Month: March 2021

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Since its inception, the Internet has been home to three main things: porn, cat pictures, and conspiracy theories. Whether it’s “exposing” the Bilderbergs or finding the CIA’s connections to if the cat can haz cheeseburger, there are parts of the Information Superhighway that lead to sketchy neighborhoods.

During the Trump Administration, the Left heaped scorn on QAnon, a movement sharing pro-Trump information and finding conspiracies where there weren’t any. Now, the Left has its own QAnon group, nicknamed “Blue Anon.” And, as with most things the Left is involved in, it’s divisive. There are some who take Blue Anon as seriously as the footnotes in a Buzzfeed article, and others who take it very seriously as the Leftist hackery in a Buzzfeed article. In either case, it’s worth further mockery…I mean examination.

Blue Anon

What the Left thinks it means – Ummmm…let me circle back with you on that…

What it really means – a sign not everything is rosy in Bidenland

In my lifetime, I’ve watched as the Democrat Party went from a political party to a collective of loosely-connected voting blocs, often working at cross purposes, who vote the way they do because “they’re better than Republicans.” In the past two Presidential election cycles, though, there is a core of activists who don’t necessarily agree the Democrats are better than the Republicans and feel the party needs to move further Left. Apparently because these activists want to lose more elections, thus ensuring they will be “oppressed” with their iPhones and Starbucks lattes.

And it’s in these pockets of resistance where Blue Anon thrives. With Donald Trump out of office, they have to find a different Boogeyman to sustain their narrative that has the cushiest oppression this side of a 4 star day spa. Guess what, Leftists? They’re gunning for you now! Or they would if they didn’t believe guns were a tool of white supremacy or the Patriarchy or some such.

Regardless, Blue Anon isn’t happy with the current crop of Leftists running things, as is evidenced by watching the Socialist Socialite and the Squad take pot-shots at Nancy Pelosi whenever it’s politically expedient to do so, but to walk in line behind her most of the time. Say what you will about the Squad, they’ve picked up the Washington Cha-Cha pretty quickly. But they’re still committed to a more progressive Democrat Party in the near future, and the sooner for them, the better. As a result, there are people who not only buy into the idea Karl Marx had some good ideas, but also believe the current Democrat Party leadership is working against them.

Welcome to the Blue Anon Petrie dish!

To be fair, Blue Anon does have a point. The Leftist leadership wants nothing to do with advancing a more progressive agenda. A progressive agenda, yes, but not nearly as progressive as Blue Anon wants because of one thing: the Leftist leadership wants to stay in leadership. Losing elections because you took a hard stand to protect the Twin-Billed Yellow Sapsucker at the expense of a few thousand jobs isn’t something the leaders relish. Oh, they’ll pay it more lip service than Andrew Cuomo with his subordinates, but for some strange reason, they promptly forget it once they’ve secured enough votes to keep their butts Crazy Glued to their seats for the next millennia. It’s this reality of politics that escapes Blue Anon like most prisoners at Stalag 13, and it’s also the fuel for their conspiracy theories.

The thing to remember about any conspiracy theory is there is usually a nugget of truth in it. You may have to dig for it, but it’s there. With Blue Anon, the nugget of truth is there in the open, mainly because political Leftists aren’t afraid to show their contempt for people they consider inferior (i.e. not them). Where Blue Anon goes off the rails is when they attribute every bad outcome on the same nugget of truth even when there is no connection. To be fair, this is the same problem QAnon has, but it’s a feature of any conspiracy theory worth its salt.

Another feature, which is the fatal flaw, is the fact it can be reasonably explained away with common sense. In order to believe any conspiracy theory, you have to simultaneously believe the powers that be are so clever as to get into positions of power without being noticed while simultaneously being stupid enough to let the “real facts” get leaked to the conspiracy theorists. Now, I’ll admit I’m not an expert on stuff like this, but if the only people who know the truth are people you wouldn’t trust not to injure themselves with a plastic spork, I’m willing to bet they and the truth aren’t on speaking terms.

That is what makes Blue Anon so funny to me. These are people so convinced of their mental superiority while at the same time getting suckered in by an absurd con solely because it feeds into their preconceived ideas. That’s the hook, kids. Blue Anon works for Leftists because it reinforces their beliefs, no matter how silly or unrealistic. And before Leftist leaders can say “Et tu, AOC?” Blue Anon will start asserting their perceived power in an attempt to create political power.

And most of the time they will get crushed in the process. Ask Cindy Sheehan about trying to take on Nancy Pelosi.

On a bigger scale, Blue Anon represents the biggest failure of the Biden Administration to date: the inability to unite the country. There will be more failure to come, I assure you, but the failure to unite the country (which was one of the cornerstones of why Joe got the gig in the first place) will certainly be hard to top. And, yes, I know Leftists are blaming Trump and conservatives for this, which is fair. But you supported Joe Biden on the basis that he wasn’t Donald Trump and could bring the country back together again. Also, don’t give me the “he’s only been in office for X months” because Joe Biden was in office for most of my life, and I’m 51 as of the date of this writing. The fact he’s had decades to come up with a cogent vision isn’t undone because he just moved into the White House. Not to mention, he was Vice President for 8 years under Barack Obama, so it’s not like he’s been hiding in his basement…oh, wait.

Seriously, though, Blue Anon is going to be a thorn in the Left’s side for months to come because they can’t just dismiss them like they dismissed QAnon without political consequences, namely the 2022 midterm elections. Yet, they can’t simply accept Blue Anon at face value because the conspiratorial stink will rub off on them.

Welcome aboard the Kobiashi Maru, kids!

Recent Mass Murders

In the wake of 2 mass murders the Left is again talking about gun control. And the Left does want to take guns away from the people, all the people, so only the military and the police will be armed. That is the ultimate goal of the Left. The State cannot impose it’s will with a well armed population.

There are already a multitude of laws both federally and locally that are under the guise of safety. Where did they fail in these two resent cases? Instead of investigating that failure, the Left just wants to place more restrictions on ownership of weapons which is a clear and present violation of the US Constitution and therefore any such law is automatically unconstitutional and invalid.

Many of the useful idiots, as Stalin called them, don’t understand the plain language of our Constitution. The 2nd Amendment states:

“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Many get tripped up by the word Militia. Thinking that means the armed forces, the standing military of the United States. This is wrong thinking. The word was chosen and capitalized for a reason by the Founding Fathers. Here, Militia, means every able bodied citizen capable of defending the Constitution.

An armed citizenry is necessary to keep a nation free of tyranny from forces that would take away its freedoms. Even if those forces originate from inside the nation or outside of the nation.

That is why the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. And that means impeded, circumvented, restricted in any way shape or form.

The Left likes to state that the Founding Fathers didn’t mean for this amendment to be used for civilian ownership of military weapons. But that too is also a wicked lie. The Founding Fathers didn’t come back from a hunting trip. They came back from attacking the largest and most powerful nation and military on the face of the earth at the time. Using weapons of war that were owned by the individuals firing them.

The 2nd Amendment wasn’t written to allow American’s to go hunting on the weekend. It was written for Americans to keep their Republic from a tyrannical government that would take it away from them. Even if it was elected into place by foolish Americans.

There is an odd thing that happens in cases of violence. If one commits murder and assault with a knife. The attacker is punished. If one commits murder and assault with a blunt instrument, a baseball bat for example. The attacker is punished. If one commits murder and assault with a vehicle. The attacker is punished.

But if one commits murder and assault with a firearm. Then the firearm is punished. Others that own firearms are punished and tracked like sex offenders. And maybe the attacker gets punished to if they didn’t have a bad childhood that is stated to be the cause of the violence they committed.

The loss of life recently in these cowardly attacks is heartbreaking. I weep for the loss of life. I lift up prayers to Almighty God to comfort the families in their time of grief. And I will say again the Left’s gun control is not the answer.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Even though the Presidential election has been over for 4 months, we’re still talking about it. I know elections have consequences, but I didn’t think one of them would be being bored out of my mind while watching people with zero clue about how government works argue over simple concepts. And the normal people trying to educate them can be frustrating, too.

Lately, the conversation has revolved around election security, and, no, I’m not talking about the possibility of having armed guards at polling places. Leftists are doing everything they can to not only say anyone who rejects the notion the 2020 election had issues with voter fraud, but also to say future elections are subject to voter fraud.

Yes, they are that contradictory.

But what to Leftists mean when they speak about election security? It’s not what you think…

election security

What the Left thinks it means – methods to expand the voting base

What it really means – methods to ensure Leftists win more often

When you look at the various proposals Leftists have come up with to promote election security (and I have because I have no life), it’s astounding what they’ve managed to lump together. Here are some of the high/low/no lights

– Abolishing the filibuster in the Senate
– Preventing gerrymandering
– Promoting mail-in voting
– Working against any new laws requiring a photo ID to vote
– Electing more Democrats/Leftists
– Making it easier to register potential voters

Maybe it’s me, but there seems to be a lack of security in the Left’s election security proposals. Between the ridiculous (preventing gerrymandering) to the sublime (blocking Voter ID bills), I have yet to see how any of these would lead to the kind of widespread election security the Left say they want.

Unless…this isn’t actually about election security at all!

And it’s not. The Left has any number of ways to create electoral chaos, from voter registration fraud (hi, former ACORN nuts!) to ballot harvesting to “helping” seniors fill out ballots for Democrat candidates to accepting and counting votes from the posthumous. The Left has a vested interest in keeping the chaotic status quo because these aforementioned election shenanigans would go the way of Andrew Cuomo’s popularity with the elderly in New York.

Keep this in mind the next time Leftists claim Republicans can’t win elections without cheating.

The scary thing to acknowledge is that some of the Left’s election security ideas have merit. I’m okay with eliminating gerrymandering because it turns Congressional districts into an Etch-A-Sketch. Just when you have the lines drawn the way you want, someone else can come along, shake it all up, and force you start over. As current state-level politics lie, Republicans have the Etch-A-Sketch in a majority of the states, so it’s no wonder the Left wants to get rid of it. In doing so, however, they remove the power they would have if/when they win back the states. Not to mention, the Left have used gerrymandering for the express purpose of getting more minorities elected to Congress. As we’ve seen with Congressional geniuses like Hank “Guam Is Tipping Over” Johnson, Sheila Jackson Lee, and Maxine Waters, this is a brilliant idea that can in no way make the Left look bad.

To any Leftists reading this piece, that last sentence was sarcasm.

Although I agree with the elimination of gerrymandering, it shouldn’t be involved in any discussion about election security (nor should it be involved in any discussion of Senate elections, yet it happens). On the other hand, there are potential solutions, like voter ID, that should be involved in any discussion about election security, but get dismissed by Leftists because…they might work.

Take voter ID, for example. Having potential voters show some form of identification before they vote is (or at least should be) the cornerstone of election security. The fact the Left pushes back so hard on this should be a red flag as to their commitment to secure elections. More to the point, though, voter ID laws speak to actual election security because they address a major problem with voting as it stands now: in many cases, we don’t know who is voting and whether they’re eligible to vote. Granted, it’s not foolproof given the number of fools out there willing to test the boundaries, but it’s a step in the right direction. The underlying issues of availability and cost to get the necessary identification are related, but not to the point that they negate the positive impacts.

Since it doesn’t perpetuate the problem and the stereotypes connected to it (namely, that Leftists believe minorities are too poor and/or stupid to get ID cards), the Left will never go for it. Which is why we have to. As with personal security, election security starts and ends with us. That’s going to require a bit of effort on our part, but it’s going to be worth it if for no other reason than to watch Leftists’ heads explode as their strategies face the failure that comes with honest men and women doing the right thing.

In the meantime, be careful of Leftists bearing promises of election security. Unless, of course, you think the election equivalent of Barney Fife might do a good job.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

There are times when I shake my head in disbelief at what the Left takes seriously. This is one of those times.

It starts with New York Times tech reporter Taylor Lorenz taking her role to new depths by attempting to publicly shame a conservative mother online through bullying her daughter. Rightly, Lorenz has been called out for this behavior. Then, she started complaining about online harassment she’s received, which caused many a Leftist to ignore the utter garbage she did to warrant the attention. Thanks to Tucker Carlson naming Lorenz and using a photo of her available on the Times website, the victimhood meter got turned up to 11 through the invocation of a magical phrase the Left has been using for the past few years, “online violence.”

Let’s demystify this term, shall we?

online violence

What the Left thinks it means – mistreatment of minorities and women online, including taunts, insults, and trolling

What it really means – a made-up controversy with real-life inspiration

With the advent of the World Wide Web (thank you, Al Gore…not!), American society changed forever. Even though we were able to chat with people around the world, our worlds shrank inward. Things we wouldn’t say to people in public were said online, often with our real names attached to them. And don’t get me started on Rule 34. If you don’t know what that is, please don’t ask. You really don’t want to know.

Out of that change came troll culture, which then turned into American culture. And as exchanges got more heated, egos got more fragile. People on social media go from bully to victim in a matter of keystrokes. Hell, I’ve been shit-talked by 12 year olds playing Call of Duty.

Does it cross lines of civilized society? Absolutely. Should we be trying to do better than throwing more shade at people than Rosie O’Donnell sunbathing? No doubt. Is it violence? In a word, no. In two words, fuck no.

Words, by definition, cannot be violence because they lack the ability to be physical. When spoken, they are the expulsion of air through the mouth combine with muscular actions. Even a literal tongue lashing doesn’t involve actual lashing of the tongue. Words can inspire violence (i.e. fighting words), but the words themselves don’t commit the violence.

Now, let’s add in the online element. This may come as a shock to many people, but online life isn’t real life. Even if you believe words are violence (which just confirms you’re a dumbass), the fact the words occurred in the cyber-ether renders your opinion more useless than Eric Swalwell’s security clearance.

So, why are so any people convinced online violence is really? One, online life has made people dumber than a bag of hammers. More importantly, though, it’s a clever play on words the Left uses to convince people it’s a serious problem by playing to their emotions through the negative implications of violence. Let’s be honest. There are very few positive aspects to violence, and those that are positive usually cost at least an extra $50…not that I’d know about that, mind you…

Where was I again? Oh yeah, Leftist word play. By invoking the concept of violence, the Left counts on us to fill in the blanks and assume the worst. Adding the word “online” makes it seem widespread and a direct threat to us personally because everybody and their Grandmother is online these days. Although I get a chuckle imagining an octogenarian trolling a 20 year old over his or her taste in anime, the desired effect is to get us afraid of what could happen.

And by creating that fear, the Left can take your voice, equating legitimate criticism with the modern equivalent of an elementary school taunt, only with more vulgarity. As with other times the Left attempts to manipulate us through creative wording, the key to countering it is to recognize it for what it is and call it out. What Taylor Lorenz and her enablers are trying to do is to escape responsibility for being reprehensible to someone with less power than they have. With Tucker Carlson calling her out, the shoe is on the other foot and now Lorenz is getting a taste of karmic justice.

Let’s just say she’s not a fan. Which makes it all the funnier to me. So, win-win!

Meanwhile, don’t fall prey to the emotional manipulation the Left is using here. They want you to avoid using your brain and simply believe, just like one of the Left’s online darlings Anita Sarkeesian says: Listen and Believe. But when what you’re being told to believe is absurd on its face, you have my blessing not to listen.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The Leftist world was shaken to its core within the past 2 weeks due to allegations of sexual harassment against New York Governor and the Left’s example of how a state can handle the COVID-19 crisis (more on that later), Andrew Cuomo. As of this writing, three women have come forward to accuse the Governor of inappropriate sexual advances, up to and including unwanted touching. In light of these allegations, the Left have circled the wagons to try to discredit the accusations as politically motivated due to former President Donald Trump’s impending legal case before the state court.

Meanwhile, the rest of us are scratching our heads trying to figure out the new rules about sexual harassment. Is it okay to do what Cuomo did, or is it excusable because Trump did worse more often? If only we had a weekly piece that would explore the Left’s mindset on issues like this…oh, wait!

sexual harassment

What the Left thinks it means – unwanted sexual advances or comments made by men in power that make the victims uncomfortable or frightened of possible reprisal

What it really means – unwanted sexual advances or comments made by men in power that make the victims uncomfortable or frightened of possible reprisal, unless you’re a Leftist

We’ve come a long way since Anita Hill accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, but we’re no closer to making progress on the issue. Powerful men and women have used it to get what they want for decades, and if current events are any indication, it’s still happening. That’s why the #MeToo and #BelieveAllWomen movements got started, folks! Well, that, and it’s easier than a Paris Hilton murder mystery novel plot to appear like you care by tweeting and re-tweeting hashtags.

When it comes to actually doing something about the problem…I guess it depends on who the Left considers an ally. I’m old enough to remember when Senator Bob Packwood was run out of office for chasing a secretary around his desk, and rightly so. Then came Bill Clinton, who was accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Certainly worse than chasing a secretary, but not to the Left. They said the accusers weren’t credible, accused them of being money-hungry, and tried to paint the Commander in Briefs as a victim of a “right wing smear.”

Guess what? The Left is doing the same with Cuomo. As inconsistent as they are about what constitutes sexual harassment, they are consistent about recycling bad ideas.

In Cuomo’s case, though, the Left has a bigger target: Donald Trump. Ever since Trump mentioned grabbing women by the puddy tat, the Left has painted him as a sexual predator. As a result, every time a Leftist gets caught doing more than talking about such an act, the Left brings up Trump. I seem to recall there being a term for trying to deflect negative facts by bringing up a tangentially-related person, but I can’t seem to come up with it. What about you, dear reader?

Although I can’t completely discount the possibility of Trump acting like, well, Trump, it doesn’t excuse what Cuomo is alleged to have done. It also doesn’t help Cuomo’s cause that there are photos of him doing what he’s accused of doing, and that the photos support the allegations against him.

But it shows a lot more than the Left wants us to see. For one, it shows us how ugly Cuomo is. I mean, money and power may be aphrodisiacs, but there are limits!

More importantly, though, it shows how far the Left will go to protect their own, even at the expense of optics and ideological consistency. I don’t have the hard data on this yet, but I’m willing to guess a good chunk of the #metoo folks are defending Cuomo by any means necessary at the expense of women. Yet, these are some of the same folks who wonder why more women aren’t believed when they come forward with their allegations. Hmmm…well, I can’t figure it out. I’ll leave it to the “smart” Leftists.

Another tack being used by the Cuomo defenders is they want to have an investigation done into the allegations before they will call for him to resign. By the way, Justice Brett Kavanaugh is on Line 1. He wants to have a word with the Cuomo supporters.

Seriously, though, the defenders will try to act like they’ve always wanted investigations into sexual harassment allegations. I know you’re going to be surprised, but the Left is lying about this, too. When it comes to the Right, any and all allegations are believed, no matter how weak they are. Case in point: Christine Blasey Ford and the aforementioned Brett Kavanaugh. For Kavanaugh, the mere allegations were enough to disqualify him from the High Court, even though Blasey Ford was as credible as a Nigerian prince’s email. The more we dug into the allegations, the less believable they were.

That wasn’t a problem for the Left, though. They still invoke Blasey Ford’s name to show they support and believe women. When the roles are reversed, no benefit of a doubt is given. Whether it’s Paula Jones, Juanita Broadrick, or Tara Reade, the women have to be lying or being used by the “Right Wing Smear Machine” (Patent Pending) to bring down an innocent Leftist.

Even if the “innocent Leftist” has photos of him doing what he’s alleged to have done.

The thing to remember about the Left is they politicize sex because they politicize everything. When it comes to sexual harassment, they play jump rope with the tightrope they expect the rest of us to walk. And since the time of Anita Hill, they’ve learned how to play Double Dutch to the country’s detriment. When you are allowed to play fast and loose with the rules you personally set, you can justify anything.

That’s how cults get started. And Amway.

Right now, Cuomo is benefitting from the Leftist double standard, oddly enough in two ways. First, he’s skating on behavior that would get most of us drug through the mud by the people defending him. Second, it takes attention away from a more serious issue, that being his boneheaded approach to dealing with COVID-19 by putting patients with the elderly, one of the groups most susceptible to contracting it…and dying from it. Then again, the media have done a piss poor job of covering this aspect to Cuomo’s incompetence, so they’re focusing on the sexual scandal because sex sells. If the Left can get us to focus on the sex, they’re betting we’ll forget about the killing of Grandma and Grandpa. Then, once the sexual harassment story goes away, so does the nursing home scandal.

Unfortunately for them, that’s not how it works, kids.

Using sexual harassment as a means to cover up a major scandal is low, even for Leftists, because it shows how little they care about women’s issues that don’t rhyme with abortion or the gender pay gap. They can and will use women to achieve political ends, thus making the women affected by sexual harrassment and sexual assault acceptable losses as long as the Left gets what it wants.

In other words, the Left are the sexual predators they keep warning us exist.

The thing we have going for us is consistency. While the Left changes their rules at the drop of a hat, or some other article of clothing for that matter, we rely on facts and evidence gathered through research and logical thinking. No matter who is being accused, we want there to be an investigation where every allegation can be verified or rejected. What’s more, we don’t care whose ox gets gored in the process. As long as we continue to follow that mindset, the Left will ultimately lose.

In the meantime, Andrew Cuomo should be held accountable for what we’ve seen him do. Even though his sexual harassment is being used as a scapegoat, the fact he and his ideological partners are willing to throw women under the campaign bus to protect him should make the Left take a seat.

As in a Colosseum’s worth.