Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

To all of you from all of, well, me, I hope you have a Merry Christmas, Happy Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Kickin’ Kwanza, Fabulous Festivus, Cool Yule, a Spectacular Solstice, or for those who don’t celebrate anything this time of year, happy Sunday.

And for a number of people who just so happen not to be us, Congress gave them a very generous holiday bonus to the tune of, oh, $1.7 trillion. It was part of an omnibus spending bill whisking its way to President Joe Biden’s desk as of this writing, where there is no doubt he will sign it. Where the doubt lies is whether he’ll sign it in pen or purple crayon.

Another issue not in doubt is your favorite blogger is going to cover it this week. And I will, too!

omnibus spending bill

What the Left thinks it means – a necessary spending bill that helps America and Americans

What it really means – a bill so full of pork Jews and Muslims can’t partake of it for religious reasons

In my lifetime, Congress has always been the home of big spenders, as the National Debt Clock continues to show. More on that later, but I wanted to give you an idea of the numbers we’re dealing with here before giving more details. Plus, it will give you a chance to get a stiff drink or fifty to steel your nerves.

First, let’s dig into the details. Thanks to Senator Rand Paul and Congressman Chip Roy, we have an idea of just what Leftists were telling us were vital expenditures necessary to keep the government from shutting down. Here are a few examples.

– $4.5 billion in COVID Economic Injury Disaster Grants to people who weren’t eligible to get them in the first place

– $1.7 billion for upkeep of federal office buildings not currently in use

– $140 million in COVID funds used to build a spa

– $31.5 million in COVID funds to buy luxury cars

– $3 million on watching ‘roided-up hamsters fight

– $2.1 million to encourage Ethiopians to wear shoes

– $1.1 million to teach mice to binge drink (could have just sent them to college)

– $69 million in overpayments to government contractors for a terminated contract

– $77 million in mismanaged and untracked fuel purchases by the State Department

And so on and so on.

Granted, you could make an argument for some of the spending ($3 million to build a Gandhi museum, almost $500 million to redevelop our hard cider industry, $200,000 for radio spots telling drivers to stop at railroad crossings), but most of it is USDA Certified Lean Bullshit. Out of all the bad financial decisions that makes Arthur Andersen look like Warren Buffett, possibly the worst was almost $120,000 going towards…and I wish I was making this up…a grant to research whether Thanos could actually snap his fingers while wearing the Infinity Gauntlet.

The short answer? No. My answer? No, because Thanos is a fucking fictional character.

Where is that stiff drink?

Okay, I’m ready to continue.

Remember when Ukrainian President and Vogue photo subject Volodymyr Zelensky recently told Puddin’ Head Joe he would need more money? Well, surprise surprise surprise, the omnibus spending bill has nearly $45 billion in aid earmarked for Ukraine. And that’s on top of the $68 billion we’ve already given them in 2022. For the math challenged out there, that will be in the neighborhood of $113 billion.

Of course Leftists and some self-describedreal conservatives” tell us this money is essential and if we don’t agree, we’re anti-Ukraine and, thus, anti-American. In fact, to them it’s a no-brainer. After all, if we fund the Ukrainians well enough, they’ll beat the Russians and hinder their ability to influence the world

No. That’s really what they believe.

And if it hadn’t been for 18 Senate Republicans voting with Senate Democrats and two Independents in favor of the omnibus bill, we might not be having this conversation. As of this writing, only one of these 14 asshats, Mitt Romney of Utah, has even attempted to explain his reasoning.

Put simply, the Senate Republican support was a no-brainer because no brains went into their votes.

Bartender, hit me!

Now, for the fun part. All of this spending is being done without being in a budget. Since 1996, the federal government has been spending money through Continuing Resolutions (basically, an IOU Congress writes to itself promising to spend more money without any rhyme or reason) or…drum roll please…omnibus spending bills. The reason is simple: no budget means no budget limits. I’ve seen inebriated sailors with more restraint than Congress.

Speaking of inebriation…bartender!

Let me lay my cards on the table here. I’m not a fan of omnibus spending bills, not just the ones Puddin’ Head Joe will sign. Congress has a spending problem, and omnibus spending bills are blank checks backed up with the promise of professional liars that they’ll pay it back with interest.

By the way, $475 billion of the omnibus bill is for interest on the national debt.

Yeah, we’re never going to see a balanced budget anytime soon, not when it’s so easy to pass spending bills that have no fiscal strings attached.

Even if you’re in favor of the bill, you’re going to have a hard time convincing me spending any money on Thanos research, luxury cars, or building a spa advances anything in the national interest. Personal interests, sure, but national? Give me a fucking break!

Speaking of which, I’d better take a break from drinking long enough to wrap this up.

The very fact supporters of the omnibus spending bill have to rely on faux patriotism, a backdrop of Ukraine fighting for freedom, and the idea the government has to stay open or things won’t get done should give us pause to drink…I mean think. As Americans struggle to make ends meet due to inflation being higher than Tommy Chong on Willie Nelson’s tour bus, our elected officials continue to make matters worse by making our money more worthless than an abstinence talk by Bill Clinton.

The sad thing is there’s nothing we can do about it. Aside from a wholesale house (and Senate) cleaning and starting over, we’re stuck paying for someone else getting a luxury car, thanks to Daddy Government. The sad truth is there are so many Democrats and Republicans, both elected and governed, who have no problem with the current state of affairs. After all, they’re not going to pay the tab; we are.

And with that, I bring this Lexicon entry to a close. Which is good timing because I’m about to passdkjladkahdfadjf;dajkl;

[Editor’s Note: We found Thomas slumped over his laptop after getting blackout drunk writing this piece. We cleaned up his entry and his computer as well as we could. We are giving him coffee intravenously in the hopes he’ll be awake in time for next week’s Lexicon.]

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

First, we had homophobia, which is the irrational fear/hatred of gay people (according to the Left). Next, we had transphobia, which is the irrational fear/hatred of trans people (also according to the Left). Now, thanks to the people at GLAAD, we have…dragphobia.

According to the…well, I repeat myself.

The latest phobia has roots in a group affiliated with the LGBTQPXBNOTHATISADIFFERENTBAFEWMORELETTERSADDEDEVERYWEEKCHECKBACKDAILYFORUPDATES community and a trend that seems to keep popping up: drag aficionados appearing in what some people consider inappropriate locations in front of all ages. Namely, where there are children congregating. And, well, some people don’t take too kindly to that.

Congratulations, kids. You got another phobia!

And I got another Lexicon entry!


What the Left thinks it means – the irrational fear or hatred of people in drag

What it really means – the real fear and hatred of Leftists trying to warp the younger generations into supporting the Left

If the Left is to be believed (and at this point, it’s a pretty safe bet they shouldn’t), hate speech of all kinds is on the rise, not just on Twitter, but in America. Gays, lesbians, trans people, bisexuals, queer, and now people in drag are all victims of this hate, and, dammit, we need to do something about it.

Like…Tweeting about it?

Or at least podcast about it like GLAAD did. Because as we all know the only way to fight hate is to put it on blast on social media! No need to even put on a pair of pants, or in some cases a garter belt that matches your wig and eye shadow as you prepare for Drag Finger Painting Day at the local preschool.

Okay, so that was a bit excessive. Drag queens haven’t held finger painting day at a preschool, mainly because the paint could get on their sequined dresses and ruin their nails. But if current trends continue, we are not that far away from this becoming a thing.

“But, Thomas, how do you know this is going to happen?” you might be asking. Others might be asking, “Why do you care about drag queens so much?” Still others might be asking, “Would you like fries with that?” Trust me, gentle reader, all will become evident in time.

The first question is easy to answer: it’s been done before successfully. The Left have a standard framework when they want to indoctrinate…I mean educate people.

1. Swing for the fences. Push for exactly what you want and see if you can get it. If not, move to step 2.

2. Find out which groups agree with you and work on a strategy to get more of that group to agree.

3. Introduce a step towards the primary goal that would appeal to that particular group and make it sound like it’s perfectly normal and right to agree.

4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 until enough people agree to sway public opinion (perceived or actual) towards normalizing the idea introduced in step 2.

5. Introduce the next step towards the final goal and repeat steps 1-4.

6. Repeat until you get what you want.

The Left did this with homosexuality and with the idea gender is fluid. Today, anyone who isn’t on board with gay men and women or think there are only two genders can get you “on the wrong side of history” as the Left likes to say. The Left is still in the early stages of getting trans people accepted as just one of the guys…or gals…or something, and it’s having some success.

Since this process works so well, why wouldn’t Leftists try it with drag?

To answer the second question, I really don’t care about drag queens on the whole. I don’t dig it, but I don’t judge anyone who does. Those who do drag and do it well are talented and often can fool the untrained eye. That’s how I met my first girlfriend, Tyrone.

But just like how drag artists use makeup and costuming to tone down elements that ruin the look, there are a number of people using drag as a cover for what they really want, which is apparently as many young boys as they can get their well-manicured hands on. These are the bad apples that are turning an adult activity into a poisonous applesauce.

I have known people who like to dress in drag, and underneath the make-up and clothing, they’re human beings. For that reason alone, I can’t cast a wide net as some. After all, there is Lady MAGA, a drag artist who was and may still be unabashedly a fan of Donald Trump. Granted, Lady MAGA is an exception rather than the rule, but there are bound to be others who quietly support Trump and the GOP or who don’t say anything because of what would happen to them if anyone found out they weren’t Leftists.

Only in Leftist America can someone be supported if they come out as gay, but be reviled for coming out as conservative.

Now, for the part that may get me some hate mail. Drag performances in and of themselves aren’t necessarily sexual in nature. They can be adult in nature, but that doesn’t make them sexual. Even when they get sexual in nature, that’s not automatically bad…when the target audience is fellow adults. When the target audience skews more towards eating boogers than eating caviar, that’s when members of the drag community crosses the line.

Take Drag Queen Story Hour, for example. Supporters say drag artists reading to children is a way to spark their imaginations and get them interested in reading. This approach has some merit, as children (and even some adults, like your humble correspondent) enjoy seeing colorful characters they recognize or like hanging out with them. Detractors say drag artists are trying to groom children into getting into drag, pedophilia, homosexuality, and other adult subjects they’re not intellectually or emotionally ready to understand yet. This approach also has merit, as children are impressionable and may try to imitate what they see and experience.

While both sides have points in their favors, there are still enough niggling points that I can’t support either. If a drag artist is reading The Very Hungry Caterpillar, it’s not necessarily an attempt to get your child into becoming the next RuPaul. If a drag artist is reading How To Get a Gerbil Out of Your Ass, that’s a different story altogether. For one, different creatures. But more importantly, different subject matter that wouldn’t be appropriate for m0st adults, let alone children.

Ah, there’s the vital concept: age-appropriate. Drag by its very nature is not age-appropriate for children because it requires a level of sophistication to understand and appreciate. Having it appear at events geared towards children is going to piss people off instead of fostering the aforementioned understanding and appreciation. Even if your goal really was just to get kids into reading, someone has to understand how it might be a shitty way of going about it.

Then, there are the “all ages” or “family friendly” drag shows. Both sides are guilty of mischaracterizing what goes on at drag shows. The anti-groomers want to make it sound like a significant number of these events actually involve children based on video footage of some of the more egregious examples. The pro-drag side want to make it sound like these events are family friendly and put the responsibility of children appearing at them on the parents. For those well-publicized events where drag artists are barely dressed around or actively encouraging lewd behavior from children in attendance, the only family friendly activities are those of the Mansons.

That quip would surely get me labeled as dragphobic and I would deeply care about how to respond to that…if I gave a fuck about what the GLAAD dipshits think about me. I neither fear nor hate drag artists, but I fear for their futures if the Left continues to sacrifice them to advance an ideological goal.

One of my Immutable Truths is “A movement’s worst enemy is the movement itself.” Right now, the worst enemies of the drag scene are the members who are using drag as a way to get close to children for sexual gratification. These are the ones getting all the attention and, thus, shaping the public image of what drag artists are like. Bad publicity may still be publicity, but it’s a letting-Joe-Biden-work-without-a-teleprompter level of horrible idea if the end goal is to get people not to care about drag.

And true to their core, GLAAD isn’t helping matters any by creating the dragphobia label. Drag artists, along with gays, lesbians, and trans people, don’t need GLAAD to help them gain acceptance. They need good PR, and GLAAD ain’t interested in that. They have an agenda to push like a drug dealer working straight commission, and they don’t care who gets hurt along the way, even if those being hurt are the people the organization are allegedly trying to help.

The truth is there are very few people who actually hate and/or fear drag. Most people on both sides of this issue are operating on a lack of knowledge, which is used to gin up an abundance of fear. Under those conditions, there can’t be understanding since there is no real trust between the sides. They are automatically conditioned to believe the worst in the other side because of what misinformation is getting released. To break this cycle, we need people to understand the issues and facts and then reach out with a genuine intent to fix the problems together. A pipe dream, perhaps, but it’s the only one that makes sense to me.

Oh, and as for that third question, I do want fries with that, and I hope you find use for your gender studies degree soon.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

After a week full of surprise twists (the #TwitterFiles exposing a lot more than anticipated), not-so-surprise twists (Leftists being wrong again about Twitter being dead), and some disappointing-but-not-surprising twists (Herschel Walker couldn’t cross the goal line to win the Georgia Senate runoff election against Raphael Warnock), we finally have a story worth discussing that doesn’t involve Elon Musk.

Brittney Griner is coming home!

Now, if you’re like me (and if you are I’m so very sorry), you have little or no idea who Brittney Griner is. I will admit I had to do a bit of digging to get the facts behind why her release is such a big deal, and I agree it is. Just not for the reason the Left wants us to believe it is.

Brittney Griner

What the Left thinks it means – a brave woman freed after being imprisoned in Russia for no reason

What it really means – a prisoner released solely due to the social justice hierarchy

When Joe Biden took over as President, I knew there would be some bad decisions coming down the pike. I mean, he picked Kamala Harris as Vice-President, a woman so unpopular with Democrats that I got the same number of delegates she did and I didn’t even run. Sure enough, there were no supply chain issues with Puddin’ Head Joe’s bad decisions, as they kept coming in like a LGBQT+ wrecking ball.

Even with incredibly low expectations, I knew somehow the Biden Administration would find a way to limbo under them with room to spare. And that’s exactly what we got with the Griner release.

Brittney Griner is a WNBA player who played in Russia during the off season (which is not that different from the regular WNBA season) and was detained after a search found vape cartridges with hash oil in them. Although what she had was legal in Arizona where Griner plays, it isn’t legal in Russia. As a result, she was sentenced to nine years in prison. Griner appealed the verdict, but was denied. Now, less than a year after she was arrested, Griner is free. A feel good story, right?

Yeaaaaah…not so much.

The terms of Griner’s release included a prisoner exchange for Viktor Bout, who just happens to be an arms dealer with the cute little nickname “the Merchant of Death.” Aside from the laundry list of activities for which he became infamous, he was also the inspiration for a Nicholas Cage movie. That alone should have kept him locked up indefinitely.

Then came Puddin’ Head Joe, who thought it was a good idea to trade Bout for Griner with the hopes of getting another American prisoner detained in Russia, former Marine Paul Whelan. Whelan has been detained since 2018 amid allegations of espionage. Although the charges seem a bit shaky, America has let him sit in a prison camp for far longer than Griner.

So, why are we getting excited over a WNBA player getting released in exchange for an arms dealer? A lot of it has to do with Griner’s identity. Not only is she a basketball player (that maybe 0.00000000001% of the population knew prior to her arrest), but she is black and a lesbian. In social justice terms, that’s practically a “Get Out of Gulag Free” Card! Throw in the fact she lobbied the WNBA to not play the National Anthem during the 2019 season to protest police brutality, and you might as well make her a Leftist Saint. You know, if they believed in that sort of thing.

Even if you strip away all of that, anybody with a lick of sense can see trading an arms dealer for a basketball player while leaving a retired Marine on the table is a bad idea. For one, it’s a fucking arms dealer! For another, it shows the world just what America values these days. If you’re an albino transsexual paraplegic Inuit midget with AIDS, you’ll get the Biden Administration working around the clock to get you home. If you’re a white guy, well…let’s just say you’re going to have to wait a while.

Like, say, the 43rd of Never.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but Bout is also a Russian fucking arms dealer! Now, who are we currently in c0nflict with on the world states? If you said Russia, congratulations! You’ve been paying attention. And if you’ve been paying attention, you can also see where this is going, but for you Leftists reading this, let me spell it out for you: Joe Biden just gave Vladimir Putin an arms dealer, all while funneling money to Ukraine…who is currently fighting Putin and Russia.

Either Griner is one hell of a basketball player, or Puddin’ Head Joe got played. And I think you know which way I’m leaning on that one.

Regardless of how you feel about Griner’s detainment (I think it’s bullshit) and release (it’s great she’s coming back home), the fact the only way it makes sense is through the lens of social justice should be concerning. We should not be making these kinds of major decisions through social justice because of the way social justice operates.

Leftists have devised a hierarchy of oppression through which they view different scenarios to determine how to react. Put another way, it’s a checklist to see how oppressed you are based on superficial factors like gender or race. Check enough boxes and, voila, you’re oppressed! But wait! There’s more! Not only will the hierarchy of oppression tell you if you’re oppressed, but it will show you how oppressed you are! And if your oppression score is lower than someone else’s, the other person gets the support because…oppression!

This makes Calvinball look like chess.

Needless to say, when you prioritize oppression by who allegedly has more of it, some people are still going to feel oppressed which doesn’t help the situation any. Then again, if Leftists were critical thinkers, we might not have Puddin’ Head Joe as President.

As it stands, Brittney Griner is coming home to a hero’s welcome while Russia gets a fucking arms dealer back and a former Marine remains in custody. Even before now, the Left has been writing pieces damning America for various aspects of our prison system or why our government should be supporting Griner because patriotism or what it says about America’s current social issues or how black women are treated in prison. Expect this trend to continue with more frequency and ever higher decibel levels.

But always keep in the back of your mind the Leftists cheering at Griner’s freedom have given zero fucks about Paul Whelan, as evidenced by a) how they haven’t talked about him before now, and b) how slowly the Biden Administration has been working towards getting him home. But when social justice overrules geopolitics and common sense, you’re bound to find yourselves in situations where the obvious answer gets rejected in favor of a worse deal than the Minnesota Vikings trading for Hershel Walker.

Oh, and one last thing. Viktor Bout is a fucking arms dealer.

Damn. Now I need some of the good eggnog…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Yes, it’s another post about Twitter. In my defense, though, the current Twitter drama is like being in the Mob or on Brokeback Mountain: every time I think I’m out, they pull me back in and then fuck me. Or something like that

The New York Times and other leftist media sources recently reported an increase in the number of hate speech incidents on Twitter since Elon Musk took over. Their source was a study conducted by several groups, including the Anti-Defamation League, academia, and the Center for Countering Digital Hate, all pointing to what they’re trying to push as an epidemic of hate. Their solution? Get another COVID booster.

Actually, the Left has a few different options on the table from having the government oversee Twitter to investigating Musk’s purchase to leaving the platform altogether to staying and fighting as Alyssa “I’m Definitely Not the Boss” Milano suggested. In other words, they don’t have a clear strategy, but they have a clear idea of what hate speech is.

And, as we’re about to see, they’re completely wrong. Again.

hate speech

What the Left thinks it means – hateful speech that is not protected by the First Amendment and should be illegal

What it really means – hateful speech that is protected by the First Amendment, but not necessarily by Twitter

I’m going to be honest with you at the start. Neither side has this issue completely right as it pertains to Twitter. As a private company, Twitter can set the rules as to what it allows on the platform, and the First Amendment need not apply. After all, the first five words of it are “Congress shall make no law” and last time I checked Twitter isn’t Congress. Although I’ve found an increasing number of twits on both…

At the core of the issue is how hate is defined. Since hate speech first came into the public lexicon, hate has evolved from racist, sexist, and generally unacceptable commentary to anything that hurts a Leftist’s fee-fees. Prior to Musk buying Twitter, the Left had a field day getting accounts nuked for Terms of Service violations more spurious than the credibility of Media Matters.

That’s because the Left has friends in high places, namely the moderation staff. When you get to define what constitutes hate speech, you can justify any moderation invoked under it. With the moderation staff at Twitter leaning so far left the only parts of their body that got sunburned were on the right, let’s just say they were fairly liberal with their definition, and definitely illiberal with their enforcement.

But, remember, it’s Elon Musk creating more hate speech on Twitter.

Actually, the hate speech has been there; it just hasn’t been called such. Like the “Summer of Love” in 2020, the Left crafted a tidy, yet wholly unbelievable narrative. And when confronted with the flood of conservative Twitter accounts going down, their response was the same: they shouldn’t have broken the rules Twitter, a private company, created.

All while telling a Colorado baker to bake the cake, I might add.

Fast forward to, oh, now. The Left no longer defends the private company because the rules are starting to apply to the people who used to be the ones who made up the rules as they went along. Although there are some inconsistencies with how the rules got applied, the fact the Left got a small taste of what conservatives endured for years isn’t entirely unwelcome, at least to me. Still, Musk should work on ensuring the rules are fair across the board, and that starts with the moderation team.

Meanwhile, back in the “hate speech is on the rise on Twitter” camp, they’ve run into a bit of a problem: the numbers don’t seem to match what is going on, or at the very least what the Left says is going on. But why let a little thing like reality get in the way of a good two minutes hate, right?

Which brings us back to what constitutes hate speech because, well…the people making the claims of a rise of hate speech on Twitter aren’t exactly forthcoming with their methodology. Although they cite the number of “slurs” being posted, they never provide context. Granted, there are few instances where calling someone a racial, sexual, or other type of slur would be fine, the fact there are some and the lack of transparency of the internal mechanics of the study being promoted as gospel should be enough to make even the most rabid Leftist pause.

Should be, but doesn’t apparently.

This is the time to push back against the Left’s narrative by asking hard questions. How is “hate speech” being defined? What was considered “slurs”? How were these slurs counted? Was context considered in the determination? Do we really need any more Tyler Perry movies?

Although these questions (especially that last one) will remain unanswered most likely, there is one thing that isn’t in dispute: the First Amendment protects hate speech. No matter how many Twitter Leftists repeat the idea it’s not, the US Supreme Court has already ruled it is. And before the Leftists decry this as a racist decision by a right-wing court, Justices Kennedy, Sotomayor, Kagan, and…the Notorious RBG concurred.


Even if you disagree with the ruling, and with basic Constitutional principles for that matter, the concept of hate speech online and in general just doesn’t work without understanding intent. In most cases, it’s clear, but if you’re just looking for words and not context, there will be a lot of hits that should have been misses. Or Ms. if you’d prefer.

Without that added context, you’re more likely to find a cost-effective government agency than you are to find a consistent and logical conclusion. You might as well use a blindfold, a dartboard, and several adult beverages to confirm whether something is hate speech. In other words, a more sensible method than we’re using now.

What the Left fails to understand, either purposely or…oh, who are we kidding, is how to combat hate speech. What they want to do is remove it from the public square so no one can see or hear it. All that does is make it more attractive for those looking to push the envelope more than a postal employee working straight commission. It’s the forbidden aspect that makes it so attractive, as Tipper Gore and the Parents Music Resource Center found out way back in the 1980s. Nice to know Leftist still can’t learn from history, though.

The other and ultimately preferable way to fight hate speech is with…brace yourselves…more speech. By letting assholes spout off, they get their feelings off their chests and we can respond by not being assholes. That, and we can find out where the assholes are and know who not to send Christmas cards to, so…win-win! For the most part, I think Musk falls into this camp, which is a good thing for online speech all the way around.

Not that it will convince the Left to stop being hall monitors. Just look at how they treat each other on Mastodon! They need to feel they’re in control, which is why they’re trying to paint Twitter as a cesspool where only racists, sexists, homophobes, transphobes, and other shitty people congregate. That’s why they have to invent a scandal, especially considering their predictions about Twitter going the way of Kanye West’s future endeavors have yet to occur. (Amazing how the same folks who say the Earth is going to end in 10 years as they did in the 80s can’t get predictions right, isn’t it?)

So, I would take the studies showing an increase in hate speech on Twitter with a grain of salt…the size of Mount Everest.