With Election 2024 coming up faster than a salmonella and ipecac shake, the political landscape is going to get contentious in a hurry. And nowhere is it getting more contentious than on…MSNBC.
Yes, our good friends at the cable news equivalent of Vox are already sounding the warning bells on the possibility of Donald Trump becoming President again, and their crack talking heads (or talking heads on crack, I can never tell) have figured out what the Left has to overcome: rural America. From a recent “Morning Joe” appearance by Chris Matthews:
I think voters have got to take their hand in this election and don’t wait for the government to do it. Because, you know this election is going to be close. And it’s going to be very close in places like Pennsylvania, and you’re gonna have rural people out there voting their craziness about the cult.
In case you were wondering, the “cult” Mr. Matthews was referring to was…Trump voters. Yeah, I was shocked when I found out, too. And by shocked, I mean shocked someone took Chris Matthews out of cryogenic storage to appear on MSNBC.
Regardless of whether you think Trump voters are in a cult, this little snippet exposes how the Left feels about people who don’t live on the coasts. And it means I have another topic for the Lexicon.
rural America
What the Left thinks it means – a bunch of uneducated rubes who need smart people with the right politics to run their lives
What it really means – people whose voices the Left love to silence or ridicule
For purposes of transparency, I have lived in Iowa my whole life, so I would identify as a rural American. Granted, I don’t have Puddin’ Head Joe’s phone number on speed dial or access to all the most elite dinner parties on either coast, but I do know the people who have the attitude Mr. Matthews expressed usually haven’t been to a rural area for more than the time it takes to get a Starbucks.
Which means most Leftists. But speaking out of abject ignorance is on brand, so they see nothing wrong with it.
The problem is…there’s a lot wrong with it. Painting rural America as a swath of rabid Trump supporters misses the mark. It also misses the Matthew, the Luke, and the John, it’s so off base. The thing about rural America is how diverse it is ideologically, philosophically, and yes, even racially. We’re not all white people here, and we’re definitely not all conservative Republicans.
Take Iowa, for example. As of November 2023, the Hawkeye State is pretty evenly split, with Republicans and that powerhouse of politics Unaffiliated taking the top two spots, and Democrats in a close third place. That doesn’t exactly scream “Trump Republican stronghold” to me. And it certainly doesn’t sound like a cult, unless it’s the world’s lamest cult.
Things get even more murky when you consider the Midwest as a whole. Although it’s mostly a sea of red, there are states like Illinois, Michigan, and Minnesota that buck the trend, and they are certainly rural, or would be considered rural by the MSNBC morons. Yet, in their haste to whip up hysteria about Trump 2.0, they ignore the reality on the ground in those states.
Unfortunately, there are enough people unaware of the reality ready to believe rural America is like the bumpkins on “Hee Haw” only dumber. Including a former Senator from Missouri, Claire McCaskill. On the same show Matthews made the “rural cult” comment, she agreed with him, saying:
…if you are not on Donald Trump’s bandwagon, if you’re not a member of the cult, then you just stay quiet.
And people wonder why she’s no longer a Senator. Oh, wait, it’s because she’s a moron!
Anyway, both Matthews and McCaskill mirror the Left’s attitude about rural America, which has been pretty much a constant since I’ve been an adult. (Biologically, not emotionally.) The Left believe if it doesn’t happen on either coast, it’s dumb and needs to be converted to the “correct” way of thinking. And they’ve been pretty successful, converting states like New Mexico and Colorado from red or purple states into blue ones. They accomplish it like people who get STDs get them: they fuck people. And not unlike the aforementioned STDs, once one person/state gets it, pretty soon another one gets it.
But look at the bright side, kids! Pretty soon all states will need shit maps like San Francisco! Then we’ll all be equal! Won’t that be awesome?
The thing is rural America might not be the intellectual and ideological pushovers the Left thinks it is. People from the backwoods and gravel roads have a lot more life experience than Leftists do, and that shapes who they are more than any college curricula can. They worship God, they hunt and fish, they drive beat-up pickup trucks, and they know the value of a hard day’s work. And, yes, they have different political beliefs. You’re just as likely to find a farmer who votes straight-ticket Democrat as you are a farmer who votes straight-ticket Republican.
And the best part? These two farmers can be friends and/or neighbors without it descending into “Summer of Peace” style anarchy. That shit’s on you coastal Leftist motherfuckers. We may not walk in your circles, but we may not want to in the first place. Rural America is a simpler existence, but not an empty one because we don’t have what Leftist cities have. In fact, I think we might be better off that way.
Should Donald Trump become President again, Leftists won’t change their opinions of rural America. They’ll only quadruple down, saying Trump won because rural America is stupid as they point out the number of “smart” people who voted for Puddin’ Head Joe and Kamala “Word Salad” Harris. Just remember, some of those “smart” people came from rural America and found their way into your ideological bubble in spite of it. To have know-nothings like Chris Matthews, Claire McCaskill, and the entire MSNBC network from top to bottom paint rural America as some right wing feeding ground is not only insulting to me, but should be insulting to every Leftist in rural America who is fighting to bring a little more East and West Coast into the Midwest.
So, to the Leftists who think rural America is a vast intellectual wasteland, I offer two invitations. The first is to come to one of our rural communities and spend six months to a year here. Then, you can see what goes on here and be better informed. Maybe you’ll even like it enough to stay.
Should you reject the first invitation, I formerly invite you all to shut the fuck up about rural America. Thank you. Fuck you. Bye!
Category: Politics
Political posts about the right or left and everyone inbetween
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
By the time you read this, the Left will still be coping with the resignation of former Harvard President and known copycat Claudine Gay and trying to rewrite the narrative to make her into the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy. By the way, Hillary Clinton, please call your office. That part was predictable.
What wasn’t so predictable was the Left falling all over itself to redefine plagiarism to make it more acceptable. Granted, the Left loves to redefine words with the regularity of a guy who eats a lot of fiber and prunes, so it’s not surprising they would do it here. It’s the sheer fucking stupidity behind it that has me dumbfounded, but not speechless (which is a good thing because if I couldn’t put my thoughts into words, this would be a very short blog).
plagiarism
What the Left thinks it means – a not-so-serious offense where someone wittingly or unwittingly copies the work of another
What it really means – intellectual theft
When I was growing up…errr…going from childhood into adulthood, I was taught copying someone else’s work without attribution was a grave error. I’m talking worse than wearing leisure suits unironically here, kids. I will admit to having done it back when I was young and stupid, but now that I’m old and stupid, I know the error of my ways. By copying someone else’s work and claiming it as your own, you are at best depriving the owner of the original work of recognition.
So, why in the Wide World of Fuck is the Left suddenly okay with plagiarism?
To be fair, they’re not completely okay with it. Just if the wrong people use their stuff. See how Twisted Sister lead singer Dee Snyder reacts to Donald Trump supporters using “We’re Not Gonna Take It” as a theme song. Of course, he’s okay with it being used as a theme song for anti-gun activists and Ukrainians, so…yeah.
This isn’t to say he’s not within his rights to dictate who can use his song. Even though I don’t agree with the political reasoning behind his decisions, I can’t object to what he’s doing because it’s his intellectual property, and I’m sure Leftists would agree without question.
Just not for the intellectually consistent reason.
Let’s say someone were to copy an article by Taylor Lorenz and try to pass it off as his or her own. The Left would have a shit fit. Of course, this would never happen because a) you’d have to be dumber than a bag of hammers to do it, and b) Lorenz has the intellectual vigor and rhetorical skill of moldy bread. Copying one of her pieces is grounds for being declared mentally incompetent in 16 states.
That was before Ms. Gay, of course. As of this writing, there have been 40 instances where she has plagiarized someone else’s academic work while writing hers. Most of the academics she’s plagiarized and other academics have defended her, going so far as to say they don’t feel it was plagiarism. Now, this is where shit gets weird. Instead of calling it what it is, Leftists came up with new excuses, ranging from “sloppy attribution” and “sort of more like copying other peoples writings without attribution” to suggesting it’s more commonplace and, thus, not as big of deal as it’s being made out to be. Some went so far as to say the charges were “mostly bogus.“
And if you had “anti-plagiarism is racist” on your 2024 Stupid Shit Leftists Say Bingo card, you have a winner! Because Leftists have to bring race into everything from plagiarism to getting the wrong kind of cage free organic free range cruelty free bananas from Whole Foods, it was only a matter of time before Ms. Gay’s race was brought into it. And it wasn’t just one or two outlets, either. There were a litany of “muh racism” takes from all the predictable sources. Why, it’s almost like they…plagiarized their responses!
Or they share the same brain cell. You know, whichever.
More to the point, though, should the Left’s indifference to plagiarism spread outside the halls of academia, it would have a detrimental effect to any intellectual property. Patent law, copyright law, and even laws surrounding parody would definitely take a hit. As much as I’d like to see 50 porn “parodies” of Barbieheimer (all shot, produced, and released within at a pace that would make Roger Corman look like an overmedicated sloth), I’m not sure this is the direction we should want to go.
And think of the impact to social media sharing sites like YouTube, whose copyright system is more fucked up than Keith Richards as an AA sponsor. Or Keith Richards in general. Any video posted could get taken, renamed, and rebroadcast, including any previously copyrighted material. That in and of itself would impact a certain bay of pirates sailing on the interwebs.
Now, who would be hurt most by this attitude? Maybe…oh, I don’t know…the Leftists in the performing arts community? After all, if plagiarism is fine and should be excused with the lightest of wrist slaps, there’s nothing preventing someone like me from copying a Tyler Perry movie or a Cardi B song and calling it my own.
I mean, aside from me having taste, that is.
This is a situation where the Left’s adherence to social justice comes back to biting them in the collectivist ass. They can’t hold Ms. Gay accountable for what she clearly did because it would look racist and sexist. But in doing so, they’re going to be hurting their financial bottom line sometime in the future because they are undercutting intellectual property rights, which is how many of their prominent donors make their money. Hope it’s worth it.
Meanwhile, Ms. Gay is no longer President of Harvard, but is still employed as…a political science professor. Granted, plagiarism isn’t necessarily a criminal matter, but the fact she only got a demotion speaks volumes about how Harvard and the Left have put not being called racist and sexist above not enabling plagiarizers, in direct defiance of the rules Harvard has for its students. That’s right, kids. College students are now held to a higher intellectual and ethical standards than one of its professors.
At least for now. It’s only a matter of time before Harvard will have to deal with a student who uses the precedent it set with Ms. Gay to argue (and I daresay successfully) there is a double standard between students and faculty and demand plagiarism be allowed across the board with little to no penalty to the offender. And we thought Harvard fucked up its response to anti-Israeli protests on campus!
The Left’s response to Claudine Gay’s frequent plagiarism reveals fundamental flaws that benefit no one. Unless there is protection of intellectual property, we might as well start emulating China. Oh, wait…
Either way, Ms. Gay doesn’t have much to worry about. After all, she may not be President of Harvard anymore, but she’s already built up quite a resume to run for President of the United States.
The Aftermath
Like many teenagers, the social media of choice is a bit of Instagram and Tictok which holds true for the Perry school murderer. Of his accounts have been taken down and scrubbed from all platforms. Even from X that had others posting pictures from those sites. But there are screenshots on various sites showing what he did post still if one is interested in the truth.
The police and mainstream media will gloss over, or dismiss outright, the glaring true nature of this murdering fool. Because it doesn’t fit the narrative.
The murder’s social media profile listed his pronouns as “he/they”. And has multiple hashtags for gender fluid and transgender ideologies. Along with following such groups across social media platforms.
The boy was mentally ill to say the least. And instead of helping this young man he was pigeon holed into the trans and gender fluid movement. And those that did this washed their hands of it thinking they had done a good deed. But this is what caused the outburst of violence.
So many young people are being failed by the system with this trans movement nonsense instead of getting to the root cause of whatever mental illness or demonic possession is impacting them so they can get real help.
It saddens and sickens me that this is allowed to continue. But helping these youths goes against the narrative.
If this is acknowledged as fact at all in the mainstream media the spin will be that the Perry School District is backwards and not inclusive enough for their trans and gender fluid kids. All the blame will be shifted to the community and student body. And bulling will be the subject of discussion rather than the mental illness of the young adult that committed this horrific crime.
And given the media spotlight for the Iowa Caucus this will be a talking point for removing Iowa’s first in the nation status. The blame will be put on Iowa as a whole for not being inclusive.
Iowa School Shooting
A school shooting has taken place in my own backyard. Not some far away location on the coast or up in the mountains. But right here in the heartland of America.
As I begin writing this article the details are few. Injuries and possible deaths have been reported from some outlets but not yet confirmed. Details will come later. Although one detail is known, the shooter is dead.
But before the full extent of the news and information is released. The Left is up to its usual bag of tricks and “solutions” to the problem they created by instituting “gun free zones.”
Their solutions are metal detectors at the doors of schools. No backpacks at schools. And of course the gun grab of “military style” weapons. All of these are absurd.
Metal detectors might not detect some weapons and of course weapons can enter through other means as well. Not just the doors.
Backpacks and duffle bags are needed by students. These carry school books, homework, and gym clothing and sports equipment that are owned by the student. It would be insane to think how a student would carry these items without such a bag.
And lastly, we have the gun grab of “military style” weapons. The Left hates the 2nd Amendment. And it’s always the poor AR-15 that gets the blame. They still think AR means “assault rifle” when it really means Armilite Rifle. The original manufacturer of the AR-15. And every rifle available today is semi-automatic, just like the AR-15. So banning the AR-15 does nothing.
The agenda of the Left is not to end school shootings. But to end civilian ownership of firearms and the 2nd Amendment. If you really wanted to end school shootings let’s start by removing the “gun free zone” and arming responsible staff members who can end a potential shooting before it gets far at all.
Looking back in history, in the 1930’s, the height of the “gangster era” fully automatic machine guns were available to the general public. All the gangsters had them. (And they still have them today despite laws preventing it.) But there were NO school shootings then. In fact, school shootings are a recent event. Something that started in the late 1980’s or early 1990’s. Why?
Prior to this time. Students had guns in the parking lots in the back of pickups at school. Any would-be shooter would be dropped before they got far. But that wasn’t the reason.
No the real reason why school shootings started it because it had been a whole generation since God was removed from the schools and government buildings. The students that had God stripped from their schools were now sending their kids to schools. And God wasn’t allowed in the doors.
Ethics became situational or cultural. Thus anything was OK or good because of how one felt about it. This is what has caused this event and all the others like it to take place.
And this too was caused by the Left.
Extremist Makeover: Caucuses/Primaries Edition
As we enter 2024, this is like Christmas all over again for political geeks like me because we start having caucuses and primaries where the two major parties try to convince us they will do a better job at ignoring our interests than the other side. And for a few weeks, different states are the most important places for candidates to be. Then, before the confetti and balloons can be cleaned up, the candidates are off to a different state that will become the most important place to be.
This kind of political vagrancy isn’t without controversy, however. States like California have complained about how states like Iowa and New Hampshire get first crack at potential candidates while they have to wait for closer to the end of the selection cycle to pick who’s left. Iowa and New Hampshire, on the other hand, take pride in being the first in the nation to select candidates.
And then there is the barrage of political ads where PACs and candidates play fast and loose with the truth in an attempt to one-up the rest of the pack. Between the mailers, radio ads, TV ads, internet ads, and personal appearances, it’s getting to the point voters are tired of the process on Election Day…which is when the next campaigns seem to begin.
So, how do we fix this? Thankfully, I’m a solutions-oriented guy and I think I have some solutions.
1. Reduce the length of the caucuses/primaries to 4 weeks. With the interwebs, people are connected 25/8 (because Common Core math), so there really isn’t much of a need for candidates to travel from state to state to shake hands and kiss babies. Just don’t get the two mixed up, kids. Anyway, if we create a tighter window where candidates can meet with potential voters, there won’t be as much pre-election burnout and, at least theoretically, it will force candidates to make their best arguments first. Of course, some candidates don’t have good arguments to vote for them in the first place, so having their embarrassment limited to a month at most will help them realize their folly or retool for the next run.
2. Enforce truth in advertising laws for political ads. Every politician lies, and their campaigns only enforce the lies they want told. Compare that to, say, drug ads, where every possible side effect has to be named in case someone has an adverse reaction. Although electing a politician may not cause physical maladies, you can still have an adverse reaction. Instead of hiring a lawyer and filing suit against candidates, let’s take another tack and treat political ads the same way we treat drug ads with the same demand of honesty and transparency. That alone might prevent some political types from running in the first place, which makes the process better by subtraction! Win-win, baby!
3. Split up the caucuses/primaries so they can be done in a month. There are 56 caucuses and primaries among the states and American territories. By my math, that means we could have 14 caucuses and primaries for each of the 4 weeks. And, yes, California, it can be alphabetical, so you can be first in the nation for something other than bad ideas and worse politicians.
There are other options that are tangentially related to the process, but I think these will be a good start to making caucuses and primaries better for everyone.
Failing that, there’s always cage fighting.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If you heard a loud squee recently, it came from the collective orgasm the Left had after the Colorado Supreme Court ruled former President Donald Trump could be removed from the 2024 ballot. The reason cited (and gobbled up by every Leftist like a crack whore looking for a fix) was the “insurrection clause” of the 14th Amendment due to what the court found was Trump supporting an insurrection on January 6, 2021.
Even though there’s a lot of debate over whether January 6th constituted an insurrection (short version: it wasn’t), there was no surprise the Left would try this tactic, and it would be a matter of time and/or court shopping to find a bunch of black robed dupes willing to do what Hillary Clinton couldn’t: visit Wisconsin more than once. Oh, and beat Donald Trump.
This gives us a chance to take a closer look at the “insurrection clause” to see what all the hubbub is.
“insurrection clause”
What the Left thinks it means – a provision in the 14th Amendment that disqualifies Donald Trump from running in 2024
What it really means – more proof the Left can’t read the Constitution very well
The 14th Amendment covers a lot of ground, but the part the Left has focused on is Section 3:
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
And when you consider the Left believes Trump supported the January 6th “insurrection”, it’s not hard to come to the conclusion they did. Too bad that conclusion makes zero sense when the facts are examined.
I’ve discussed the “insurrection” previously, but the TL;DR (Too Long; Didn’t Reblog) version is January 6th wasn’t an insurrection because it doesn’t fit the legal definition of one. Furthermore, there’s an extreme leap of logic that has to be made to make the argument, namely the “insurrectionists” who were there to support Donald Trump would have needed to be in favor of overthrowing him for it to be an actual insurrection. After all, Trump was still President that day.
But leaps of logic alone aren’t enough to totally mock the Left’s interpretation of the 14th Amendment. Nah, we also need to mock their inability to read the damn thing from top to bottom. For this, we need to look alllllllll the way down to Article 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The case that originated this clusterfuck of a legal decision is Anderson v. Griswold, which brought up the question of whether Trump could be disqualified from the ballot under Colorado law. Although each state has the power to determine its own election laws, the application of law in this case runs afoul of the very Amendment being used to deny Trump his name on the ballot.
Remember that pesky thing called due process, kids? Yeah, it wasn’t used here. Trump wasn’t a direct party to the lawsuit, but his right to due process was violated in that he was essentially convicted of insurrection without every being charged or convicted of it. The special counsel’s indictment doesn’t even charge him with it! Also, he has yet to be formally charged with it!
So, what did the court do? Determined he was guilty because…fuck if I know.
The reason they gave was a “preponderance of the evidence,” would could mean anything from a hand-written letter on White House stationary signed by Trump saying “I’m going to incite an insurrection today, and it will be the best insurrection ever,” to the court not wanting mean tweets anymore. As of yet, I don’t think we’ve seen the evidence the court referred to, and I’m tempted to say we’re not gonna because that might expose the entire ruling for the farce it most certainly is.
Back to the point about due process. Insurrection is a federal crime, which means only the government can bring the charges. Since that hasn’t happened, the Colorado Supreme Court wouldn’t have the standing to bring the charges, and without there being an actual charge or conviction, there can be no application of the 14th Amendment. And without there being an actual trial (sorry, Ted Lieu), Trump was denied due process. Not even a fucking stupid statement from Colorado’s Secretary of State declaring Trump guilty of inciting an insurrection will overcome that.
How fucked up is this situation? A former Trump lawyer not known for sucking up to him after being let go says the US Supreme Court could rule 9-0 to overturn the Colorado Supreme Court’s ruling. And this is a guy who has said Trump was “toast” in his criminal indictments.
If this wasn’t bad enough, there’s even some debate over whether the “insurrection clause” would even apply to the Presidency. Given how loosely the law has been interpreted to disqualify Trump, I’m sure the Left would be willing to stretch the logic so much Reed Richards would need a chiropractor. In my non-legalese reading of it, I can see where it could be, but it’s not nearly as much of a slam-dunk as the Left thinks it is. There’s just enough wiggle room for Trump to argue it doesn’t apply (even though the arguments I’ve put forward above about the lack of due process would be stronger, but I’m not advising him).
Then, there’s Section 5:
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
What the Colorado Supreme Court did completely ignores this part of the Amendment used to remove Trump in the first place. Congress didn’t disqualify Trump via legislation (and, to the Leftists reading this, this is not an endorsement of such action being taken). It was done by a majority of judges who are clearly incapable of ruling within the confines of the law. Leftists may be okay with it, but wait until it gets turned around on them.
If this decision is upheld by the USSC, it sets precedent, which can be used to disqualify politicians from both sides based solely on a politically-convenient interpretation of “insurrection” and a process where a favorable court decision is more certain than if you asked Hunter Biden if he wants crack for Christmas. Let’s take our good friends from the Capitol Hill Occupied Protest from that bastion of progressive living, Seattle. What the group did and advocated could be considered an insurrection (personally, I don’t, but for the purposes of this sketch let’s say I do). Using the Left’s argument here, no one who participated in CHOP would be eligible to run for public office.
And neither would any of the politicians who supported CHOP.
Then, all it would take would be a Republican with more balls than sense to find a court in Texas that would rule so and before you can say jurisprudence, a good chunk of Democrats would be out of a job. And it would be thanks to the Left’s “Orange Man Bad” rhetoric.
Okay, I’ll admit this sounds too good to be true because, well, Leftists have more double standards than they have genders (this just in…still 2), but it would be detrimental to the country as a whole. It would be weaponizing the legal system to get what an ideologically-driven segment wants. Or, as the Left calls it, Tuesday.
Regardless, the “insurrection clause” being used in Anderson v. Griswold shows a level of desperation on the Left because they know Puddin’ Head Joe is slightly more popular than an anal cavity search done by Willie “Giant Hands” McStuffins, and his accomplishments on issues that really matter to the people are sparse at best. He can’t run on the economy (but he can run from it), foreign policy, or any of the kitchen table issues that Joe Six Pack and his family worry about on the daily. But at least he can run on being the first Administration to hire incompetent and dishonest trans people, amirite????
To try to curtail a possible Trump 2024 victory, the Left counted on the courts to eliminate him from the running before the caucuses and primaries could begin. If the High Court (as opposed to the court in Colorado who appeared to be high when they rendered this dumbfuck decision) rules according to the law, there should be no doubt it will get overturned. If they rule according to political ideology, it will get overturned most likely, but it will have the stink of partisanship all over it and the Left will redouble their efforts to expand the court.
And, yes, my irony meter overloaded after typing that.
In the end, it should be noted there’s a reason the “insurrection clause” is rarely used and/or prosecuted: because there’s a fine line between legitimate protest and insurrection. Redressing grievances with the government is protected by the First Amendment. Acting out in a way that threatens the very fabric of our government isn’t. To conflate the two for the purposes of electoral victory is dishonest, detrimental, and a dick move.
If you read this before Christmas, I wish you the happiest of holiday seasons.
And if you read this after Christmas, I wish you the happiest of post-holiday sales.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
It wasn’t that long ago that Harvard was seen as one of the upper echelons of intellectual pursuit. Only the smartest, most well-off students could even breathe the air on campus, and only the best of the best of the best could graduate. Then something happened.
Harvard got stupid.
Nothing drove this point home more than a recent Congressional hearing involving Harvard President Claudine Gay and her inability to articulate the simple concept that wishing death on anybody is bad. Oh, but it gets a lot worse, as we’ll explore later, but it’s worth reviewing the fall from grace and bringing a whole new meaning to the Harvard Crimson.
Harvard
What the Left thinks it means – an excellent university where free speech and activism are embraced
What it really means – a diploma mill for well-heeled Leftists
Although Harvard is in the spotlight for being absolute dipshits, it’s not lost on me the fact higher education in general has gone to hell, and I may not mean figuratively here. Not only has the Left set up camp on campuses (or would that be campusi?), but their influence on academia has created a self-perpetuating hug box/bubble where only the “right” opinions can be heard.
Since the start of the Israel/Gaza conflict, campuses/campusi like Harvard saw tensions rise, as well as the number of anti-Jewish incidents. On the one hand, you have Jewish students and their supporters, and on the other, Leftist freaks who see Israel as the aggressor and as an apartheid state. On a side note, “The Apartheid State: not a good state slogan.
Anyway, this created a razor thin line for school administrators to tread. If they showed even the slightest bit of support for Israel, the Leftists would cause as much chaos as possible at the bare minimum, and given the fiery but mostly peaceful Summer of Love 2020 edition that chaos could be (and probably would be) destructive. If they sided with Gaza, they would run the risk of losing donations from Jewish supporters.
Which means the administration did the stupidest fucking thing they could and caved to the Leftist mob.
If that wasn’t bad enough, President Gay’s response to questions about whether wishing death to Jews was against their policies caused Harvard to lose $1 billion and inspired calls for Gay to resign. More on this debacle later.
I’m not a Harvard graduate, but I think I could have crafted a better response than Gay gave. Let’s see…
Harvard University respects both the importance of free speech and the delicacy of the current situation in Gaza. As President, I cannot in good conscience allow calls for violence against any group on campus, as it is inconsistent with not only the spirit of the freedom of speech, but also the culture of intellectual vigor I strive to foster at Harvard. What happened on my campus is abhorrent and I denounce it fully.
Seriously, was that so fucking hard????
Granted, this would have pissed off campus Leftists, but it would have struck the right tone and avoided a lot of backtracking and “clarifications” from Gay. Besides, if you wanted to disperse a crowd of Leftist protesters, you could always carpet bomb the protest with job applications. Or carpets, if you’re so inclined.
After that shitshow of a Congressional hearing, Gay faced new scrutiny, namely that of her academic accomplishments. Seems she may have plagiarized parts of her 1997 dissertation and other papers she copied…I mean wrote. Of course, Harvard downplayed the severity of the matter, calling it “a few instances of inadequate citation…” which is fancy talk for “yeah, she fucked up, but we can’t really punish her for what she did because it would make Leftists fuck up the campus.” Even some of the people she copied tried to downplay it while acknowledging it was plagiarism.
Even so, the Left went into damage control mode by supporting Gay in her time of self-imposed need, but claiming…get this…rules against plagiarism are racist. And I’m sure it has nothing to do with the fact Gay is a black woman and, thus, would be covered by the Left’s new rules on plagiarism. It’s just a coincidence…
On the plus side, Gay is qualified to go from substandard President of Harvard to substandard President of the United States, thanks to the Puddin’ Head Joe standard.
So far, Gay still has her job, which speaks volumes to how far Harvard has fallen as an institution of higher learning. At this rate, they might be at best an institution of middling learning, but that reputation is going down faster than a hooker going for a world blow job record working straight commission. Is a diversity hire worth this much trouble? Not only is Gay inept, inconsistent, and a plagiarizer, but her continued presence as anything other than a former Harvard President negatively affects the Harvard brand.
Consider if you will the fact Harvard has a website that not only defines plagiarism and outlines a clear policy, but openly discusses why plagiarism is a bad thing. The fact the President of this university is allowed to violate these standards and gets Leftist support for it would be humorous if it weren’t so disgusting. Throw in Harvard’s tone-deaf response to the anti-Jewish sentiment on campus and we’re looking at the point of no return to turn things around. Harvard, if it weren’t already FUBAR, would be sending Change of Address cards announcing their new address in downtown FUBAR.
Although the financial hit Harvard has taken so far is a start, it’s going to take a lot more to remove the stench from the burning dungheap Claudine Gay and the Left created. To start the healing process, Gay should be fired and replaced with someone who would run the campus competently and apply the rules consistently across the board. I would volunteer for the job, but I don’t want it. Although it would be fun to make Leftist heads explode when I apply the rules to them, I have more important shit to do.
You know, like making a bag of microwave popcorn without it burning.
Extremist Makeover: George Santos Edition
In case you haven’t heard, the House career of New York Representative George Santos came to an end recently. Yes, a man who dressed in drag, claimed to be Jewish and tried to explain it away by saying he was Jew-ish, and being a Leftist target for lying to voters (which would be a boon for Leftist politicians) was expelled by the House for…ethics violations.
Yeah. I laughed a lot when I heard that, too.
Anyway, Santos is out of a job and will need to rehabilitate his image. And me, being the equal opportunity helper that I am, I think I have just the thing to do just that.
Let’s start with the basics. George Santos is damaged goods. He’s been caught in a number of questionable situations with varying legal implications. He’s done some sketchy things with finances and broken the law doing it. In short, he’s more radioactive than Chernobyl.
So, what makes me think I can fix his image? Because I’m just stupid enough to try, dammit! And because there’s an obvious solution that will clear everything up and make Santos untouchable in Leftist circles.
All George Santos needs to do is say he self-identifies as Hunter Biden.
Think about it! The First Crackhead has all the sympathy from the Left, and they will circle the wagons at the first sign of criticism. After all, he’s a private citizen…who just happened to use his dad’s name and connections to get jobs an untrained chimp would be more qualified for than he was. You know, just like you and me!
Well, George Santos is in the same boat. He’s a complete scumbag (without ever trying to buy a dime bag) who is utterly irredeemable. No one would trust him to run the fryer at the local McDonalds, let alone anything above that pay grade. But qualifications don’t mean a damn thing if you’re connected to the Bidens! I mean, look at the patriarch!
Plus, there’s the added bonus of holding the Left to their bizarre mindset regarding personal identities. I mean, if a 6’6″ former linebacker wants to be called Loretta, the Left says we have to accept it. So, if George Santos says he identifies as Hunter Biden, the Left won’t have a leg to stand on (not that they usually do, mind you, but work with me here).
And the best part about it? Santos will get all the Leftists defending him without him having to commit the crimes Hunter has! He may still have to atone for the crimes he committed, but he can apply Leftist logic (a contradiction in terms) to the situation and the Left will have to defend him or be exposed as hypocritical idiots.
I’m pretty sure the Left will choose the latter option, but I can dream, right?
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I’m beginning to think Elon Musk got me in the Secret Santa draw this year because he just gave me one hell of a Christmas present! Musk filed a lawsuit against one of my favorite Leftist “news” sources, Media Matters, alleging the clown show… I mean news organization defamed the Social Media Network Formerly Known as Twitter through manipulating the algorithm to make it appear the network supported Nazis.
As we’ll see in a bit, manipulation is on-brand for Media Matters. While Leftists call them a “media watchdog group” or “a left leaning nonprofit“, the truth is much less squishy and harmless.
Media Matters for America
What the Left thinks it means – a non-profit organization exposing the lies of the Right
What it really means – a tax-exempt propaganda/misinformation arm of the DNC
Media Matters started from somewhat humble beginnings, at least by DC standards. It was the brain child of conservative-turned-Leftist and noted liar David Brock in 2004 and was designed to counter what Brock considered a right wing bias in media.
I’ll wait until you catch your breath from laughing so hard before I continue.
Ready? No, I see you’re still laughing, so I’ll wait a bit.
Now? Nope, still laughing!
Okay, since we’ll never get through this piece if I wait for you to stop laughing at Brock’s stupidity, I’ll go on without you.
Anyway, Brock’s asinine empire was built on a foundation of countering what he considered right wing lies with…left wing lies. Early on (and even to this day in some cases), Media Matters resorted to taking comments out of context to fabricating context for “gotcha” purposes to out and out lying to paint conservatives as liars.
But they’re seen as reliable sources of news. Or not.
Makes you really trust their reporting, doesn’t it?
Regardless, the Left sees Media Matters as a vital tool in the war against misinformation, which is funny considering the Left is generating misinformation on the daily about everything from Bidenomics to the war in Gaza to, well, fighting misinformation. Of course, this hasn’t stopped the Left from talking about the “chilling effect” the lawsuit will have and how it’s done to silence criticism. Of course, it’s all bullshit, but Leftists are gonna Leftist.
Of course, this flies in the face of the Left’s own rhetoric from alllllll the way back to 2020 regarding COVID-19. Back then, the “misinformation” was grounds for Twitter accounts being terminated, jobs being lost, and lives being ruined. In these cases, the Left said these were all fine because bad speech has consequences, which it does. Just ask The Chicks (formerly The Dixie Chicks).
But when it comes to Media Matters, the Left’s commitment to bad speech having consequences is weaker than a mixed drink at a strip club. Not that I know anything about that, mind you…
Anyway, when Media Matters lies, the Left runs with it. Maybe this has something to do with some Leftist media types being in bed with them. Or, it could be the fact they’re all fucking Leftists. Regardless, as long as the Left embraces Media Matters as a reliable and viable source of information, that symbiotic relationship will continue.
But, that doesn’t absolve them of lying for political benefit, nor should it. I have a great disdain for liars regardless of what party they inhabit, so it’s not a political thing with me. Media Matters has not only crossed the line, but did a flamenco dance over it to emphasize just how much they’re willing to draw attention to the fact they’re liars.
Legal experts are split on the merits of Musk’s lawsuit, but there are a few things I have to point out for our Leftist friends.
1) This isn’t a free speech/First Amendment issue. Lying is not necessarily protected by the First Amendment, as can be evidenced by libel, slander, and defamation lawsuits. If someone knowingly lies about another party with the intent of damaging that party, all free speech arguments go out the window because there’s provable malice involved. Wait a minute…doesn’t Musk’s lawsuit involve defamation? Why yes, yes it does!
2) The Left’s reaction to the lawsuit shows a level of desperation. As easy as it is to portray Elon Musk as the big bully in this case, the fact the Left is jumping between “Media Matters told the truth” to “Media Matters is a victim for being targeted” shows me they are trying to play both sides to see what works. If Media Matters is telling the truth, why try to portray them as victims? If they’re being targeted, wouldn’t a court case and possible trial bring that out for the world to see? Although it’s possible the two things can simultaneously be true, I’m betting the Left is shitting themselves because they know Media Matters is going to be exposed, which will also expose other Leftists.
3) The facts may not be in Media Matters’s favor. If what is being reported on the conservative media side is correct, an internal investigation showed how Media Matters gamed the X system to create a false narrative about X and Musk by extention. Given how Leftists reacted after the Social Media Network Formerly Known as Twitter stopped letting Leftists dictate things, it’s not that unlikely Media Matters took it upon themselves to get revenge by “proving” Musk’s “far right leanings.” (For the record, Musk appears to be more libertarian in approach, which to Leftists is far right. Consider the source.) Also, considering The Twitter Files brought plenty of receipts to the chagrin and disdain of the Left, I wouldn’t be surprised Musk has the goods…again.
4) Media Matters is bunch of fucking liars. Even if you agree with them, you can’t ignore the fact they’re not on a name basis with the truth. And you can’t be serious about fighting disinformation without getting your own house in order. But, of course, you will ignore this because Media Matters is on your side. All the better for me, since I can continue to point and laugh at your hypocrisy.
Whether Elon Musk’s lawsuit against Media Matters for America goes anywhere is immaterial at this point and certainly immaterial to my position on them. There’s an old saying about not being able to polish a turd, but Leftists aren’t willing to give up on trying that with Media Matters. The only thing that comes out of that is shit all over their hands, which will go well with the blood they have on their hands for being warmongering assholes.
And it will be fun to see Media Matters and Leftists enter the Find Out stage of Fuck Around and Find Out.
Extremist Makeover: The Vice Presidency
Hey, kids, and welcome to a segment I’d like to try out and see if people like it. If so, I’ll try to do one of these every so often if only to give me an excuse to do something other than Leftist Lexicon entries. If not…well, I may still do it anyway because I’m a stubborn asshole.
Either way, I feel a bit of explanation is in order. Throughout my time on the Interwebs, I’ve been called a right wing extremist more often than I can remember, so for the purposes of a 2000s callback, I’m going to lean into it for the purposes of this sketch.
Remember those TV shows where they revamp a home and make it better than it was? I’m going to apply that same mindset to different topics that come to mind in the hopes of entertaining you and maybe, just maybe, giving you a new perspective. Or failing that, give you another reason to send me hate mail. With that being said, let’s get into this edition’s Extremist Makeover.
At one time, a President’s Vice President was as important a pick as the name at the top of the ticket. But after the past few elections, the Vice President has become less relevant than the footnotes of a Media Matters hit piece. Aside from a few Constitutional and ceremonial duties, the Vice President doesn’t actually do very much. If he or she is doing a good job, you typically don’t hear about him/her because, let’s face it, it’s a boring job.
And it’s not like it’s a lock for a better job. The last Vice President who got elected President was Puddin’ Head Joe, and neither of his stints were all that memorable. Anymore the Vice Presidency is a safeguard for the President because nobody wants to see that person with access to the nuclear codes. Think I’m wrong? Take a look at this list of less than luminaries.
George H. W. Bush – sorta wimpy, hates broccoli and the laps of Japanese leaders
Dan Quayle – young guy, bad speller
Al Gore – the archetype of every “typical white man” joke ever told
Dick Cheney – Wilfred Brimley with a shotgun
Joe Biden – an incompetent dumbass whose resume in the private sector is lighter than a supermodel’s snack
Mike Pence – what would happen if mayonnaise gained sentience and assumed human form
Kamala Harris – someone I wouldn’t trust on a diplomatic mission to Alderaan
And these are the Vice Presidents of the winners of the Presidency. The losers are far less impressive.
Let that fact roll around in your brains for a minute.
Clearly, the Vice Presidency has lost its luster, so how do we (or more specifically, I) fix that? Given the propensity of the Vice President to be the one voted Most Likely To Drool On Themselves from their respective high schools, it may not be in our power to make things better. However, I think we can make the role match the quality.
The Vice President is considered the Second Gentleman or Second Lady in the case of the aforementioned Mrs. Harris. To better align the actual duties of the office with the most appropriate title, I propose the Vice President be called the Second Banana. For people unfamiliar with the term, a second banana is someone who supports the main act, specifically a comedian. Given how much of a joke politics has gotten recently, that’s not too far from the truth as it stands.
Since a second banana is there to support the first banana, there isn’t much expected of him/her, but there are times when the second banana can become a first banana through sheer popularity or excellent performance. That takes a lot of work and competence, which are in short supply in Washington, DC, these days. If the Second Banana wants to be considered for a spin-off (i.e. the Presidency), he or she is going to have to show the ability to carry it instead of just assuming it’s a done deal. That’s how we got “Joey” after “Friends” went off the air.
In short, changing the Vice President to the Second Banana will help bring about better Presidents while providing us with laughs for years to come!
So, what do you think of this Extremist Makeover? Do you have any ideas for future makeovers? Let me know!