Month: January 2022

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Once again, the Lexicon Gods came through in a big way this week! There was enough material for two whole installments, but one of those can keep for a while. This week, though, there was one that practically begged me to write about it.

And, no, it’s not the voices in my head. At least, not this time.

The two worst kept secrets in Washington, DC, became public knowledge this week. One involves an old man taking actions in preparation of the impending Republican obliteration of the Democrats in the 2022 midterm elections, and the other involves Supreme Court Justice Steven Breyer. After days of speculation about whether Justice Breyer was going to retire fueled by the media, he finally came out and confirmed he was, much to the chagrin of the tens and tens of his fans.

As a result, President Joe Biden may get a Supreme Court nominee in the near future. During the 2020 Presidential lock-in…I mean campaign, Biden promised to appoint the first African-American woman to the Supreme Court because…reasons? Leftists are praising the decision and pushing the President to make good on his promise because it will add, and I’m not making this up, “new lived experiences” to the High Court.

Hanging curve ball, meet rhetorical bat.

lived experiences

What the Left thinks it means – cultural insights that are not usually reflected in positions of power

What it really means – a word salad designed to give gravitas to someone just for breathing regularly

Let me cut to the chase here: everyone has lived experiences simply by living. Last time I checked, everybody was different, from genetic code on up. As a result, each life experience will be different due to parenting, environment, social and economic status, and so on. So, to make some people’s lived experiences more valuable than others, especially when it comes to political appointments, is folly.

Which is why the Left keeps doing it.

No matter who the President appoints, there is going to be scrutiny down to the microscopic level. Anything from legal briefs to favorite brand of cheese puffs will be brought up and scandalized by political operatives wanting to take down the nominee. Oh, sure, some will take a hard look at seemingly controversial topics done for the sake of looking smarter than the Senator actually is, but most of the inquiries will come down to “gotcha” moments. That’s why the party that controls the Senate does its best to coach nominees on how to avoid these moments.

In short, give vague, non-specific responses to specific questions, smile a lot, and try to look like you own the place.

Unfortunately, that typically works. In the past few decades, people who could have been good Justices have been scrapped while others who wonder which foot goes into his or her legal briefs first get by without a hitch. In some cases, even clear conflicts of interest aren’t enough to derail the nomination.

Now, what does any of this have to do with “lived experiences”? It’s a tool used to deflect any criticism, legitimate or otherwise, from the nominee in question. Within the “diversity is our strength” crowd, there are two fundamental principles: 1) white males are overrepresented, and 2) the only way to correct this is to overrepresent non-white people.

Don’t look at me. It doesn’t make sense to me either.

Even if you’re not a white male, the Left will find a way to discount your lived experiences if it’s inconvenient to their cause. Look at how the Left treats Dr. Ben Carson, Candace Owens, Tulsi Gabbard, and too many other people to mention, past and present. For some reason, their lived experiences aren’t valid, while the lived experiences of people like Vice President Kamala Harris or former President Barack Obama are sacrosanct. Then again, maybe the lived experiences of sleeping your way up the political ladder or going to private schools without anyone ever challenging you are vital to this country taking steps in the right direction, but I’m going to need a lot more convincing before I jump on the bandwagon.

And a few stiff drinks.

Now, consider the Left’s support of identity politics as it pertains to lived experiences. What happens if someone self-identifies as a non-white male? They probably didn’t have the same lived experiences as an actual non-white male, but in their minds they have. And unless they want to be hypocritical bigots, they have to accept this identification.

Now imagine if someone like Mitch McConnell, Donald Trump, or Ted Cruz did that. The sheer sound of Leftist heads exploding would be epic!

As it the fact lived experiences is about as useless a term as the Left has devised. Not only is it based off the absurd notion one person’s life experiences are somehow superior to others, but it creates a caste system based on it. The fact it’s being used as a bizarre Leftist litmus test for Supreme Court Justices is as unhinged and laughable as you can get. Like Joy Reid, only dumber.

But it’s all to hide any deficiencies in any Leftist darling’s resume when it comes to the actual job of the Supreme Court: to interpret the law and the Constitution. Nothing else. And in the end, as long as whomever is nominated has a grasp on that, I won’t raise too much of a fuss. If she turns out to be someone who couldn’t count to ten with the Bill of Rights as a cheat sheet, then I’ll have problems. And none of it will be related to her background or what life experience she brings to the table. That is ultimately irrelevant, as it should be from the jump. Anyone who says differently is selling something, namely a judge or lawyer who would make Lionel Hutz look like Earl Warren.

And not only is Hutz a horrible lawyer, but he’s a flipping cartoon.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As hard as it may be to believe, I try to vary my subject matter for the Leftist Lexicon because I owe it to you, the readers. I mean, there are only so many times I can say “Joe Biden fucked up” before it gets stale and you start looking for other content. That’s why I stopped paying attention to a lot of media: too much echo, if you know what I mean.

And speaking of echo chambers, public schools are being turned into one such chamber, thanks to generous involuntary donations from taxpayers like you. At least, that was until recently when several parents looked into what was being taught at their children’s schools and lodged complaints. In response, the Left started targeting such parents for ridicule and harassment for daring to exert what they’ve derisively called parents’ rights. Even though Joe Biden sucks more than a Dyson at the center of a black hole, we can put off that discussion for a while to focus on this issue.

parents’ rights

What the Left thinks it means – a movement by uneducated/uninformed parents designed to undermine public education and prevent progress

What it really means – a movement by parents who are taking an active interest in public education

I know being a public school teacher isn’t an easy job because I went to public school and I know what kind of fresh hell awaits each new school year. Combined with long hours, lack of gratitude for putting up with the little hellions parents send their way, the lack of pay, and bureaucratic bullshit, it’s a wonder there are still people willing to be teachers anym0re. And in the nearly 35 years since I graduated, things have only gotten worse. And I’m not just talking about teenage boys addicted to Axe Body Spray, either!

Something that hasn’t changed is the ideological leanings of most teachers. They tend to lean to the left more than a baseball player trying to predict when the other team is going to try to pick him off at first base. The thing is they’ve gotten bolder or less able (or willing) to hide those leanings. Hell, there are even teachers who post videos bragging about how they’re indoctrinating students into thinking like a Leftist. Just like Jeffrey Epstein, Leftists prefer younger targets.

Too soon?

For a number of decades, the Left has had free rein in this practice due in large part to a little legal term called in loco parentis, which means “In Crazy Parents” in Latin. Actually, it means “in place of a parent.” Under this concept, teachers act as parents while the students’ actual parents are off at work, at home, or in some cases heading out to get a pack of smokes and not returning even after three years. When used responsibly, it can reinforce parental and societal expectations about how to be a good citizen. When abused, it can create friction between parents and children in the name of ideological progress.

And Leftists have been treating in loco parentis like Ike treated Tina.

Now that actual parents are starting to look at what pretend parents are doing, there’s a King Kong sized monkey wrench in the Left’s plans. And in their usual intelligent and mature way, the Left decided the way to address the problem is to…go after the parents.

Because they’re that fucking brilliant. And by brilliant, I mean stupid.

But it’s all in line with Leftist thinking. There are a couple of ideas at work here. First, the Left feels everyone should be a ward of the State in one form or another. Anything the Left can make mandatory under the watchful eye of the State (i.e. them), the better it is for them, so they strive to make everything possible a function of the government. You know, like…oh I don’t know…public education.

As a result of this, it feeds into another Leftist idea: they are the smartest people in any room. That means, surprise surprise, they think they know what’s best for us. And anyone who doesn’t agree with them is automatically stupidheaded assfaces, which means the stupidheaded assfaces are fair game for ridicule, derision, and all around dickish behavior. It also opens up the Left’s playbook to rely on a logical fallacy called appeal to authority. Basically, it’s “because X said so” with X being anyone the Left thinks is an expert on the subject matter at hand. In this case, teachers.

This is where the Left gets it exactly wrong. Parents may not have the educational pedigree of a teacher, but they do still teach. In fact, for the first 3-5 years of a child’s life, it’s the parents who lay the groundwork for teachers to do their jobs. Assuming teachers will do a better job than parents is a fool’s errand because a) kids will always remember what their parents teach them, and b) a lot of today’s teachers suck ass. And unfortunately I can only vouch for about 85% of teachers taking that figuratively.

Therein lies the issue. Teachers and parents have to work together to get the best outcomes for the students. When there is friction, like, say…oh I don’t know…calling parents’ rights racist and ignorant…the end result isn’t good for anyone, least of all the students. That’s where the Left goes astray on this issue. Instead of welcoming parents as they take an active interest in their children’s education, the Left wants to keep curricula hidden behind a bureaucratic barrier so parents can’t find out what their children are learning, if anything at all.

Now, here’s where the Left’s educational plans backfire. Without transparency, Leftist parents won’t know what their children are learning and, thus, can’t supplement that learning with in-home lessons. And as with most families, what you learn in the home is often more powerful than what you learn in the classroom.

The Left can’t accept parents’ rights as legitimate because it permits people other than them to have a say in a lesson plan. When your future relies heavily on recruiting young ones, excluding the parents makes it tougher to accomplish that goal. So, great going, Leftists!

As for the parents on the forefront of the parents’ rights movement, make sure you’re ready to fight for a while. Not only will the Left not give ground easily, but if your entire fight is limited to schools not teaching one subject like CRT, you’re going to ultimately give up your children to the Leftist machine. Yes, I’m talking about making an active investment in your children beyond buying them phones and video games. Taking interest in your children’s studies helps to form bonds that transcend the classroom and you might even learn a thing or to in the process. That’s how Common Core “math” got uncovered, after all.

I know parents’ rights aren’t as sexy a topic as saying Joe Biden is a fuck-up, but they’re monumentally important nonetheless. If you believe the children are our future, it’s up to you to be a good role model and fighter for the best education they can get.

Either that or you’re listening to too much Whitney Houston.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Life is full of choices. What do you want for dinner? What car should I buy next? Ginger or Mary Ann? Well, thanks to the Left, we now have another choice.

We can have a filibuster in the US Senate, or we can have democracy.

This choice came about due to Leftists attempting to push through voting reforms, but ran into a little snag called Senate rules. To sway public opinion, Leftists are now saying we cannot preserve both democracy and the filibuster in the Senate.

Of course, there’s a bit more to the story. And by a bit, I mean a whole fucking lot.

democracy or the filibuster

What the Left thinks it means – the decision between making it easier for people to vote and retaining a Senate rule that doesn’t make sense

What it really means – a false choice between something we don’t have and something the Left doesn’t like right now

Let’s deal with the elephant in the room first: we are not a democracy and never have been. We are a constitutional republic. Granted, we’ve been using democracy and republic interchangeably, but there are clear differences that prevent the two from being synonyms. First, they’re spelled differently. Second, and probably more important, a democracy doesn’t require electing officials because the people have the power to decide the outcome of matters. A republic does.

Granted, Leftists are going to say this is a semantic difference, but it’s really not. It’s like saying a chihuahua and an elephant are the same because they’re both four-legged animals. But, as anyone who has tried to housebreak an elephant will tell you, they’re not the same. Regardless, the fact remains we don’t have a democracy, thus half of the choice is false on its face. You know, like Nancy Pelosi’s face?

The other half of the decision is a lot less technical, but no less important to understand and appreciate. The best way to describe it is a higher threshold than a simple majority and it’s usually reserved for matters of high importance. That way a crackpot majority can’t ram through self-serving laws merely by having a few more crackpots than the opposition. It’s a useful tool for the minority party in the Senate because the mere threat of one is often enough to take a piece of legislation back to the negotiating table.

Of course, that happening these days is rarer than how Dracula takes his steak. Neither major party has been able to count on having the minimum 60 votes to overcome a filibuster threat for several years now, but instead of trying to craft actual bipartisan legislation, they dig in deeper and get nothing done.

Which is fine by me, by the way.

But it’s not fine by Leftists. They have big plans to turn America into the socialist shithole like they’ve always wanted. Due to the current makeup of the Senate, Democrats have 48 seats and Republicans have 50 seats, with two Independent Senators caucusing with the Democrats. To force a tie, every Democrat and the two Independents have to vote in a bloc, thus allowing the President of the Senate (Vice President Kamala Harris in this case) to cast the deciding vote.

Enter Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, two Democrats who have gotten the ire of Leftists for…not wanting to get rid of the filibuster. Just remember, Leftists are free thinkers. Just ask them. But, as the saying goes, you get what you pay for. In this case, even free is too expensive.

Behind the rhetoric, there is some serious deception going on and the Left hopes you’ll forget all about it and support making the filibuster as obsolete as Ralph Northam’s future with the NAACP. For this next section, we’re going to assume the Left is correct about America being a democracy.

The first Senate filibuster in American history occurred in 1837, which means it has been in existence for 185 years. Also, Senate Democrats used or threatened a filibuster over 300 times under President Donald Trump. And it’s only become a threat to democracy now? Sorry, but I’m throwing the brown bullshit flag on this one. The only reason the Left wants us to think it’s a problem now is because they don’t get to use it like they did when Democrats were in the minority in the Senate.

It’s almost as if the Left aren’t trying to protect democracy so much as they’re trying to protect Democrat-acy.

Now that we’ve entertained the Left’s “America is a democracy” fantasy, we must go back and deal with the real world. One of the reasons the Left is hellbent for leather to get rid of the filibuster is because they claim Republicans will get rid of it when they’re in the majority. Even though…they didn’t. In fact, Mitch “Old Age Mutant Senator Turtle” McConnell bucked President Trump when the latter wanted the Senate to do away with it. And to date, Republicans have not attempted to eliminate the filibuster, although they did render it toothless when it came to judicial nominees. Still, a weakened filibuster under certain conditions isn’t the same as eliminating it altogether, which is what the Left wants now.

But as many a Leftist has yet to fully understand, political power is always in flux. Democrats may control the Senate now, but they may not after Election Day. The very thing they want to eliminate will become another tool to use when they’re out of power. Then, I guarantee Leftists will sing a totally different tune. How can I be so sure?

Because New York Senator Chuck “Amy’s Funnier Relative” Schumer sang that tune a few years ago when he defended the filibuster. If you doubt me, look up Senator Tom Cotton’s recent speech in the Senate where he quoted Sen. Schumer directly. The only thing consistent about the Left is their inconsistency, that’s for sure.

Although I see a need to reform the filibuster, it’s not the existential threat the Left makes it out to be. It’s a safeguard against bad decisions, of which there are plenty in Washington, DC, like the effort to get rid of it. Funny how that works, isn’t it?

There is no choice between democracy and the filibuster to be had. Since we don’t have the former, we can keep the latter with no issues.

Except for Leftists, who don’t have issues so much as subscriptions.


Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

In case you were wondering what holiday follows New Year’s this year, it’s not MLK Day; it’s 1/6 Day.

Over the past year, Leftists have made so much hay over what happened a year ago they can keep John Kerry fed for the winter. While most Americans have put 1/6 in the past, the Left made it a focal point for a good chunk of their rhetoric since it happened, whether it be calling the protesters “domestic terrorists” or lamenting how close we came to “the end of democracy.”

Eat up, Mr. Kerry. And while you’re eating, let me give you something to read.

1/6

What the Left thinks it means – an on-going threat to our country, proof at how radical the right wing has gotten

What it really means – a date that lives in infamy only because the Left keeps resuscitating it

In the grand scheme of things, 1/6 was one of those times when some of our fellow Americans acted like a drunk uncle airing dirty laundry during a family reunion (or spilling all the iced tea, if you want to maintain the reunion imagery, or spilling all the Twisted Tea, if you want to maintain the drunk uncle imagery). These knuckleheads broke some laws and deserve punishment, no question.

Then, the Left overplayed their hand. Surprising, right? They started trying to dox anyone they could find related to the 1/6 incident, even if the people they found were literally obeying the law. On top of that, the lawful and the lawless were lumped together and called domestic terrorists. Since then, the Left has stoked fears of another 1/6 happening because…well, they haven’t really figured out the reason, but they’re sure it’s real!

If you thought “Russia Russia Russia” was overplayed, you aren’t ready for “1/6 was an act of domestic terrorism” 12-inch club remix.

Here’s the funny thing (one of several related to the topic, I assure you). What most of the 1/6 protesters did is…drumroll please…protected speech. The First Amendment covers a lot of ground, but one of the parts involves protest, i.e. redressing grievances with the government. You can disagree with the reasoning behind the rally/march/Congressional invasion, at the heart of it was an attempt to get government to answer a question about the 2020 Election. Thus, it was a legitimate form of speech, an argument the Left used throughout 2019 and 2020 to cover the riots…I mean protests related to Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, and other popular Leftist causes. However, once the line between speech and illegal activity gets crossed, the First Amendment no longer applies.

Apparently the Left hasn’t gotten the memo, but now they have, they’re applying it to the 1/6 protesters. Granted, they’re applying it wrong, but hey. Meh for effort, I guess.

While this is going on within the Beltway, most of the rest of America has moved on, which is not what the Left wants. They need us to be afraid (oh, and snitch on anyone they tell us is a threat because you don’t want QAnon people in your neighborhood, right), so they need to keep the fear cranked up to eleven because, well, it’s one higher. This, in turn, has created the steady stream of misinformation combined with an unhealthy amount of paranoia. You know, like the media do with COVID? Given how they treat the unvaccinated like a leper at a buffet, they don’t even have to change the template that much. Yay, recycling! And because of this, the Left calls themselves real patriots, but I seem to see they’re wearing kilts when they do.

This is a reference to the “No True Scotsman” logical fallacy in case you didn’t know. Basically, the No True Scotsman fallacy tries to create division by stating nobody who believes X would act or think in a certain manner. The idea is to make the undesirable person and/or idea, well, undesirable. What it does, however, is create a false standard that the “undesirable” will never be able to attain because he/she will never meet the accuser’s criteria. Kobiashi Maru, anyone?

Through this intellectual and literal dishonesty, the Left has created what they consider to be the perfect trap to snatch up people who understand what happened on 1/6 and reject the Left’s reality on the matter. But just like James T. Kirk in the aforementioned Kobiashi Maru reference, there is always a way to avoid the trap. With Kirk, it was cheating. With people like us, it’s rejecting the Left’s entire argument on its face, which is really easy to do.

I’m going to repeat what I said on the topic about a year ago, so I apologize ahead of time, but there is a major point that really needs to be reiterated to put the Left on their heels. First off, calling 1/6 an insurrection is like calling Al Gore a climate expert; the Venn Diagram shows no link between the two. The purpose of an insurrection is to overthrow the existing government, and who was President on 1/6? Donald Trump. If there was an insurrection on 1/6 and the perpetrators were Trump supporters, logic dictates the insurrectionists would be trying to overthrow the man who allegedly inspired them to try to overthrow him. Either Trump is an idiot (which would make Hillary Clinton look even worse than she already does), or the Leftist narrative is wrong at best, dishonest at worst.

Let’s just say I’m betting the house on the latter.

The more lenience you can give to the Left is the protesters tried to disrupt the duties of the Electoral College in certifying Joe Biden’s election to the Presidency. At best, the worst of the disrupters caused a slight delay in the process, and the results were certified the way the Left wanted them to be. Property damage, trespassing, vandalism? All crimes that should be prosecuted, and given how quickly it’s going, we might be celebrating a 25th anniversary of 1/6 before we get done with the legal proceedings.

And justice still won’t be done.

I’m no Trump sycophant, but I have a few questions about 1/6 that the Left don’t want answered. Which, of course, means they’re questions that should be answered, if for no other reason than to get the full picture. The events of 1/6 weren’t completely lawful, but they weren’t the 9/11-times-a-gazillion the Left wants us to believe they were. Fortunately, most people have moved on, which leaves Leftists bereft of an actual reason to continue paying attention to 1/6.

Chew on that, Mr. Kerry.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The world of football lost a great man, as former Oakland Raiders coach, NFL commentator, and namesake of a long line of football games John Madden passed away. To those who knew him (and many more who didn’t), it was heartbreaking because we grew up watching or listening to his unique voice or playing one (or in my case, many) of his games. Losing someone so well-known is bad enough, but a handful of Leftists decided to take the opportunity of Madden’s passing to criticize his role in what they felt was racism, danger to public health, and other social ills.

That’s right, kids. The Left went after football.

Now, it’s personal.

football

What the Left thinks it means – a violent sport rife with racism, social and economic inequity, and physical harm to the players

What it really means – a violent game that represents America better than the Left does

Now, for the people reading this in another country, I’m referring to American football, not the traditional football known elsewhere. Traditional football has its own set of issues, but I won’t get into them here. Mainly because I know all about football riots and I want to keep myself from being in the center of one in the near future.

Anyway, the Left attacking football isn’t exactly new. Since Colin “I Blew a Super Bowl Win and Became a Benchwarmer and All I Got Was a Lousy Netflix Special” Kaepernick turned his floundering football career into a full time racial grifting career, the Left has has its eyes on making the National Football League into the Now Fun for Leftists league, complete with safe spaces, penalties for not using the right pronouns, and scores based on how woke a team is.

For any Leftists reading this, these are not suggestions. Do not implement them. I was kidding.

Football by its very nature is violent. The purpose of the game is to score points by getting the football from one side of the field to the other while preventing the other team from doing the same. It’s Stratego with linebackers. Yet, within the violence there is artistry and intellectualism. It’s not just men pushing and clawing at other men. It’s seeing players using their minds and bodies to their utmost for the betterment of themselves and everyone else on the team. If you really think about it (and I have since I don’t have much of a social life), isn’t that America in a nutshell? When we are at our best, America utilizes its best and brightest to advance everyone.

And that’s why Leftists hate it so much.

In the hivemind of a Leftist, America is imperfect (which it is) and can only be improved through advancing Leftist ideas (which it can’t). To that end, the Left started working on football to remake it in their own image, and in some cosmetic ways they’ve succeeded. By adopting the Black Lives Matter narrative, you can’t go a weekend without seeing “End Racism” and “Black Lives Matter” on helmets, end zones, and commercials featuring current NFL stars. Although this is praised as forward-thinking, it’s never enough for the Left. Fortunately for them, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has a spine of Silly String and is willing to bend over to Leftist demands.

This is not to say all of the proposals being brought forward suck ass, even if the NFL is slower than Joe Biden massaging a young girl’s shoulder while he sniffs her hair in bringing them to the forefront. Within the past few years, the NFL has started taking concussions more seriously, which has been one of the major criticisms of the Leftists who used Madden’s death to scold football fans. There’s still a ways to go, but it’s not like the NFL has been stagnant as it was in the past.

But it’s still not enough for Leftists.

Regarding the racial issues brought up, football isn’t about racial bean-counting. It’s about finding the best people to play the positions. Minorities and women are finding their way onto coaching staffs and even into head coaching roles. Just like the Presidency, it’s only a matter of time before people of color and women are as common as a losing season for the Detroit Lions.

But it’s still not enough for Leftists.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see a pattern forming here? Oh, yeah, it’s that Leftists aren’t ever satisfied when you capitulate to their demands.

Although the Left’s complaints about football and John Madden’s role in the devaluation of minorities seem to come from a good place, let’s not forget these are some of the same asshats who thought housing COVID patients with the elderly was a good idea. So, needless to say, I’m taking their football complaints with an asteroid of salt. I’m half-convinced one of the reasons Leftists hate football is because they think the Electoral College has a football team.

Central to this whole matter is the Left feeling like it has to take up the cause for others. If only the players had a union…oh wait! They do! And this union has taken up the causes Leftists are just now inventing…I mean discovering. The funny thing is Leftists typically love unions, but in this case they’re discounting the players’ union altogether. Considering how many union reps happen to be black…well, it doesn’t take a genius to make the connection, so I’ll explain it slowly for the Leftists so they understand.

By disregarding the efforts of blacks to make the NFL better and assuming you speak for them makes you racist. And you can’t blame me for making that connection. These are your rules, kids, not mine.

I know the NFL has screwed a lot of conservative fans with its adoption of Leftist ideology, but it may be time to come back and help it find its way again. It’s possible to tweak the existing structure to allow for improvements while telling Leftists to go pluck a duck when they start virtue signalling on behalf of wealthy blacks. (Holy Twilight Zone, Batman!) Leave the signals on the field, Leftists, and let the players play. They are doing a lot more heavy lifting than just in the weight room, and it’s time we give them the respect they deserve and the encouragement they need to make their communities stronger. Screw politics and reward good behavior.

The funniest thing about this whole John Madden non-controversy is how quickly some Leftists condemned the man without knowing a thing about what he did to address their concerns well before Leftists decided to ruin football. Madden was a big proponent of concussion protocols back in the 1990s, featured many incredible athletes in the video games bearing his name, and understood the difficulties players face. Maybe it’s because he…you know…was a fucking coach instead of a scolding Leftist douchebag that couldn’t be bothered to do a few seconds of research on Google before spouting off?

Naaaaaaaaaah!