Month: April 2021

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The eyes of the world were on Minnesota earlier this year, and not because the Twins and the Vikings have been mathematically eliminated from the post-season on the same day. Former police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted on three counts related to the death of George Floyd, and the Left cried tears of joy because justice was served (according to them). Yet, there are some, including your humble correspondent, who don’t quite agree with the sentiment, thanks to people like Maxine Waters voicing opinions prior to the jury being sequestered to deliberate.

We’re going to be dealing with some lofty concepts here, kids, so grab a cold beverage and strap in.

justice

What the Left thinks it means – an outcome that reinforces our collective societal will and punishes those who try to subvert it

What it really means – an outcome where the process and the verdict support a fair result

To make things perfectly clear, I happen to agree with the verdict. What Derek Chauvin did on camera crossed the line between securing a suspect and police brutality. It’s hard to argue that (although I’m sure there are plenty of people willing to try). If the case were tried purely on the evidence, the result would be the same.

Ah, but there’s the rub. This case wasn’t tried purely on the evidence. The Court of Public Opinion, which has a track record that makes the 9th Circuit Court look like Solomon, has been trying and retrying this case pretty much on the daily. Whether it’s elevating George Floyd to heroic/deity levels or using the case as a means to promote everything from defunding/abolishing the police to rooting out white supremacists en masse, the Left has been milking this situation for all it’s worth. Judging from the recent home purchase of a Black Lives Matter founder, it’s worth quite a bit.

Even with the video evidence, there is still an important step to consider: ensuring both sides get a fair hearing. The Court of Public Opinion typically isn’t the venue for such discourse, so it falls to the actual court system. And that’s where the Chauvin verdict goes off the rails like Gary Busey driving an Amtrak route. Thanks to Leftists like Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, and President Joe Biden, the environment surrounding the trial made a fair hearing impossible. There is some question of whether the jury was sequestered to the point they wouldn’t have heard the aforementioned Leftists’ comments, so we can’t be sure one way or the other.

And that, ladies and gentleman, is how you plant the seeds for an appeal.

Leftists were so hellbent to get a conviction that they didn’t take into consideration what they were doing to deny justice, the very thing they claim they wanted out of the Chauvin trial. Although lack of self-awareness isn’t a bug in the Left so much as a feature, it took an amazing amount of blockheadedness to agree to the idea to let some of the most divisive politicians in modern history and Joe Biden weigh in on what the jury “should” do.

Speaking of which, Speaker Pelosi? Call your office, provided you’ve extracted your feet from your mouth after thanking George Floyd of “taking one for the team.”

Anyway, the Left’s approach to justice, real or whatever make-believe version they want to promote today, is based on their general approach: the ends justify the means. In the Chauvin case, the Left wanted a guilty verdict so they can continue to perpetuate the notion police officers are killing innocent black victims constantly. (Of course, actual data shows that’s not happening, but Party of Science, kids!) As long as this perception is considered to be reality, the Left can keep bringing it up as a means to get money and power without actually doing anything about it.

Think about that last part for a moment. The Left needs these problems to continue for their own purposes. And if it takes people dying to make that happen, so be it! Who would have thought the party that supports abortion on demand would have such disregard for human life?

Meanwhile, the Left keeps slapping “justice” on everything to the point the word loses its meaning. You know, just like they did with racism! Environmental justice, social justice, economic justice, racial justice, about the only thing they haven’t touched on is actual justice, and let’s be glad they haven’t or it would get screwed up worse than it already is. And if the Derek Chauvin verdict is any indication, they may have their sights set on it.

The issues they face, however, are a bit deeper than they are. For all the times they’ve taken up for convicted cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal and the number of lawyers in their midst, you’d think they’d have figured out the American criminal justice process. Just because you hold your breath and stomp your feet doesn’t mean you get the verdict you want. There is still a matter of evidence and procedure that have to be followed or else you get a conviction that gets overturned faster than a pancake at IHOP. And that’s by design, my Leftist friends. Actual justice doesn’t begin and end with the judge’s gavel; it begins with following the steps to ensure all parties involved have a chance to be heard and present a case. I know that kinda puts a crimp in your “execute first and ask questions…well, never, really” approach, but it does make things a lot handier when it comes to, you know, actually getting a legal ruling that won’t get overturned due to a lack of procedural integrity?

In other words, if you follow the rules and don’t let Maxine Waters say something incredibly stupid about an ongoing trial, you don’t have to worry about the verdict you want getting thrown out. Granted, that may be a hell of an ask from the Left, but we can hope.

Regardless of how you feel about the Derek Chauvin verdict, it’s hard to say whether justice was actually served. On the one hand, he has been convicted of contributing to George Floyd’s death. On the other, the environment surrounding the trial made the conviction all but certain, but not in a good way. When that happens, it’s a good thing Lady Justice is wearing a blindfold or we’d be due for a series of rampant scale-whippings.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

To put it mildly, this past week has been what the military would call a “target-rich environment” for somewhat humorous weirdos like me. On the Left, there has been a move to create four more Supreme Court seats and do away with the Electoral College. On the right, Project Veritas exposed CNN, which promptly got James O’Keefe kicked off Twitter.

Now, which would be more entertaining, a dry discussion about the Supreme Court or the Electoral College, or poking fun at a cable news network whose fortunes are as bright as a Socialist Socialite policy position?

Let’s just say I’m siding with schadenfreude.

CNN

What the Left thinks it means – a reputable news organization that occasionally ventures into “Fox News Lite” territory

What it really means – a news network who keeps finding a way to tarnish its reputation

Back in the day, CNN was the only name in cable news because, well, there weren’t any other real cable news networks out there. And it was unique in that it showed a global perspective on news, which was a big risk because of the way American media are set up to cover international events. Think coups and earthquakes, kids.

Where CNN really came into its own was during the first Gulf War. With reporters live on the scene giving regular updates and being one of the few (if not the only) television news crews there, CNN became a household name around the world. Once the Gulf War ended, CNN could have either rested on its laurels and coasted or continued to cover stories as balanced and as in-depth as possible.

Given the fact we’re in the process of mocking it, I’m guessing you can figure out what path CNN took.

What happened that caused CNN’s fall from grace (no relation to Nancy)? That’s hard to say because there have been a number of incidents in the 30 years since the first Gulf War that could have been the catalyst, but for me, it was the campaign and subsequent election of Bill Clinton. For better or most definitely worse, Clinton was our first “rock star” President, and CNN acted like a pack of teenage groupies hoping to catch his attention.

To me, the minute any news outlet picks a side in an ideological battle, it ceases to be an example of good journalism and becomes an example of good propaganda poorly masquerading as journalism. As other news networks popped up or became more prominent as they carried water for the Commander in Briefs, talent had viable options to exercise, and some of them did. As that happened, CNN picked up other talent, but the replacements didn’t fill the talent void. And in the case of Brian Stetler, became a talent void in and of himself. Pro Tip: if you have someone with as inconsistent a track record as Stelter, don’t let him host a show called “Reliable Sources.”

Aside from Stetler, CNN doesn’t have as much star power as it once did, and even less actual journalism is being done. Maybe it’s me, but when you call yourself a news network, it kinda implies you know what news is. Judging from the Project Veritas video, though, even the staff wouldn’t recognize news from a hole in the ground. And don’t get me started on whether they know their asses from the aforementioned hole.

Although the video didn’t expose anything new (assuming CNN swung Left was so obvious Stevie Wonder could see it), it does damage their brand at a time when they need to regain some of their viewership. Although the landscape is looking like the Hatfields and McCoys, but more cordial, there is room for a straight news organization that gives different perspectives.

Which the Left hates.

The Left relies on being able to control the narrative, so any time one of their usual outlets decides to…horror of horrors…show more than the Left’s version of events, the Left accuses that outlet of betraying them. Just look at how they go after Jake Tapper when he tries to reason with the Left. Granted, it’s getting more rare than how Dracula likes his hamburgers, but it happens.

Right now, CNN is finding itself the odd network out. On the right, there is Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN, and on the left, there is…pretty much everybody else. No matter how Left CNN leans, it will be outdone by someone else. To put it another way, CNN is now the New Coke of cable news: some love it, but most prefer the Coke that actually tastes like Coke. MSNBC will do what CNN does or used to do with a greater Leftist slant, so CNN becomes an afterthought. Personally, if it weren’t for the Left’s hatred of Project Veritas, I’m not sure Leftists would care how bad CNN looks right now.

Yet, I’m reminded of a saying: “Where there is chaos, there is opportunity.” If CNN wants to be relevant again, they need to resist the urge to become MSNBC without Rachel Maddow. They also need to resist the urge to swing to the right, especially considering the Right doesn’t trust CNN as far as Pee Wee Herman could throw Mount Everest. So, I see the best way to stand out and move forward is to look towards the past. Wipe the slate clean and go back to straight news, complete with an announcement of the change so people know what’s going on. Sure, it will piss off the Left, but the way I look at it, you’ll get more viewers than if you continue on your current path.

Of course, that will go over with Jeff Zucker like David Duke at a BLM rally, so it probably won’t be done anytime soon. Even so, what do you have to lose, Jeff? A bunch of whiny crybabies who think they respect science while simultaneously believing there are more than two genders? At some point, you have to cut your losses, buddy.

And when it comes to Leftists, you’re dealing with a lot of losers!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

It’s Spring (no thanks to Punxatawny Phil), and you know what that means, right? Neighbors starting to mow their lawns again! Being able to break out light jackets most days! The Chicago Cubs being mathematically eliminated from the post-season by the end of the National Anthem on Opening Day!

And talk of infrastructure.

Sure, infrastructure isn’t the most exciting topic to talk about, but it’s become one of the central themes of the Biden Administration. Well, that and circling back on questions Jen Psaki isn’t prepared to answer at the time and then never circling back. It must have caught on because Leftists are talking about it almost non-stop. Everything from schools to health care is being touted as being infrastructure.

And we wouldn’t be talking about it if they weren’t trying to pull a fast one on us.

infrastructure

What the Left thinks it means – services essential to running America successfully

What it really means – stuff we should be spending money on instead of stupid stuff

For once in a great while, the Venn Diagram between what the Left believes and I believe cross. I do see there is an infrastructure problem in America, as the potholes big enough to cause echoes exhibit. Where we part company is in how we address it. The Left wants to throw enough money around to fill the potholes in perpetuity, while I want to actually, you know, fix the fracking potholes! And why do our approaches differ so widely? It’s simple.

The Left doesn’t want to fix anything. They would rather leave a pothole where it is, no matter how many cars get swallowed up whole in them. A problem solved is a funding opportunity lost. And when I say “funding opportunity,” I mean funding opportunities…for themselves. The Left has found a way to turn government projects into ATM machines where your balance is never zero and you always have millions in deposits being made by good ole Uncle Sam.

This isn’t to say the Right is any better. Instead of funding studies on the mating habits of the 14-toed albino shrub sloth, the Right spends money on war. With the billions needed to fix roads, bridges, and buildings, I think the Department of Defense could do without 3 or 4 screwdrivers for the cause.

Yet, without fail, when the temperatures turn warmer, politicians start thinking like Norm Abrams and thinking they should fix the problems they find. Their problem is they’re as good with tools as Tim Taylor from “Home Improvement” and their version of Al Borland is just as inept. And on this edition of “This Old Country” we’re going to watch what manicured politicians do when they’re expected to get their hands dirty: absolutely nothing!

When you really think about it, and I have because I lack actual hobbies, this humorous aside uncovers the reason why everybody in Washington talks a good game, but never plays the infrastructure game. How many DC politicians and/or staff have to drive on the same city streets you and I do? How many wonder if the bridge they’re driving on could collapse like Lindsey Lohan on, well let’s be honest, any day ending with “day”? And how many do you think would put up with buildings less stable than Gary Busey after a bender with the aforementioned Ms. Lohan? Oddly enough, the answer is the same for all three questions.

Zero. Nada. El Zippo. The Big Bagel. The amount of self-awareness Eric Swalwell has.

Because it doesn’t affect them, the DC types (especially Leftists) don’t care about who it impacts.  

The funny thing about infrastructure is you can make an argument that anything is related to it. Remember the game Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon? It’s just like that, only more expensive and without a “Footloose” film credit. Even so, the Left’s attempts to shoehorn everything under the infrastructure tent are as bizarre as they are humorous. While some elements like high-speed rail or a pipeline would certainly fall under infrastructure, most of the Left’s additions, like paid leave, child care, and caregiving (according to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand) are more of a wish list than actual infrastructure.

Now that we’re over 700 words into this beast, maybe it’s time we set some ground rules. For me, infrastructure has more of a concrete and definite benefit to people and, in some cases, the greater societal need. Filling a pothole may not seem like much, but people will notice it when they don’t have to worry about wheel damage driving down a particular street. Rebuilding a downtown area affected by rio…I mean mostly peaceful protests or tackling a community project like building a park have tangible results that can be mapped out on a timeline.

While there is an argument to be made about child care, caregiving, paid leave, and other more esoteric ideas being infrastructure, I’m less inclined to include them for a couple of reasons. First, there isn’t a clear connection between the action taken and the result of said action. You can give a child all the love in the world, but if his/her aspirations go no further than being a YouTube celebrity, nothing of tangible value is gained. And you’d be hard-pressed to come up with an argument anything of esoteric value is gained, for that matter.

Second, and this is a big one, there is no discernable end-point. With rebuilding a bridge, you can not only see the progress, but you can see the end of it. With something like child care, there is no such indication we’re done. And when it comes to Leftists, if you do something for one group of people, it has to be spread out to every group for as long as they deem because if you don’t, you’re a bigot. (Of course, Leftists throw around the term like Randy Johnson in his prime, so…) So, no matter how deep you think your pockets are, be ready to keep turning them out with the Left’s idea of infrastructure.

For me, the biggest knock against the Left’s infrastructure calls is the Left doesn’t have a good track record when it comes to actual infrastructure. Remember “The Big Dig”? Sure, it’s one example, but it’s a disaster 25 years and several billion dollars in the making. Can you imagine what the Left would do with a bridge project? The Big Dig would look like a crack in the pavement, and it would be an eyesore and a financial drain for generations.

You know, like a Barbra Streisand concert ticket?

In the meantime, we need to resist the urge to throw anything and everything in the infrastructure bucket and focus more on what is infrastructure. Although most of what needs to be done is way outside of our respective paygrades, there are still some things we can do in our own backyards to fix the problems we see. And, the best part is we can do it without the federal government directing us. You will still have to deal with state and local authorities, but I guarantee they’re going to be a lot easier to deal with than the national folks are going to be.

As far as the Left’s Great Spending Spree Forward is concerned, just remember they aren’t above emotional manipulation to get what they want. And they will. Of course, they will also use absurdly stupid concepts to try to get what they want, so it makes it easier for us to a) recognize it, b) neutralize it, and c) laugh at it.

And extending Senator Gillibrand’s logic just a bit, mocking her is infrastructure!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

I know we just talked about conspiracy theories last time, but something has come up recently that might make them seem more credible, and we have COVID-19 and Leftist power grabs to thank for it. I’m speaking of vaccine passports, not the ones that allowed coronavirus to spread here like cream cheese on a bagel.

What the Biden Administration and its fluffers…I mean media supporters have suggested is to require people who have gotten vaccinated to be able to provide proof of such so businesses and the general public know. Seems pretty innocuous, doesn’t it? Wellll…let’s just say this one is going to be fun to digest.

vaccine passports

What the Left thinks it means – a necessary measure to ensure public safety

What it really means – totalitarianism with clown makeup as to not scare the kids

One of the biggest problems we’ve faced since COVID-19 became the viral equivalent of “Baby Shark” is we don’t know a lot about it. Even after a year of “two weeks to flatten the curve” we’re barely scratching the surface of what it can do and whether our medical responses are adequate. We don’t even know for sure whether the vaccines developed will do anything to it or us.

Before we go any further, though, let me clarify. I am not anti-vaccine by any stretch of the imagination. As a science geek, I happen to like the knowledge medical technology has evolved to the point that a shot in the arm can protect against most illnesses. Where my hesitation comes into play is when government gets involved, whether it be through funding testing and development or giving the okay to distribute drugs to the public. That hesitation isn’t without merit. Remember Olestra? Yeah, that got the government green light and it wound up making people’s pants brown, if you know what I mean.

While the effectiveness of President Donald Trump’s Operation War Speed can be debated (and, following various Twitter conversations on the subject, is), I can’t quite get behind the notion everything’s fine. As I’ve noted previously, government isn’t in the problem-solving business because they don’t have a vested interest in solving problems. If anything, they need the problems to continue so they can continue to bleed taxpayers dry. And as we’ve seen with some Democrat governors, they have no issue making things harder on their constituents, but easier for themselves.

By the way, Governor Cuomo? You might want to check with your office regarding a bunch of New Yorkers outside with pitchforks and torches.

So, why does the government want us to get vaccine passports? To the Left, it’s for the public good, which is admittedly a good reason. And if it was just for that reason, I might be a little more lenient. However, thanks to Leftist Twitter (which is pretty much the same thing), I get the feeling there’s a lot more below the surface that we should consider.

You know, like…totalitarianism.

Some Leftists have said the quiet part out loud and said those without a vaccine passport should be denied service, put on lists to prevent them from interacting with others who are vaccinated, taxed more heavily for the additional burden to our healthcare system, and a few other onerous actions designed to force compliance. At this rate, I’m surprised they haven’t gone the Hester Prynne route and just made non-vaccinated people wear a scarlet letter. (Yes, I could have gone with the Nazi route, but at some point Godwin’s Law comes into play. Besides, with so many people throwing the Nazi word around like Tom Brady during a playoff game, it’s better to try some fresh references.)

This raises more than a few questions, of course, not the least of which is what happens if someone gets vaccinated and it doesn’t take. Getting a passport saying you’ve gotten the poke means nothing if you can still contract the disease and spread it. Aside from a boon for medical liability attorneys, such a scenario doesn’t help anyone, but opens people up to a lot of hurt.

Then, there are those who are unable to get the vaccine due to pre-existing conditions. These cases may be rare, but they do exist. How would that impact the whole “you need to get a vaccine passport to do anything” approach? Plus, since we’re dealing with pre-existing conditions, how can the Pro-Passport Posse reconcile this position with what is likely their support for Obamacare? And since this is the government getting involved in personal medical decision, how will the pro-baby death movement react?

Spoiler Alert: they can’t square that circle, and they won’t even try. They’ll just tell you it needs to be done because shut up.

The fact some dude in the Midwest can think up these potential drawbacks when our elected officials haven’t should be concerning regardless of your position on the vaccine passport idea. And it’s not like these drawbacks are too obscure or preposterous to consider. They should be front and center and, dare I say, addressed without mockery, shaming, coercion, or undue oppression by government or Leftists. The fact the self-professed “Party of Science” can’t even acknowledge the potential downfalls of its approach isn’t a good sign.

Plus, there’s this whole personal liberty thing to consider. As much as I can see the general good of getting a COVID-19 vaccine, it should remain a choice because not everyone is me. I would rather take my chances contracting COVID and respect another person’s agency than to force that person to forcibly conform. It’s in my best interest to take precautions, but it’s also in my best interest to let others attempt to come to the same conclusion. It’s the same reason I still wear masks and wore a seatbelt before it became illegal to drive without one: enlightened self-interest. If someone else doesn’t see things the same way, so what? Last time I checked, life was a terminal condition. Well, there was this one guy…I think he was a Jewish carpenter or something.

Anyway, the point is not everyone is going to dance to the tune you play, so you either need to convince others to shake their respective booties or accept it. Trying to force people to do the Macarena because you like it shows a) you care more about personal power than the good of the collective, and b) you have crappy taste in music. Vaccine passports work along the same lines, including the crappy taste in music. The fact so many Leftists are on-board with the idea to the point of punitive enforcement against those who don’t agree is a no-go for me. The thing I’ve found with Leftists is they will try to force agreement when they lack the ability to persuade others to agree. Although it’s a lot less work, it’s going to guarantee pushback from parties that might have been persuaded otherwise.

In the meantime, don’t forget to celebrate the one year anniversary of “two weeks to slow the spread”!