With less that two weeks away from Election Day (please check local listings for the number of days in your area), it’s crunch time for Donald Trump and Queen Kamala the Appointed. Many votes are still up for grabs, and both tickets are vying for them.
One of the voting blocs the Harris/Walz ticket has been really trying to get is women, and with good reason. Women make up a little over half of the American population, so they have the power to make or break an election. But the Left wants women to know they can vote for Queen Kamala the Appointed without their male partners knowing, thanks to a website called VoteWithoutFear.com. Apparently, Leftists think women will be frightened into voting for Trump because of their male counterparts, so they just want to reassure women their voices can be heard without anyone else knowing it.
Or so they say.
VoteWithoutFear.com
What the Left thinks it means – a website that provides necessary information for women to vote for who they want
What it really means – a website that provided information that should already be known and encourages deceit
Voting is a sacred right, one that not everyone uses on a regular basis. In the 2020 election, 66.8% of the population 18 years of age and older voted, and this was a high point this century. That means over a third of the population didn’t vote for one reason or another, and that opens a window of opportunity for outreach.
On the surface, VoteWithoutFear.com offers advice to women who want to vote, which is not a big issue in and of itself. From the website itself:
Now here’s the important part – WHO you actually vote for on the ballot is not public information. You do not need to tell your spouse who you voted for, even if they ask. Your right to vote is part of our civil liberties, and your vote is your own – that being said, do whatever you need to do to remain safe.
Although this information is truthful, it’s also something voting adults should already know, especially if they stayed awake in civics class…or even had civics class for that matter. What we have here is a little thing the kids like to call a secret ballot. Even if we have political bumper stickers all over our vehicles and more yard signs than actual yard, we don’t have to tell anyone how we vote in a public election. Union elections, on the other hand…
The reason for the secret ballot is to add a layer of protection for the voter against coercion/intimidation from outside parties. Apparently, Leftists think MAGA Males are forcing their wives, girlfriends, daughters, etc. to vote for Trump against their better judgments. In the Leftist hivemind, no self-respecting woman would vote for Trump because, well, Orange Man Bad. Of course, this runs afoul of one of the Left’s favorite causes, female autonomy.
From the party that gave us “My Body, My Choice” when it comes to abortion apparently think women can’t be trusted to vote the “right way,” i.e. for an unqualified woman because she has a vajayjay. The existence of a common body part doesn’t equate into a binding agreement to vote a certain way. It would be like a candidate saying you need to vote for him/her because you have a foot. It doesn’t make any sense.
Then again, if it made any sense, it wouldn’t qualify for being a Leftist squawking point.
Even if the Left doesn’t think free-thinking pro-Trump women exist, the way they approached the woman vote in the 2024 election is simplistic and intellectually demeaning to the very people they’re trying to court. If you look more closely at the VoteWithoutFear website (and I did because I have a life that make the Amish look like Hugh Hefner), the way they phrase their points comes off as more condescending than informational. Granted, they may be playing to an audience, but there’s a difference between keeping things simple and making things sound like you’re talking down to them.
Which is pretty much the Leftist MO.
The Left have played a self-contradictory game with women. While claiming to champion women’s rights (i.e. abortion), they treat women like children who need to be lead by the hand into doing the right thing (i.e. voting for abortion). They say women are just as smart, capable, and successful as men, but they just can’t be trusted to vote for who they want. And after years of painting Donald Trump as a sexual predator who wants to strip away women’s rights and turn the country into a Handmaid’s Tale dystopia, the Left thinks they’ve greased the wheels to making a vote against Trump a no-brainer.
The problem? Some women don’t give a fuck.
Just because you bring up plausible concerns about Trump doesn’t make those concerns universal. And when the Left has used women as pawns, as they did with Cindy Sheehan and Christine Blasey Ford, it gets harder for them to make an argument that they actually care about women as women. But they care a lot about men who claim to be women for whatever reason because trans women are women, even if they still have a dick and male chromosomes.
Which goes to show the Left knows as much about women as they do about men. Or men in general, but that’s neither here nor there.
The larger point is men and women process things differently, and that’s okay. If you love someone enough, you can get past any differences and focus on those characteristics that unite us. My wife and I have different political and ideological stands on issues, but we’re smart enough to not let that define our relationship. I trust her to vote for whomever she wants without having to justify it to me, and vice versa. If you have to hide who you’re voting for to “keep the peace,” the relationship is already on shaky ground.
Good thing the VoteWithoutFear website offers advice on divorce. And, yes, that was sarcasm.
It should be pointed out a lie of omission, like lying to a spouse about whether you’re voting for one candidate or another, is still a lie, and it can drastically affect a relationship. But the Left doesn’t care as long as they get the woman vote. It’s almost like the same people who bashed JD Vance for referencing “childless cat ladies” want women to be…childless cat ladies. How weird is that?
Therein lies the real issue with VoteWithoutFear and the Left’s approach towards women: it denies the complexity of women in general. I’m not a woman, but even I get it. Although there was this time in college where I was a woman, but I was in love with this really dreamy guy and…did I type that out loud? Nevermind.
The point is Leftists reduce women to body parts without agency until the Left steps in and try to speak on women’s behalf. Leftists are mystified by the vagina to the point of deifying it. And I thought incels were desperate losers! When you create expectations of anyone on the basis of what they have in their pants, there is going to be a point where the reality doesn’t match up with the expectations.
Hence, the reason Leftists don’t understand pro-Trump women. They expect the Sisterhood of the Traveling Vajayjay, but get women who think outside of their pants to what matters more to them than a mutual body part. And, if I’m being honest here, Leftists haven’t done a good job in standing up for women lately. You know who has?
Donald Fucking Trump.
By aligning himself with movements to keep women’s sports and spaces for biological women, Trump has a track record of supporting women (and, in some cases, paying them hush money). The best Queen Kamala the Appointed has brought forth is protecting abortion and claiming to be raised middle class. Oh, and hauling out celebrities to help her.
Stunning. Truly stunning and/or brave.
The braintrust behind VoteWithoutFear.com is playing into the Left’s preconceived notion that women are helpless creatures (when they’re not being super awesome Boss Bitches). I would say I’m insulted, but that’s not my place, nor am I going to be insulted on behalf of women. Instead, I’m going to say it’s doing a disservice to women everywhere to treat them like the sum of their body parts. There are plenty of strong women who don’t need a website or a political party to tell them how to vote, and these are the women who should be championed far more than they are.
Even if you’re a woman reading this and still want to vote for Harris/Walz, so be it. Just know the Left doesn’t see you the way you see yourself. They have reduced you to a single body part and a single issue. As bad as Trump has been dealing with various women throughout his life, he is at least listening to them and trying to address their concerns more often than Queen Kamala the Appointed has.
At least he only grabs them by the pussy instead of reducing them to a pussy.
The Litmus Test
Since the internet began back in the days of BBS, then to usenet, then on to message boards, and chat rooms, there has been one litmus test that proved, 100%, that the poster had lost the argument they were making. The argument litmus test was a universal standard. And now here in the age of social media it seems to have vanished.
That litmus test was if a user compared anyone to Adolf Hitler or any event to Nazi Germany the argument was over and that user had lost.
Today we have multiple posts of this nature out on social media. Everyone of them is a foolish post. Everyone of them has lost the argument with their foolishness. And everyone that posts these memes is a fool.
No person is or will be as bad or evil as Adolf Hitler and no government or administration comes even close to the level of Nazi Germany. None.
This is why that litmus test has always existed on the internet since it’s inception. It is true today as it was decades ago.
Now I Could Be Wrong
While people across the political spectrum have been doing to the Harris/Walz campaign that Calvin does on those truck stickers, I’ve been troubled by something. Oh, not the well-deserved mockery, mind you. Something a little more…conspiratorial, if you will.
Now, I could be wrong, but it seems to me Democrats don’t want to win the 2024 Presidential election. Granted, the old saying about attributing malice to what can be chalked up to incompetence may be closer to the truth (and when dealing with the Harris/Walz ticket, there’s a lot of incompetence to go around), there’s still a part of me that thinks they’re throwing this election. Here’s why.
1. Democrats have a damn bad ticket this go-round. Let’s face it, Queen Kamala the Appointed and her sidekick Tampon Timmy just aren’t moving the needle for people outside of the Left. Oh, they had some momentum early on, but their poll numbers keep sliding like a house in a California mudslide. Of course, anyone with half a brain cell could have told them Queen Kamala wasn’t popular, and they did…until President Brick Tamland dropped out. Then Queen Kamala went from also-ran to running for President. How unpopular is she? I have as many primary victories as she does in two Presidential campaigns and I didn’t even run. The Left got saddled with a bad hand, period.
2. It sets up use of the victim card. If there’s anything Leftists love more than complaining about stuff, it’s complaining about stuff while claiming to be a victim. With the way the primaries shaped up and how Queen Kamala the Appointed got the nomination, it opens up the possibility of making the Queen a victim. She didn’t have enough time to campaign. She didn’t do as much fundraising as she could. She had to deal with Donald Trump’s attacks on a regular basis. And with her being the first black-Indian-possibly-Martian female to run for the Presidency, you’ve hit the Oppression Lottery! There are plenty of excuses at the ready should Queen Kamala become unburdened by what has been her job in November.
3. It clears the main obstacle from potential 2028 candidates. With President Tamland not running for reelection (and thank God for that), the only thing stopping other Democrats like Gavin Newsom and Gretchen Whitmer from jumping into the 2028 Presidential election is…Queen Kamala herself. If she wins, it takes all the oxygen out of the next election, and Newsom and Whitmer may not be able to stay relevant long enough to wait for the Queen to give up her palace. Even if she only serves one term, that’s more time than the challengers have to keep being front of mind. And if you think the Queen is going to let others come for what she considers hers, think again! The only way to clear the path is to have Queen Kamala lose.
4. The Harris/Walz ticket keeps pissing off voting blocs. While the Left has been trying to portray itself as a big tent (as long as you agree with them 100%, that is), this election cycle the tent has gotten pretty exclusive. In doing so, there are a lot of potential votes getting flushed like, well, the turd that is the Harris/Walz ticket. Christians, white men, black men, Palestinians, Jews, and so many others have been at the business end of a political snub in the relatively short time Queen Kamala the Appointed has been the Democratic nominee. Although incompetence is definitely a possibility, even I’m skeptical about the depth in this case.
5. The party faithful are getting revenge for the way Harris got the nomination. This kinda goes back to point 1, but there’s another element to it. Queen Kamala the Appointed didn’t actually win any delegates; President Brick Tamland did, and Queen Kamala was the plus-1. The way President Tamland was unceremoniously forced out of the race most likely left a lot of hard feelings towards Queen Kamala, hard feelings that can be used to undercut the Vice President and her Presidential aspirations. And, let’s face it, Washington, DC, is full of two-faced weasels who will smile to your face even as they stab you in the back. That takes a lot of flexibility, moral and otherwise, and I wouldn’t be surprised if a few Tamland loyalists gave Queen Kamala’s team some really bad advice to sabotage the campaign.
6. They know they can’t pull off the same election heist they did in 2020. I know, I know, election denial is horrible, wrong, and all around icky, but there was some hinky stuff going on in 2020 that makes me wonder how legit the results were. My primary tip-off that things weren’t kosher? The way the Left said everything was fine. Although we can’t go back and rehash the 2020 election, the Left knows they won’t be able to pull off whatever shenanigans they pulled in 2020 for numerous reasons, not the least of which being how sloppy their work was in the first place. With that in mind, the Left need to throw people off the scent and what better way than to sacrifice a minor candidate to “prove” elections are secure?
7. The Left needs Trump as a foil. I saved the best for last. In every story, there is conflict between a protagonist and an antagonist. The Left has built up such a narrative about Donald Trump that it’s become a necessity for them to have him back in the White House to justify everything they’ve said to date. With Queen Kamala the Appointed, they don’t have that antagonist (at least not on the scale they’ve made him out to be). Without that struggle, the Left will have to do something they’re loathe to do: actually work for a living.
If these points aren’t enough to convince you the Left is trying to throw the 2024 election, let me know. After all, I could be wrong.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
As Election Day looms over our heads like the Sword of Damocles, Queen Kamala the Appointed is trying to shore up as many voters as she can to try to deny Donald Trump. Let’s just say it hasn’t gone well. Even captain of the Exxon Valdez Joseph Hazelwood is saying the Harris/Walz campaign is a disaster.
And speaking of reaches for humorous intent, there’s a group called White Dudes for Harris who recently put out a…well, one of the dumbfuckiest ads I’ve ever had the misfortune of seeing. And it only cost $10 million! Not to be out dumbfucked, some genius decided to put professional actors in an ad about how real men support Queen Kamala the Appointed.
Someone get Bath and Body Works on the horn. I think I may have found who okayed their snowflake candle packaging!
Either way, I find it interesting the Left is suddenly interested in masculinity as a positive attribute. Usually, Leftists hate all men, even the ones who agree with them in an attempt to get a laid…not that I know anything about that, mind you. Meanwhile, we have a Lexicon entry to get to!
masculinity
What the Left thinks it means – the way a man acts, talks, dresses, and so forth
What it really means – a subject about which Leftists know nothing, which isn’t that different from any other subject when you think about it
One of the things I like best about my life is I remember what things were like before the shit hit the fan. Back in my day, men were men and women were men and everybody was really confused. Seriously, though, we may have any number of men as role models each representing a different facet of the male experience (think Tom Selleck and Boy George), and people were okay with it.
Except for Leftists.
Somewhere between the second and third wave of feminism, men became an appendix with a credit line: fun for a while, but ultimately useless. Soon, the only way a man could get anywhere near a woman without being called a rapist was for the man to completely reject his masculinity, and even then you weren’t safe from scrutiny. Being a guy in the late 80s and throughout the 90s was a minefield of potential bad mistakes. And I’m not just talking about the 3 AM hookups…not that I know anything about that, mind you.
This attitude found its way into politics. (The man-hating, not the 3 AM hookups.) You couldn’t swing a dead cat (and, really, why would you) without hitting a horndog male politician who got caught in a sexual situation because, well, men. But even when that aforementioned cat hit that aforementioned horndog, there had to be exceptions for politicians who acted poorly, but supported the right politics.
And the biggest example of the eternal Hall Pass was Slick Willie himself, Bill Clinton. Leftists went from hating white male politicians to wanting to service the Commander In Briefs just for protecting abortion rights. To the Left, Clinton was the epitome of masculinity, genital warts and all.
As funny as it was to see Leftists throw away their self-imposed standards to back a man who only used them for his own satisfaction (and also to win elections), it gave me insight into just how the Left feels about masculinity.
They don’t know what the fuck it is, but they’re damn sure going to try to define it.
And as you might expect, they’re doing a shitty job of it. When they’re not saying gender is a spectrum or is a social construct, they’re saying men can have periods, have babies, and can even redefine womanhood. And you thought outsourcing jobs was bad!
Yet, in spite of their attempts to remake men into Dylan Mulvaney clones, not every guy wants to get rid of masculinity. They’re happy doing guy shit, like working on cars, hunting, and so forth. So how do Leftists try to win over these potential voters? You guessed it, by talking down to them like they were idiots. Granted, depending on where you go the odds might be in their favor, but from a political standpoint, it’s a losing strategy.
Just as Queen Kamala the Appointed found out. When she saw her numbers among white male voters sink lower than an earthworm’s cock ring, someone had the brilliant idea of trying to appeal to male voters by…hosting a White Dudes For Harris Zoom call with Leftist white dudes! Sign me up for that!
For any Leftists out there reading this, that was sarcasm.
The Harris/Walz campaign has leaned heavily into what they think masculinity should be. And their lapdogs in the media are helping. Reuters devoted time and energy to painting Tim Walz as an evolved man (all while trying to appear to be a normal guy working on his truck and hunting). Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff is being fawned over for redefining masculinity. (His first wife could not be reached for comment.)
And the whipped cream on top of this shit sundae (or any day for that matter) is the term Leftists have created to describe the Walz/Emhoff model of masculinity: nontoxic masculinity. I’ll save you a click: it’s basically being a man that would make Richard Simmons look like Chuck Norris.
That opens up a whole new Costco-sized can of worms that loops back to the point I made earlier about how little Leftists understand men. The Left have defined toxic masculinity as a series of negative traits like dominance and emotional distance that are typically seen as preferred masculine traits. Apparently, the people behind this concept have never been married. (PS, I love you, honey! Please stop watching “Deadly Wives.”)
Although there is some merit to not exhibiting the more negative elements of masculinity, there’s a lot more under the surface that complicates things. For one, men are different than women. I know. It shocked me, too. But even I have to repeat this fact to the Left (who are soooooo much smarter than us, by the way) because of how little the Left knows about masculinity.
Some of the traits attributed to toxic masculinity are hard-wired into the male experience. Back in the old days (affectionately known as my childhood), men didn’t have time to process emotions because they were too busy trying to survive. Men were (and still are) hunters and gatherers at heart. If they fail to come through in providing for their families, there are negative implications. Granted, these days those implications may be limited to having to spend the night on the old musty futon in the basement, but the principle is the same. Men are seen as providers, and with that comes a lot of responsibility and psychological baggage.
And the Left thinks putting a flannel shirt on a guy who doesn’t know a fuel pump from a pumpkin spice latte is better.
Here’s the thing. Masculinity, much like Queen Kamala the Appointed’s policy positions, is vague, can cover a lot of ground, and is often contradictory depending on the day. As a result, trying to redefine it to fit a current political need is pointless. And extremely comical, as the most recent “I’m a man supporting Kamala Harris” ad was.
What made this ad so funny was in how superficial the men were in it. The more I thought about it, the more it reminded me of something. Then, it hit me.
The guys in the ad…were the modern day Village People. The cowboy, the gym bro, the farmer, all stereotypical male archetypes. And the old guy could easily pass as a biker! All they needed was a cop and a sailor and they could go on tour. Maybe they could open for man-turned-pretend-woman Dylan Mulvaney, who could sing his rendition of a song from “The Book of Mormon” called “Man Up.”
Trust me, Leftists. That tour will bring out tens and tens of fans.
The other comparison I can make involves a talk radio network I affectionately call Err America. Billed as the liberal alternative to talk radio, they did their best to copy the success Rush Limbaugh and others experienced. And they failed, mainly for the same reason the Harris/Walz campaign is failing with men: they went with the stereotype instead of finding the deeper context that would have made them at least somewhat credible as an alternative.
So, that’s where we are with the Leftist view of masculinity. In their attempts to attract male voters, they have exposed a glaring weakness in their philosophy about it, and they are getting slammed for it. And rightly so.
Plus, it’s hypocritical (and, therefore, utterly mockworthy) for the Left to say gender is whatever you want it to be while at the same time extolling the virtues of what they think are real men…who just happen to want Queen Kamala the Appointed to be President. The whole concept of masculinity doesn’t revolve around what box you check on your ballot in November. It’s goes a lot deeper, and the Left clearly doesn’t want to take the time to figure it out. As a result, their “outreach” becomes a comical attempt at pandering that is all show and no go.
But I’m sure the Left would never try that backwards approach with people of different races…or genders…or sexual orientations…or religions…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With the impending Presidential election, there are a number of hot button issues, ranging from abortion to illegal immigration. There are so many new areas that only a complete fuckwit would dredge up a topic that’s been deader than Diddy’s career. (Too soon?)
And then Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson had to open his stupid mouth. For those of you not up on politics in the Windy City, Mayor Johnson is trying to kowtow…I mean capitulate…I mean negotiate with teacher’s unions to the tune of $300 million. And apparently he thinks being in favor of fiscal responsibility by telling the teacher’s union to go fuck themselves is akin to…slavery.
Fuck me sideways.
slavery
What the Left thinks it means – a dark period of American history that whites must still atone for
What it really means – a dark period of American history that is just that, history
In the annuls of human history, one thing is abundantly clear: everybody hates “Friday” by Rebecca Black. But something else that’s clear is how humans can be complete assholes to each other, which I guess brings us back to the song that is banned under the Geneva Convention because it is considered torture.
Anyway, slavery is not one of the brightest spots in human history, and America had its role in it. It’s as much a part of our history as Plymouth Rock, the Boston Tea Party, and the Cubs being mathematically eliminated from the post season. Much like hipness, it is what it is.
But Leftists can’t seem to let it go. They have used the past to bludgeon white Leftists into submission (literal and figurative, so long as there’s money involved) and made them feel responsible for the sins of the great great great great grandfathers. To Leftists, if you’re white, you’re responsible.
Of course, that doesn’t take a lot into account, but why would a Leftist care about context when it could totally destroy the narrative?
As the relative of two Civil War veterans who fought for the Union, I might have an opinion on how fucking stupid the Left is being bringing up slavery in any context almost 160 years after the end of the Civil War. The Hatfields and McCoys didn’t hold a grudge that long and hard!
Huh huh huh. I said long and hard.
Meanwhile back at the main point, slavery has a place in our history, and that place is in the fucking past. Of course, that doesn’t stop Leftists from bringing it up to discuss current conditions within the black community. Racist hack…I mean best selling author Nikole Hannah Jones gave us the pseudo-historical shitshow called The 1619 Project based around slavery. Even the United Nations sounded off on the effects of slavery on modern society.
Did I mention the end of the Civil War was almost 160 years ago?
Here’s the thing. Nobody alive today has direct ties to the slave trade. Yes, there are relatives on both sides of that awful equation, but they are waaaaaaaay back there in the mists of our history. Today’s problems have their roots not in the time frame Roots was about, but in the shit going on right now. Gang violence, drug culture, promiscuity, all of that is a modern phenomenon. No slave masters necessary.
Unless you count the Leftists, of course.
Yes, I went there.
The fact is Leftists don’t want blacks to be successful, intelligent, and empowered. To keep people under their thumbs, Leftists need them to be dependent on the largess of the government (i.e. our money that isn’t going to Ukraine or Lebanon) for basic needs.
You know, like…slaves?
That’s why I take the Left’s constant references to slavery with a Mount Everest-sized grain of salt. They want to make us feel guilty about our past and turn our heads when they emulate the slave masters of the era about which they want us to feel guilty. I’m sorry, but I’m not as morally flexible as an unethical yoga instructor, so I can’t let that slide.
Now, Leftists are bound to throw the usual “you’re a racist” bullshit at me for saying this and challenging their skewed worldview by pointing out what they do. My counter to this is simple: I want everyone to reach their full potential and want to knock as many barriers out of their way as I can. And that includes the barriers placed on them by people who give one-one-millionth of a shit about them as people.
I come from the MLK school of thought, where a person is judged by the content of his/her character more than the color of his/her skin, because it makes the most sense. Judging someone solely on race ignores the rest of the totality of a person. Just because you’re black doesn’t mean you’re a horrible person, unless you’re Diddy. (Too soon again?) Once we get to know each other, the more we can navigate the way we communicate with, think about, and tolerate each other. That transcends race and any other superficial matter that can be used to separate us. It’s just being a decent fucking person.
And that’s why the Chicago situation amuses me so much. The Mayor using slavery to justify forking over millions of dollars to the teacher’s union isn’t being decent, but it is being deceitful. The teacher’s unions aren’t being decent because they just want the money without having to actually do anything to get it. The only people who have any claim to being decent are the ones pushing back against this stupid deal, whether it be for fiscal reasons or because they’ve seen this story play out before and nothing gets better.
And for that, opponents to Mayor Dumbass… I mean Johnson’s plans get compared to slave owners because…fuck it, I got nothing. Not even the stated reasons make sense unless you’re predisposed to believe everything can be tied back to slavery, oppression, or some Leftist buzzword.
And the real kicker is no matter how much money gets loaned out to the teacher’s unions, it will never be enough. The schools will continue to fail (in part because of the unions), Leftists will continue to make people feel guilty about shit they didn’t do, and the racial elements of the controversy will get played over and over like “Baby Shark.” Until enough people tell these fuckwits to piss off, it will keep happening and the black community will continue to get screwed by white Leftists.
Kinda like the slaveholders did, only with a lot less lube.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In case you’ve been living under a rock recently or are a Harris/Walz supporter (which is pretty much the same thing), there’s a bit of a weather situation hitting the East Coast right now. It’s a little something the kids call Hurricane Helene. And with things being wilder than a Charlie Sheen bender with Britney Spears, people are looking for help.
That’s where FEMA comes in! Or should.
With the current Administration, the Left is all for letting FEMA do its job without question, but some people (like your humble correspondent) have questions. Namely, the people negatively affected by Hurricane Helene and waiting for help from FEMA.
So, why all the hate (I mean, aside from the obvious) and why does the Left feel they have to circle the drain…I mean wagons? Let’s take a look!
FEMA
What the Left thinks it means – a necessary government agency that takes care of people during disasters
What it really means – a government agency that makes the EPA’s Super Fund look well-managed
Before we go further, I have to be real for a moment. Regardless of how I feel about big government, I do feel there is a legitimate argument to be made for FEMA’s existence. When you consider the depth and breadth of damage that comes from any hurricane, derecho, or other major meteorological event, it could bankrupt any state unless someone or something helps out. In these cases, the federal government has the means and the money to make a difference.
It’s a great theory, but the practice leaves a lot to be desired.
Much of the negative attention surrounding FEMA started with Hurricane Katrina. To say FEMA fucked up with Katrina is an understatement of Homeric epic proportions. There is plenty of blame to go around, but it was clear FEMA wasn’t up to the task. Guess putting a horse trainer in charge of disaster relief was a bad idea, but what do I know? I’m just some asshole on the Interwebs. Heck of a job, Brownie.
Katrina exposed a lot of problems with FEMA, not the least of which being a lot of fraud and use of FEMA funds for jewelry, strip clubs, and, oh yeah, internet porn. But at least it wasn’t for mean tweets!
You would think the federal government would have learned something from the FEMA foibles, but if you think, you know they didn’t. Government isn’t in the problem solving business, especially if it means solving the problem would result in not being able to waste our money. Whether it was Hurricane/Super Storm Sandy (not AOC), Hurricane Maria, Hurricane Rita, or even more recent hurricanes, it’s clear we don’t have a handle on how to prepare for and recover from hurricanes. Oh, the Left blames climate change for hurricane activity, but ask them to provide solutions, they’re clueless.
In other words, standard operating procedure.
While people are still recovering from the aftermath of Helene, we still have a federal agency that can’t stop stepping on its own dick. Having President Brick Tamland and Queen Kamala the Appointed at the helm only makes the situation worse. As of this writing, it appears FEMA is offering a whopping $750 to help with things like food. What do they think this is, a wildfire in Hawaii?
Seriously, though, the way the federal government has responded to disasters is, well, disastrous. And now the Administration is warning us FEMA may not have money to get through hurricane season. But a closer look at what FEMA is spending money on tells us they don’t have a money problem so much as a spending problem. Of course, I could be wrong, but I’m pretty sure DEI training has jack shit to do with disaster preparation.
Then, there’s FEMA spending on immigrants. Unless those immigrants have the skills to help rebuild and provide support to Helene victims, that’s another waste of money. Whether that money is going to illegal immigrants is a matter of debate, but the fact any money is going to any immigrants is a problem.
I would say FEMA spends money like a drunken sailor, but that would be an insult to drunken sailors.
So, how do we fix it? The bad news is…we can’t. The federal government has no incentive to make FEMA work any better because it’s not in the Leftist playbook. After all, if FEMA worked like it should, it might mean fewer people would need government to help them get through life. And when you have a disaster like a hurricane, that’s the perfect time to get more people on the government teat.
Even with the Trump/Vance ticket, there’s not a single reference to FEMA in the platform on Trump’s website. You can bitch and moan all you want, but the lack of a plan to deal with the too-frequent issues with FEMA doesn’t exactly instill confidence. And it sure as fuck doesn’t instill competence.
So, much like with the FBI, the CIA, and Taylor Swift, we’re stuck with what we have until we can dismantle it, fix it, and get it back on its feet. I wish I could also tell people not to have natural disasters happen, but that’s a non-starter, too.
But that’s not to say there aren’t options we can exercise. Look for smaller charitable operations, like through churches. See what can be done to put together care packages or, if you’re close to the area and you see a need for victims to get shelter, see if you can spare some room. For all our faults, Americans remain charitable during times of great need.
That is if FEMA lets you try to help.
I will admit FEMA is a necessary evil, but does the emphasis have to be on the “evil” part? When Americans are suffering in the aftermath of a natural disaster, they don’t need a man-made disaster swooping in to make things worse. Donald Trump got a lot of shit for throwing paper towels to Puerto Ricans after they suffered a hurricane, but it was a lot more than FEMA is doing now.
And that should make every damn Leftist hang their heads in shame.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week – Special Edition
I know you’re used to only one Lexicon entry a week, but this week is extra special. Queen Kamala the Appointed came out with a policy position!
And it’s just as vapid and nonsensical as you can imagine.
Recently, the current Vice President, Democrat Presidential hopeful, and word salad aficionado came up with a new concept: opportunity economy. Apparently, Queen Kamala the Appointed doesn’t think people can live the American Dream anymore, at least not without her help. After all, she came from a middle class family.
Did you know she came from a middle class family? I sure didn’t! If only she would say something about it…
Anyway, such a special occasion as this requires a special response!
opportunity economy
What the Left thinks it means – an economy that allows the middle class to get stronger and make the economy and the country better
What it really means – a buzzword made up by people who have no idea what free market capitalism is
For the sake of transparency and because Leftists tend to be slow on the uptake, I am a fan of free market capitalism. While most of you are saying “no fucking duh,” those of you who didn’t know that (I’m looking at you Leftists) might be confused. You have been indoctrinated…I mean taught that free market capitalism is responsible for global warming, environmental disasters, exploited workers, and yet another Nickelback album, but that’s not the case. Well, except for that Nickelback one. That’s totes on free market capitalism.
Where you were lead astray was not being given the other side of the argument, which I will try to present to you now as simply as I can. Free market capitalism has its faults including pollution, but it also tends to raise the standard of living for those who practice it. Those workers you claim are being exploited so the super-duper-mega-evil corporations can make money? They’re willing participants. They have as much stake in the company succeeding as the CEOs because without money coming in the door, those doors slam shut pretty damn fast.
For all of its faults, free market capitalism is still pretty fucking awesome. If you have a good enough idea (or, in the case of Hollywood, a good enough revamp of a good idea) and you can find people to back it (see previous reference to Hollywood), you can make serious bank once you build a market for whatever it is you’re selling. Of course, even if a movie bombs worse than Hiroshima, that doesn’t stop Hollywood from cranking out more stinkers.
As an aside, for those upset over the Hiroshima reference, too soon?
Anyway, the point is free market capitalism is based on opportunities. So, why does Queen Kamala the Appointed think it doesn’t?
Because she’s that fucking dumb.
With the vague and, frankly, uninspiring rollout of “opportunity economy” comes a new Leftist squawking point focusing on the middle class. Why else would Queen Kamala keep harping on the fact she was raise middle class? (You know, when she mentions it, which is rarer than the way Count Dracula likes his steaks.) It’s because the concept has power over us as Americans. If only some ruggedly handsome, yet witty and brilliant blogger would mention that…
To Queen Kamala and her Leftist followers, the middle class has gotten the shaft, and we all know that shaft is a bad mutha…
Seriously, though, the Left labors under the notion the middle class just needs to be successful for things to get better. At the same time, they want to raise taxes and create more bureaucratic red tape that cause prices to raise, hurting the middle and lower classes more so…yay, I guess? All they need is for someone to fight for them and give them a chance to succeed, dammit!
News Flash for ya, kids: the middle class already has that chance. America is the land of opportunity for anyone who wants to try to make it big, or at least make it close enough to big that they can see it from their house. The concept of an opportunity economy rejects that notion under the guise of being patriotic. How many times have we heard politicians leg-hump the middle class as being the backbone of our country? Too many times.
And that’s the way it’s always going to be from the political class: all talk, no action.
The opportunity economy concept also raises a lot of questions. How does Queen Kamala the Appointed plan to create it? Well, she was raised middle class! Don’t you get it?????
Actually, I don’t. Being middle class doesn’t equate to a thought-out policy position any more than playing Minecraft makes you a structural engineer. There’s a lot more that goes into it than what Queen Kamala wants us to believe, and a vague word salad ain’t in that recipe.
Given the Left’s propensity to rely on government to provide everything good and just in the world, I get the feeling it’s going to be enforced at the business end of a big regulatory stick. If some government bureaucrat with an ego and a budget that far exceeds his or her intellectual capacity to understand basic economics decides you’re not doing enough to create opportunity, you’re gonna get in trouble in a way that gives the Mafia nightmares.
Before you go off and think I’m running off the rails on a crazy train, let me also point out Queen Kamala’s other big-brain idea: punishing price gouging. Although her initial offering was met with the appropriate confusion and criticism, she has since come out with a more specific policy paper on the subject…which is just as confusing and worthy of criticism. Her big-brain idea: a federal law banning price gouging. Brilliant!
One tiny problem, though. How is she defining price gouging? I’m sure she’ll get around to it before her next sit-down interview, which is scheduled for sometime in October…of 2038.
Although the idea sounds good, the lack of specifics make it a non-starter for me. If we can’t even agree on the definition, what’s the point of making a law banning it? But, don’t worry, folks! This is an opportunity economy we’re talking about here! Don’t think about the fact there are more red flags than a Chinese military parade! Become unburdened by what has been and look at the significance of the passage of time! FEEL THE JOY, DAMMIT!
The funniest aspect of the opportunity economy is when you consider Queen Kamala says she worked at McDonald’s. Whether she did or not is immaterial to the point, but her attempt to relate to people actually shows how little she understands about the economy and how her “experience” undercuts the idea of an opportunity economy.
For all the shit you can say about Mickey D’s, there is one thing that is rock solid, take it to the bank truth. The ice cream machine is always broken. But another thing is McDonald’s loves being an employment opportunity for anyone willing to ask “Do you want fries with that?” For many young people, this is their first job, and it tends to open up opportunities beyond the Golden Arches. Promotions from within are common, and McDonald’s even offers leadership programs for those looking to get into leadership positions.
In other words, McDonald’s is the ultimate opportunity economy.
Funny how someone who allegedly “did the fries” missed that. Then again, this is Queen Kamala the Appointed we’re dealing with here, so let’s cut her a little slack.
Where I can’t cut her some slack is in thinking the current mostly-free market economy doesn’t provide the opportunities she thinks we need. What we have right now works pretty well, especially considering 80% of the millionaires today are first generation. But I’m sure if the remaining 20% would be coerced…I mean forced…I mean persuaded to give up more, it would totally create more millionaires among the middle class…who will then have to pay even more taxes thanks to the kind of regressive taxation ideas Queen Kamala think are needed.
So, Madame Vice President, we already have an opportunity economy and don’t need what you’re peddling. However, I do want to present you with an opportunity should the November election not go your way.
Become the Ice Cream Machine Czar. You can’t fuck that up any worse than you did the border.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
As a recovering Leftist, I fully admit I used to believe some weird, illogical shit in my youth. Back then it was easy because a) Leftists knew just what to say to get me to believe them, and b) I was a dumbass. But the shit the Left wants us to accept as fact is well beyond anything I believed in my youth.
And for once I’m not talking about one of Queen Kamala the Appointed’s speeches. However, I’m starting to think there’s something in the Left’s water supply that is making their beliefs even more bizarre than usual. The latest example came from House Delegate from the Virgin Islands, Stacey Plaskett. During a hearing regarding the weaponization of the Department of Justice and the FBI against political opponents (read: anyone to the right of Karl Marx), Ms. Plaskett uttered the following:
…so that those agencies [the DOJ and FBI] are no longer there to serve as a check against white nationalism, great replacement theorists, Christian nationalists, white fragility, fascists, and the twice impeached convicted felon, former president and would-be dictator Donald Trump.
Her full insane rant…I mean statement wasn’t much better at sticking to reality. But she did mention one thing worth discussion, that being white fragility. This term has been thrown around a lot in recent years, mainly by racists and their supporters, to mock white people for getting offended or upset about things. So, as a Honkey-American, I wanted to take a closer look at white fragility to see what it was.
white fragility
What the Left thinks it means – the negative reactions whites feel when non-whites discuss racism
What it really means – a made-up term designed to make whites feel more guilty than they should on racial matters
The term white fragility was coined by Dr. Robin DiAngelo who focuses on, get this, whiteness studies and critical discourse analysis. When she’s not allegedly copying off black scholars and passing their work off as her own or being made to look like an idiot by Matt Walsh, she’s turned a bullshit specialization into a cash cow. She’s written a book on the subject, became the Left’s favorite anti-white honkey, and is being taken seriously by people like Stacey Plaskett.
And, no, that’s not a compliment, ma’am.
The idea behind white fragility is simple: white people feel guilty, angry, etc., when people not like them talk about racism, which is (surprise surprise)…racist, according to Dr. DiAngelo. So, if you’re confused by the logic, and believe me I get it, if a white person tries to speak about racism in a group of non-whites, it’s white privilege. If that same person doesn’t speak about racism in a group of non-whites, it’s white fragility and racist.
That kind of thinking makes the Kobayashi Maru look like a Connect the Dots puzzle with only one dot.
The thing about white fragility is it derives from Leftist squawking points on race. You know, the sentiments whites are the root of all evil and can only redeem themselves by actively fighting racism at every turn as dictated by the Left? Yeah, that’s not gonna fly with anyone with two working brain cells to rub together.
Which means, it’s perfect for guilting white Leftists into becoming slaves.
Look, whites have been absolute assholes to minorities for a long time, and it’s important we recognize that so it doesn’t happen as widely as it once did. But where the Left goes off the rails is making it a permanent condition. They don’t want whites to acknowledge our history; they want us to be eternally burdened by it.
And now, we have some Congressional dipshit wanting the FBI and Department of Justice to combat it? Maybe it’s me, but I would think the federal government should want whites to get rid of its white fragility, not fight against it as the aforementioned dipshit says. But, that’s where my hypothesis of something being in the Left’s water supply makes a lot more sense.
More to the point, white fragility doesn’t take into account one major factor: most people don’t give a shit. After being barraged with “white people suck” day after day ad nauseum, there are a lot of whites who shut down and tune out that claptrap because they’re tired of it. Others, like your humble correspondent, aren’t concerned about race because…now get this…we treat each other like fellow human beings. In those cases, race doesn’t even enter the equation, so there’s nothing we feel we have to feel guilty about.
And that drives Leftists crazy…er. The Left is obsessed with anything that can be used to categorize and then separate us. After all, what better way to rule over people than to keep them at each other’s throats by suggesting the different parties are trying to screw over everyone else?
So, what happens when we decide not to be divided? Aside from the Left losing their shit, it shows we aren’t that far off as a country. There are few actual racists out there, mainly because America has evolved to reject racism. Yet, in order to get people to believe what the Left wants us to believe, they have to stoke any division they can.
Even if they have to invent it out of nothing. You know, like an academic focus on “whiteness.” Which reminds me of a line from the Oscar-snubbed cinematic classic “PCU”: You can major in GameBoy if you know how to bullshit.
Not surprisingly, white fragility is just another way for the Left to keep racism alive. The problem is it assumes only whites are fragile. Granted, if everyone you know is a white Leftist, that’s a safe assumption. The fact is Leftists are all fragile. It’s just a matter of what causes them to shatter.
The easiest way to do that is to deny their premise. Reject the notion of white fragility by pointing out the flaws in the notion, namely the fact the Left only sees white fragility while ignoring the fragility of other races. Case in point: Joy Ann Reid. She makes an emo kid look stable on a regular basis. To call her unhinged is assuming she was ever hinged to begin with, and that’s just a bridge too far for me.
When you really think about it (and I do because the Indiana Fever were swept in the WBNA Finals), the very concept that only whites can be fragile is the definition of racism. Remember, kids, racism isn’t just about someone believing one race is better than another. It’s also about someone believing one race is inferior.
But you don’t have to take my word for it. Our friends at Dictionary.com agree.
Pull that kind of intellectual judo on a Leftist and they lose their shit. And when it comes to white fragility, they deserve to lose their shit.
So, with no due respect Ms. Plaskett, white fragility is only a thing to the Left. The rest of us are just fine not talking about race because we don’t particularly care. Besides, college football is on and that’s a hell of a lot more entertaining than worrying about whether we’re meeting some Leftist’s expectations on talking about race.
The Pope is Wrong
This month Pope Francis, an Argentinian Marxist, told children in Singapore that all religions were like languages and paths to the One true God. This includes religions that murder Christians, deny the divinity of Christ Jesus, and religions that even deny Christ existed.
I have written before about this man’s Marxist theology in honoring those opposed to Christianity and how he doesn’t follow the teachings of Jesus Christ as presented in the Bible.
And now he is condemning children, who have an opportunity to hear the Truth and be saved, to damnation. Not to mention leading the world’s millions of Catholics down this path as well due to the false doctrine of Papal Infallibility.
There is only one path to God. There is only one way to heaven. And it is out of Love that we preach the Good News of the Gospel to the whole world. John 14:6 is very clear:
Jesus told him, “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Pope Francis is telling these children that Jesus isn’t necessary for their salvation. Whatever path they are on or choose in the future will take them God.
What an evil thing to do.
Extremist Makeover: Harris/Walz 2024 Edition
With Election Day only (thankfully) a few weeks away, people who have lives are starting to pay attention to the two major party candidates. Even with her campaign of joy (which sounds a lot like the Hope and Change campaign of Barack Obama), many voters still aren’t sure what to make of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz. What exactly do they bring to the table?
That’s…hard to explain at this point, mainly because the candidates themselves aren’t talking much to reporters, and those reporters who do talk to them throw more softballs than a pitching machine full of Nerf balls. Needless to say, the Harris/Walz ticket is not burning up the campaign season, even though their friends in the media are doing everything in their power to explain away the ticket’s lack of talkativeness.
Well, I’m here to help. Sure, I’m not going to vote for Barack Obama 2.0 and the Mirror Universe Dick Cheney ticket, but I still want to help, and I think I have a way.
First off, it’s time to drop the easy “We’re Not Trump/Vance” strategy. We know you’re not them, but we do notice you’re taking a few of their ideas to make them your own. You learned well from the current President, Madame VP!
Anyway, the point is it’s not enough to say who you aren’t. You have to convince people of who you are. And that may be a problem in and of itself. For politicians of all stripes, honesty isn’t the best policy, nor does it make for the best policy statements. Right now, the Democrats have a loose coalition of special interest groups that all want the same things often at the expense of other members of the aforementioned coalition. That makes it hard to appeal to a wide swath of voting blocs.
Hard, but not impossible.
With reviews of the Harris/Walz media tours being more negative than a Goth nihilist reading Sylvia Plath (or a typical Gen Xer for that matter), it may be time for a different approach to campaigning as a whole. The current President managed to win the White House by staying in his basement and having his messaging be extremely controlled for reasons we now understand. With all of the questions surrounding the Harris/Walz ticket, though, that’s not gonna work.
So, let me borrow something from my childhood and retool it for the modern day. Back when I was a wee lad, we had these books called Choose Your Own Adventure. For those of you unfamiliar with the series, you controlled where the story went based upon decisions you made, which each decision being played out on a page specified in the book. If you decided to go into the spooky looking house, turn to page 43. If you decided to walk past the spooky looking house, turn to page 59. If you decided to buy the spooky looking house and turn it into an apartment complex, turn to your local real estate office. That sort of thing.
In this particular situation, I think the Choose Your Own Adventure concept could be useful. It would just take some work from campaign staffers to make it happen. And it can start with the Harris/Walz website.
Instead of putting together an expansive laundry list of policy positions, turn it into a Choose Your Own Adventure game. If you want to ban fracking, go to page 28 of the Harris/Walz policy book. If you don’t want to ban fracking, go to page 18 of the Harris/Walz policy book. Then, each page would outline that particular decision’s outcome and instruct the reader to make another decision which will take him/her to a different page, and so on. It may not be the most innovative, but it would be a nice change of pace from the current campaign status quo.
Plus, think of how much easier interviews would go! If a reporter had a question, he or she could just play along and find the answer. No more embarrassing word salads! And if a hostile reporter or a political talking head says, “But that contradicts what’s on page X,” you can point out how that was based on a decision made on a different page. Pretty nifty if you think about it!
So, if anyone from the Harris/Walz campaign reads this, please know I want to help if for no other reason than to encourage more applications of the Choose Your Own Adventure approach. And if you don’t like my idea, turn to page 69 and get out!