limbo under the lowest of standards with plenty of room to spare. While we’re busy worrying about how to make our dollars stretch more than Amy Schumer’s yoga pants, we tend to let things like candidate quality slide. We need to do a better job of holding our elected officials accountable at every level instead of shrugging and saying, “well, the other side is worse.” Remember, the lesser of two evils is still evil, and the lesser of two incompetents is still incompetent, even if the incompetent is on “our side.”

And people wonder why I’m voting for the C’thulu/Sweet Meteor of Death 2024 ticket.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

By the time you read this, Puddin’ Head Joe will have given his latest State of the Union Address where he will say we’re doing great under Bidenomics while calling out one of the biggest issues we face in America today.

Shrinkflation.

Not illegal immigration. Not the national debt ballooning to Rosie-O’Donnell-and-Michael-Moore-at-an-all-you-can-eat-buffet levels. Not fentanyl addiction, the price of goods and services, or our involvement in two wars. Getting less for the same price we paid for the same item previously.

At least Puddin’ Head Joe has his thumb firmly up his own ass or else he might be tempted to do something. In the meantime, we can talk about shrinkflation in terms even Puddin’ Head Joe can understand.

shrinkflation

What the Left thinks it means – when greedy companies charge the same price, but give consumers less

What it really means – when companies try to balance customer demand and production costs

I will warn you this is some economics talk, so if it’s not your bag, you may not want to continue. Unless you want to see me use the word “fuck” a lot. I bear no responsibility for any boredom or drowsiness you feel reading this week’s Lexicon.

With that out of the way, fuck.

When costs go up due to…oh I don’t know…a fucking idiot using our budget like the ATM at a strip club for compulsive people, companies have to figure out a way to continue doing business. Since most companies are run by people who have even a fleeting understanding of the laws of supply and demand, this sets into motion a series of decisions. Raise prices to compensate for the cost of doing business, offer less and try to keep prices lower, or do a combination of the two?

Shrinkflation is the combination of the two. Instead of charging the actual price of a good or service (which may negatively impact demand), companies will keep the price at the same level as before the cost hike, but they have to find a way to balance the cost with the price point. That usually means giving people less or taking a loss.

The other option on the shrinkflation table is to reduce the size of the packaging, thus reducing the amount you get. Granted, it’s usually a little bit here and there, but it can make all the difference if you get to the end of your package of Oreos and you’re missing one or two. And since we’re dealing with milk’s favorite cookie, that’s a sin against Man and Nature.

Now, for the people who don’t even have a Cliff’s Notes idea of the law of supply and demand (i.e. Leftists), the obvious solution is for the company to take a loss. After all, it’s just money and these companies make tons of it. The issue at hand for them is greed. In their hivemind, greed is immoral (except when it’s done to advance Leftist causes), so there is a moral obligation for companies to not make any more money than necessary.

Sound familiar? If not, let me give you a clue: it’s the entire fucking idea behind Puddin’ Head Joe’s push to deal with shrinkflation.

But wait, there’s more! Puddin’ Head Joe announced he was launching a task force to combat…“unfair and illegal pricing.” Yep, government has to get involved to help consumers. And I’m sure nothing could possibly go wrong with that. Look at the success of Obamacare!

On second thought, let’s not.

The thing is government can’t fight greed. Greed is a human trait, so combating it means fighting human nature. Of course, the government has been fighting wars on drugs and poverty for decades, so maybe the powers that be stupid think following the same script will work this time. It just needs time and money…no, wait, that’s Ukraine.

Regardless, it’s a fundamentally stupid idea that doesn’t attack the real issue. It’s not necessarily the greed of the companies that needs to be addressed, but the greed of the consumers. Whether you clip coupons like a rabbi performing brises on straight commission or look for sales and deals on items you want or need, we are all trying to get our dollars to stretch as much as we can. Especially these days when inflation is higher than Hunter Biden on any day ending in, well, “day.” That puts the producer and the buyer at an impasse, as the producer is trying to make as much money as possible without pricing themselves into oblivion.

But here’s the part the Left doesn’t understand: that’s a part of the law of supply and demand. It’s not like if a company makes one penny more than it “should” the buyer is fucked. It just means in that particular transaction, the producer (i.e. the one accepting all the risk) made a penny. Having some no-name, no-brain bureaucrat with a shiny new office and a meaningless title take that penny away isn’t going to fix the problem, but it may start a whole new problem: government taking more than just that one penny.

One of my immutable truths is “The sole purpose of any bureaucracy is to grow itself to the point it becomes irremovable.” If Puddin’ Head Joe’s task force can take away one penny of profit in the name of unfair business practices, what’s to stop it from taking another penny and another and another and so on using the same rationale? As long as there are people who believe businesses are fucking them over, there will always be a line outside the door of people willing to “stick it to The Man.”

But there comes a point where “sticking it to The Man” results in negative consequences. Just ask Walgreens and CVS, who have been plagued by continuous shoplifting in California and are pulling out of some areas only to get shamed by community leaders for trying to cut the company’s losses and closing stores in these areas. Of course, if these same community leaders gave two shits about the shoplifting and tried fixing that problem instead of bitching to Walgreens and CVS, maybe those locations wouldn’t be trying to get out in the first place.

Nahhhhh. That’s too simple. Has to be racism because…fuck you racists!

As consumers, we have to understand as prices go up for the things we buy and use, those same prices are going up to get us these things. The way Puddin’ Head Joe wants us to think ignores that reality and creates a straw man that would put Ray Bolger to shame. And, yes, if there is a company that charges the same price before Inflationpalooza but delivers only 1/100 of the product, that company should get the shit kicked out of them. But not through violence or government interference. In the place where it really matters, the free market.

And that’s where any shrinkflation should be addressed, to be honest. Money talks, bullshit walks, and Leftists balk, and it’s the best way to balance the needs and wants of all parties directly involved. And it will piss off people who don’t like the free market, so win-win!

Seriously, shrinkflation is only a problem for those who don’t get how free market capitalism works. Which means Puddin’ Head Joe is going to make it a problem, and we’re all going to feel the impact of his attempts to “fix” it.

Oh joy.

Our Brother-In-Law

This is your annual reminder the war between Russia and Ukraine is still going on and we still don’t have any idea of what the fuck we’re doing in it yet. I mean, aside from giving billions of American tax dollars to a cause that’s ill-defined outside of “Putin Bad” and has no clear end date in sight.

Oh, and did I mention we’re backing the losing side?

Actually, that’s a bit premature. They haven’t lost yet, so there’s always a chance Ukraine can turn things around…provided, of course, we send more money and arms.

It was at this point I came to a realization: Ukraine is like the stereotypical lazy brother-in-law. They don’t do much, spend what little money they have on shit they don’t need, and always come around when they need just a few bucks to get them through until they can get on their feet. And, because they’re related by marriage, we tend to relent in order to keep the peace within the family.

That doesn’t work so well when an entire country is the brother-in-law and we’re strapped for cash ourselves. Regardless of what Leftist squawking head tells you, the economy isn’t so rosy. Inflation continues to rise (although at a much lower rate than the previous 2 years, so yay, I guess?), and Puddin’ Head Joe keeps finding ways to make the US Dollar worth less than the acknowledgements section of a narcissist’s autobiography.

Like, oh I don’t know…giving billions to a foreign country without asking for any of it back?

Of course, the Leftist warmongers will mention Ukraine is fighting for freedom and we should support it or we’re Russian assets. Which is why so many of these same warmongers are trying to tie aid to Israel to aid to Ukraine because…freedom, I guess?

Actually, the two are not connected in any way. And if you’ve been following the events in Ukraine prior to the war with Russia, you can see why, but for those who haven’t let’s just say Ukraine has…a bit of a neo-Nazi problem. Which means we have a bit of a neo-Nazi problem because we’re funding them in the name of freedom, all the while telling us neo-Nazis are all over the US and evil, nasty people who can’t be reasoned with.

You know, just like Antifa!

This contradiction doesn’t seem to bother the Left that much, but it bothers me. We cannot hold Ukraine to a different standard than we hold our own citizens, even if we don’t like the implications. This is the kind of idiocy that got both Iran and Iraq hating our guts in the early 80s when they were having their own war. We tried playing both sides at different points and we got fucked as a result.

Now, we’re repeating the same mistake. After trying to be buddy-buddy with Russia as far back as the Obama Administration (remember Hillary Clinton’s “Reset” button?), we’re now blaming them for everything from inflation to supply line issues to the fact Taylor Swift is dating Travis Kelce. And when you consider Russia and China are getting along like the aforementioned Swift and Kelce, that doesn’t bode well for us.

But freedom…I guess?

So, it looks like we’re going to be letting Ukraine sleep on our couch for the foreseeable future. But I’m sure they’ll find a job…I mean win the war with Russia soon. They just need a few billion to tide them over until they win…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With almost every election in the past 25 years or so, there have been accusations of one side or the other trying to get an unfair advantage though what is loosely called “election interference.” This can take on many forms, but the Left seems to be particularly concerned with election interference this year.

Maybe it has something to do with their Presidential candidate being only slightly more coherent than a piece of burnt toast…naaaaaah. If we’ve learned anything from Leftists, it’s that they’re honest brokers truly looking out for the best interests of their ideological cult…I mean country. Regardless, we have a tough nut to crack, so let’s get cracking.

No, Hunter, I’m not talking real crack here, buddy.

election interference

What the Left thinks it means – outside parties influencing American politics through underhanded and illegal means

What it really means – election shit Leftists do, but never get held accountable for doing

One of the bedrock principles America’s had throughout its existence is fair elections. Voters across the country would spend more time in local libraries and churches than they would the rest of the year and cast ballots for candidates they felt would do the best job in a given role. When we started electing incompetents, though, that dynamic shifted to whichever scumbag we liked more.

Anyway, this came into question in 2000 in the election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. I won’t go into a lot of detail here because I’m still going to therapy over it, but for those of you who weren’t there, the Readers Digest Condensed Version is Al Gore tried to use recounts in select Florida counties to win the state’s electoral votes and failed. This sent shockwaves throughout the political landscape. I mean, who could have imagined a thoroughly unlikable and out-of-touch former Vice President would lose?

I mean, aside from anyone who paid attention to Al Gore.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Hanging Chads, Leftists decided Bush cheated, thus he wasn’t legitimately President. This lead to conspiracy theories involving then-Florida Governor and W’s brother Jeb, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, the US Supreme Court, and several boy bands getting their hands dirty while installing George W. Bush. Never mind the fact most, if not all, media-generated recounts repeatedly showed Bush won Florida. It was a conspiracy, dammit!

Then, before you could say “Not My President,” the election interference disappeared in 2008, even though not much in the lines of election security had changed. Hmmm…now who won the Presidency in 2008? Surely the fact the Left’s choice for President winning had no bearing on whether the Left thought election was tampered with, right? I mean that would be totally be a dick move to selectively call out election interference based on who was in office!

And it was just such a dick move they did in 2016 when Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. The only difference between the 2000 conspiracy theories and the 2016 ones was the particular parties involved. And election security? Still not that different than it was back then.

Then, before you could say “Orange Man Bad,” election integrity wasn’t an issue in 2020…except where it was and glossed over by Leftists and turned into treason if you dared not accept one of the most fucked-up elections in history as totally legit. And now Puddin’ Head Joe is fucking everything else up and is in jeopardy of losing the White House to Trump, guess what’s coming back? That’s right, election interference!

But what does that actually look like? Depends on who you ask. To a normal person, a lot of the shit that’s been going on since 2000 has been election interference, ranging from potential threats of violence (Black Panthers outside polling places in 2008) to irregular counting procedures (counting ballots after the counting was supposed to be concluded in 2020). In other words, Leftist Election Strategy 101.

To Leftists, it’s anything Republicans and conservatives do to prevent the Left from cheating. Pass a law preventing campaign volunteers from handing out bottles of water to people in line, which could be considered electioneering? That’s election interference! Call for Voter ID laws? Election interference! In fact, I think you can count on the one hand of the world’s worst shop teacher the number of things the Left wouldn’t consider election interference.

To put it mildly, Leftists care about election interference like they care about the gay community: only when it suits their larger political ends. Otherwise, it’s issue non grata. The way you can tell? Leftists aren’t overtly spending money on election security. If they were really concerned about Russia, China, or even Nickelback affecting the 2024 election, they would be coming up with all sorts of election integrity boondoggles where Leftists could get rich..er and nothing would get done.

See what I mean?

The Left’s ideal version of election integrity is one where they’re the only ones allowed to cheat and win. But by taking this approach, they’ve ensured they can never be taken seriously on this subject by anyone who has a brain, which means anyone who isn’t a Leftist. Meanwhile, real election integrity is eroding before our eyes because few Republicans care to even touch the issue, let alone take the heat from the Left for trying to do something to restore faith in the system. If we want to see a return to the good old days where we can accept election results without all the bullshit, we have to take the heat and pack a lunch. Just avoid mayonnaise and cole slaw.

In the meantime, call out the Left’s bullshit when they bring up election integrity as an issue. Ask them what they intend to do the next time one of their preferred candidates win to ensure outside forces don’t tip the scales. And be prepared not to get an answer. Or have them call you a bigot. Or have their heads explode. You know, whatever works.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

When Alabama comes up in the news, it’s usually in relation to a citizen doing something insanely stupid. This week, however, the state made the news for something at least somewhat smart.

Which, of course, made Leftists freak out.

Recently, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled frozen embryos are considered children and subject to the same legal protections as other children under the state’s abortion laws. Of course, Leftists started raising all sorts of objections, ranging from the chilling effect (their words, not mine) on In Vitro Fertilization to the ruling being the result of Donald Trump (surprise surprise) to there not being enough oat milk for the Left’s free range Cheerios. And you know how serious they are when they start putting up stupid memes comparing chicken eggs to embryos to show how “stupid” the ruling was.

The concept of when life begins is subject of a lot of debate and all of it surrounds the embryo. Which means we get to talk about it, and by talk I mean you get to read my semi-informed opinions on the subject!

embryo

What the Left thinks it means – a prospective human

What it really means – the formation of a human baby

So, when does life begin? That depends on who you ask. The people who know a thing or two about human physiology will tell you it begins when there is cellular division, which can’t happen without a spark of life. The people who flunked out of human physiology class and became Leftists say life begins once the fetus exits the birth canal. Up until that point, it’s just a clump of cells.

That’s going to come as a surprise to any test tube babies out there.

Regardless of where you fall on the spectrum of when life begins, there is something perverse about how the Left treats embryos and fetuses for that matter. Instead of seeing them as humans, the Left sees them as objects without agency and, thus, useless to their political agenda except as an accessory to abortion rights. After all, a woman can continue to vote for Leftists, but an embryo can’t.

And as long as the Left continues to support abortion on demand (and contrary to what they say, some of them do), they will have a vested interest in dehumanizing a human life. Make no mistake, kids, an embryo is a human life. I’ve often wanted to ask pro-baby-death…I mean pro-choice advocates what comes out of the womb if it’s not a baby. Is it a basketball? A Shetland Pony? The transmission for a 1956 Buick? I’ve never had the chance, but a man can dream…

Meanwhile back at the main point, the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision makes sense in the context of protecting life. Once you dig past the sensationalist headlines and Leftist mischaracterizations, there is a real issue at stake. One of the lawsuits that lead to the decision involved a hospital patient who tried to take out some of the frozen embryos, got freeze burned, and dropped the embryos, causing them to die. Now, for the pro-baby-death…I mean pro-choice crowd, this is literally the kind of thing they claim to be against: letting women choose what they want to do with their bodies. The couple in this case chose to freeze an embryo, and the patient stripped that away from them.

Not that you would hear that from the Left, mind you. To them, the decision is backwards because…feefees. And to make sure the gay community got a shoutout, Leftists said the decision strips same sex couples of the ability to start a family.

Okay, time out here. Extending the legal protections of life to embryos prevents gay couples from having families? Well…let’s see if I can put this tactfully…how in the Wide World of Fuck does that make any sense? If these same sex couples want IVF to have a child, there’s nothing in the ruling that would prevent that. The same goes for couples looking to do IVF. All the ruling does is make it illegal to kill embryos and set up punishment for those who kill them. That’s it.

It was at this point we realized the Left was full of shit.

But, wait, it gets better! Leftists are now saying they will be freezing embryos and claim them as exemptions on their taxes. The thing is such an action would not only support the pro-life argument, but also the argument people are overtaxed as it is. To put it another way, and I’m speaking for myself here, your terms are acceptable.

In their attempts to look and sound smart on this decision, Leftists have exposed their true nature. They don’t care about embryos at all. They care more about the votes they get from the mothers of those embryos and any self-reflection on whether there’s a human life at stake is strictly optional, but highly discouraged. It’s this lack of consideration that drives me to be more on the pro-life side personally, even though I’m much more libertarian towards others. My personal opinion applies to me, myself, and some guy named Earl.

In the meantime, I think I’ve found a way to get more Leftists on board with protecting embryos. Tell them the embryos self-identify as trans. They’ll fall all over themselves to prevent any of them from dying or look like hypocrites in the process. Either way, the embryos get to live!

And that’s a win for everyone. Especially Earl.

The Not-So-Great Replacement

If you’ve been paying attention to the Left in recent years (and to be fair why would you since you have jobs and lives), you’ve heard about the Great Replacement Theory. In short, it’s the belief Jews are bringing in immigrants to replace white people. Of course, it’s wrong because without white people, Leftists would have no one to blame for shit.

But those same Leftists are facing their own Great Replacement Theory, but it has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. It has to do with who will be running for President for the Democrats in 2024.

The current presumptive candidate is President Puddin’ Head Joe, but given his propensity to, oh I don’t know, be a feeble-minded buffoon on a good day, the Left is trying to figure out what to do if his mental and/or physical health continues to deteriorate. To put it mildly, their options are scarcer than meat options at a vegan barbecue. Let’s take a look at these wieners…I mean winners.

Kamala Harris – Current Vice President and leader in the Government Official Who Makes Puddin’ Head Joe Look Sentient contest. Her list of accomplishments to date have been impressive…in just how blank the list is. Her popularity is somewhere between Bidenomics and Ben Shapiro at the BET Music Awards, and only one of those has a good beat that you can dance to. Leftists are trying to replace her, so elevating her to the Presidency would be a step in the wrong direction.

Dean Phillips – The “Who Is He?” candidate. To his credit, Phillips has brought up Puddin’ Head Joe’s age and low approval rates as reasons to find someone else. But as those calls have gotten louder in Leftist circles, it hasn’t moved the needle on his candidacy. And given how his party treated Robert Kennedy Jr., it’s not surprising so many are still Ridin’ With Biden even if that ride ends up at the bottom of a ravine. And speaking of Mr. Kennedy…

Robert Kennedy Jr. – Noted vaccine skeptic and bane of the Left’s existence because he didn’t Trust The Science. Much has been made of how his anti-vaccination stance has negatively impacted his extended family, but not much has been made of…how can I put this…his being fucking right about the COVID-19 vaccine. Since the narrative of his “homewrecking” has become the go-to for the Leftist hivemind, it’s unlikely he’ll get a fair shake or an honest hearing from Leftists and the media (but I repeat myself). So, he’s running as an Independent in the hopes that will prevent the Puddin’ Head Joe stink from sticking on him.

Jill Stein – The scapegoat of Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 Presidential bid (since Leftists can’t admit the former First Lady is a shitty candidate), Stein is making another run for the White House for the Green Party. If you like recycled ideas that wouldn’t even work in theory, you’ll love her current platform…which appears to be only marginally different than her 2012 and 2016 platforms. I admire the tenacity, but when not even Leftists are willing to give your Leftist squawking points a first look, let alone a second, you might be in the Pat Paulsen category of Presidential candidates: a joke that comes around every 4 years and is forgotten afterwards.

Cornel West – Yes, that Cornel West. I can tell how much of an impact he’s going to have on this year’s election by the fact I didn’t even know he was running until I did research on the candidates. Gotta justify those speaking fees somehow!

Marianne Williamson – One of the few bright spots from the Left in the 2020 election. Sure, she’s nuttier than squirrel shit, but at least she was honest and willing to listen. No wonder Leftists don’t like her. I know she’s suspended her campaign already, but I would be remiss if I didn’t include her.

Other Democrats who some thought might run include Joe Manchin and Michelle Obama. With Manchin being as popular in Leftist circles as Rush Limbaugh in San Francisco, that would be a non-starter. Michelle Obama, on the other hand, still has the popularity she did when she was First Lady, but she said she wasn’t interested in the Presidency.

So, that leaves the Left with jack and shit for potential replacements for Puddin’ Head Joe, and Jack left town. This poses a problem for the Left in 2024 and beyond because they haven’t really developed a solid bench of potential candidates. Even rising stars like California Governor Gavin Newsom and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer have enough baggage to keep them where they are for now. In another 4 years, that may change, but for now the Left’s Presidential candidate bench is shallower than a Taylor Lorenz article. Or, Lorenz herself, for that matter.

In retrospect, the Left may have been better served by losing the 2020 Presidential election because it would have forced them to find better candidates that could have better capitalized on Donald Trump’s unforced errors. Not that they would have had any in the first place, but one can dream. As it stands, though, they have a doddering old fool at the head of the ticket, and a doddering middle age fool backing him up, and the lack of viable replacements is a problem that could cost them the White House for years to come.

Looks like the Left will have to get more dead people to vote!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

When I’m not writing blogs, banging my head against the wall until I get a concussion, or wondering if the Sweet Meteor of Death will be coming back for the 2024 election, I like to play video games. For me, they provide me with an escape from the real world so I can continue to be a functional (and, more importantly, a non-incarcerated) member of society.

But as with most fun things, Leftists had to go and ruin it by creating controversy. Granted, the Left has been trying to insert itself into video games for over a decade now and have failed. But their repeated and often embarassing failures have not deterred them from trying again. Think “Groundhog Day” but with video games. Oh, and a lot less comedy.

The latest attempt came from our good friends in GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. GLAAD recently released a report stating 1 in 5 active gamers are LGBTQIOUAEIOUSOMETIMESY and the gaming industry as a whole needs more representation of that community.

Son of a bitch…

representation

What the Left thinks it means – making sure all minorities can see a reflection of themselves in aspects of society

What it really means – superficial bean-counting without actually doing anything to help

Unless you’ve been living under a rock or trapped in Puddin’ Head Joe’s brain, you know members of the LGBTQMEANWHILEBACKATTHEHALLOFJUSTICE community exist and are prominent figures in society, mainly because so many of them can’t shut up about it. That community is slowly finding its way into various aspects of society and politics. Put simply, they’re visible and fabulooooouuuuusssss!

So, why aren’t they better represented in video games? The GLAAD report surmises it’s because the industry doesn’t think about them as viable protagonists. The exception to this is independent games where representation is much greater. But it also increases the likelihood this representation comes in really shitty games that a trained monkey could make better with an Etch-A-Sketch and a fifth of Everclear. Still, GLAAD felt confident in saying the gaming industry has to do a better job in making sure LGBTQIAIOUDEFENSE members get seen in their games.

And we can totally take an organization with a Board of Directors member named Peppermint seriously.

Unusual names aside, GLAAD is trying to come from a good place. They want everyone to feel included in video games. Is that so wrong?

Welllllll…it’s all about how that comes about that matters. That’s where I take issue with the notion of representation in this context. It’s not a matter of including a gay, lesbian, trans, bi, queer, etc. character in a game; it’s about making it make sense within the context. Trying to shoehorn a character that ticks off the flavor of the month box on the inclusiveness checklist makes it harder for gamers to accept him/her/it.

And here’s a fun little fact to consider: gamers are predominantly male. The numbers are getting closer to gender parity, but gaming is still a male’s domain. That means gaming studios are going to cater to where their cyber bread is buttered, as any capitalist worth his/her/its salt would. And make no mistake, game companies are in the business to make money, not to make social statements. If the social statement threatens the money, guess what’s going to be tossed aside faster than Hunter Biden goes through hookers and blow?

That’s where the calls for representation come into play. Since the community has a long reach when it comes to media and social influence, they can mobilize a PR nightmare within a matter of Twitter posts. And in that environment, nobody wants to be on the wrong side of a Twitter mob, so the game companies tend to bend the knee and comply. Just look at the template Anita Sarkeesian used to “help” women get more representation in video games.

Here’s the thing about Twitter mobs, though: they only have the power you allow them to have. Even as the GLAAD report gets mainstream traction (thanks NBC), the bottom line is still the bottom line, and no amount of virtual huffing and puffing from online activists will change that. Money talks, and bullshit walks.

And bullshit is the best way to explain the GLAAD report.

It turns out the gaming industry is already evolving with the times and has been since the 1980s. The early days of representation were less than stellar, but things have turned around so gay, lesbian, bi, and the other orientations are not only visible in games, but are sympathetic, realistic characters. And I’m not talking about low profile games, either. Some of the most popular titles of recent memory have represented the LBGTQAAAAAVVVEEEEMARRRRIIIIIAAAA community prominently and positively.

Including a game that was targeted by the aforementioned community, Hogwarts Legacy. After comments from J.K. Rowling that struck the trans community the wrong way, trans rights activists (including GLAAD, by the way) called for a boycott of the game. And the boycott, much like Fani Willis’s ability to not make herself look like a corrupt asshat, failed miserably.

I attribute the boycott’s failure to two factors. One, the game developers anticipated the controversy and created a transgender character. Of course, these Leftist idiots wouldn’t have known that unless they played the game. Oops!

The second, and more prevalent, reason was…gamers really don’t give a fuck about LGBTQIUDCANWEMILKTHISJOKEDRY representation. They care about…get this…good games. Sure, there are assholes who will make the biggest deal about “protecting games from woke culture,” but most of the gamers are more interested in whether a game entertains them more than who gets represented in the game. The Left completely missed the point by not understanding the audience they wanted to persuade.

And now they’re repeating the same mistake with the GLAAD report. At the very least, Leftists are consistent in being wrong and committed to recycling, albeit with bad ideas.

The point of representation in Leftist circles is to demand compliance instead of asking for consideration. But the thing to remember is no matter if you bend over backwards like a spineless yoga guru, it will never be enough. There will always be another goal to meet, milestone to achieve, or mountain to climb. So, the best way to win the game is not to play.

Say…that could be a great line for a movie! If only there was a plot, maybe involving a teenager who hacks into a government computer and almost starts a nuclear war with Russia…nah. Too implausible.

Anyway, the Left’s commitment to representation is skin deep. Notice how they don’t demand a slow, out of shape white guy be showcased in the next NBA video game. (By the way, I am available for consultation if you want to go down this road, 2K Games.) It’s always about the representation they want to push. And that’s why we need to take their calls for representation with a grain of salt.

The size of Mount Everest.