It wasn’t that long ago that I graduated from college. Okay, maybe it has been, considering I graduated with a Masters in 1994.
Excuse me for a moment while I weep to myself and apply Ben Gay to my aching body.
Anyway, one of the aspects of graduating was having to pay back all the money I borrowed to go to college and get a degree I barely use. But, for what it’s worth, I’ve read a lot of books. Okay, now I have to weep again…
These days, the crying isn’t just limited to me. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon announced the department would start collection attempts on outstanding student loan debt in default. As you might expect, students impacted by this aren’t happy. After all, President Brick Tamland tried to forgive student loan debt through various means, the most obvious one being “I’m the President, or am I?”
This has become a political issue, so naturally politicians are going to get involved. And when they do, I am here to give commentary. Oh, and to mock the appropriate parties.
student loans
What the Left thinks it means – an oppressive economic burden placed on the backs of those least capable of paying it
What it really means – loans taken out to pay for a college degree that more often than not doesn’t translate to the real world
I will warn you at this point things may get tangental because there is a lot of ground to cover. Of course, if you’ve read me for any length of time, you’re asking, “So what’s different?”
Not that long ago, going to college was somewhat of an achievement. You either had to be really smart or really rich to go. Then, someone (probably someone in the admissions department) came up with the idea that more people needed to go to college. From there, the notion was put in the minds of young people (and their parents) that you had to go to college or else you wouldn’t be successful.
Then, someone else (probably someone in the accounting department) came up with the idea that more students meant more money. And what’s a great way to raise a bunch of money in a short period of time? I mean aside from stealing it. You raise tuition! That way even if your institute of higher learning has an enrollment drought you might be able to make a pretty penny. That, and the textbook prices.
There is a downside to this approach, namely pricing yourself out of the market. Then, a third person (probably someone in the government) decided the best way to address this is to offer student loans. Then, even more young people could go to college, which made everyone happy.
At least until the kids graduated and they had to pay back the money they borrowed.
See, the thing about the government getting involved in the student loan game is it allowed colleges and universities to jack up tuition costs, which meant prospective students had to borrow even more just to go to a 7 AM Color Theory in American Literature class three times a week. Or, more likely, not attend that class and crib notes off a classmate without a life. After all, there was drinking and drugs to do!
Not that I know anything about that, mind you.
The Left is on the right side of the student loan debt issue, at least superficially. The amount of debt that has to be run up just to attend college these days is astronomical, and with a job market that can be softer than Taylor Lorenz’s feefees, being able to pay back the money owed can be tough. Not impossible, mind you, but harder than it needs to be, just like the language in the loan application.
Where the Left goes banana-shaped on the issue is in figuring out who’s responsible, mainly because some of the finger-pointing would have to go towards some of their allies. Since student loans have come under the auspices of the federal government, it’s easy to think there is a Mount Everest-sized mountain of unending money just waiting for people to take without consequence. And that group of people includes…drumroll please…college administrators and Boards of Regents. These are the people who evaluate tuition costs, and in recent years they’ve refused tuition increases as often as I’ve refused to eat medium rare steaks: it’s never come up.
And when you consider a significant percentage of administrators lean to the Left, it’s Leftists who are making the student loan debt issue worse.
To borrow a phrase from Philip Joseph Watson, “Imagine my shock.”
But the damage goes even further. With the rising cost of tuition, are students getting the bang for Uncle Sam’s buck? Well…let’s just say a lot of the banging going on is limited to the coeds. Students and parents alike believe tuition is too high and can create economic anxiety with students, which negatively affects their ability to learn.
Not that the curricula may have that much value anymore. Sure, you’ll have the hard sciences and more business-focused courses, but most of the time the courses being offered will help you in the job market as much as tattooing “I’m Unhireable” on your forehead. And I’m saying that as someone with an English Language and Literature degree! So, if you’re looking for a cushy corner office job with your Non-Binary Native American Tap Dance degree, you’re shit out of luck.
Unless, of course, you decide to go into teaching. You may not get a corner office, but being a professor can be lucrative and, aside from doing scholarly research to keep up on the trends in the field of study, it’s not too bad of a gig. Of course, this doesn’t help the student loan situation any, but hey.
Another area of agreement I have with the Left on the student loan issue is the expectations being put upon young adults. The documentation necessary to apply for a student loan is enough to make the Sierra Club cry like the Native American from that commercial. There’s a lot of legalese and verbiage to wade through and even then you may not know enough of the details to know what’s expected of you. To help with this, I have a simplified student loan process.
1. Tell the borrower how much they owe.
2. Tell the borrower when and how to make payments.
3. Tell the borrower what happens if/when payments can’t be made.
That’s it. And really that’s as complicated as it needs to be. Cut out the “party of the first part” jazz and get to the point. It’s going to make everyone a lot happier.
There’s another level to the student loan issue where the Left is at cross purposes. One of the squawking points is it’s impossible for 18 year olds to understand the terms of a student loan, so it’s irresponsible for lenders to hold them responsible for the debt. Yet, they also believe a child can know whether he or she is trans as early as 3 or 4.
So let me get this straight (or whatever sexual orientation you are). A preschooler can know he or she is trans, but an 18 year old can’t figure out that if you borrow money you have to pay it back at some point? If you flip the ages, it makes more sense, but as it stands in Leftist circles, it doesn’t, and I can’t make it make sense.
The reason for this contradiction is simple: Leftists aren’t known for making sense. But more to the point, treating young adults as though they’re children creates victims in search of an oppressor. And, surprise surprise, the oppressor tends to be the nameless, faceless monolith of whatever Boogieman the Left wants to blame for it this microsecond. Combine that with the ideological instruction these students are getting, and you have a ready-made army willing to go to the wall for a cause.
And a bunch of underinformed foot soldiers looking for direction.
This piece of advice may be a little late for some, but it needs to be said. Before you apply for any loan, look over the terms. This is Common Sense 101, but far too often people sign the documents before they think about the consequences. That’s one big reason so many people ran into problems during the mortgage industry implosion of the late 2000s: they assumed the good times would keep rolling. Then when shit went sideways, they weren’t prepared.
And that brings up another piece of advice. If you have a child or teenager in your lives, teach them about fiscal responsibility early and often. (Like voting in Chicago!) Taking a few hours to teach them about budgeting, saving, and smart spending will save them years of having to deal with the negative repercussions of overspending and underearning. If you want a quick course, tell them about the national debt and how both major parties spend like drunken sailors.
And if you’re in the group of young adults coming to the realization those loans you took out are coming due, you won’t get anywhere by complaining on TikTok, nor looking for Big Daddy Government to bail you out. After I graduated college, there were more than a few lean years as I tried to find my footing in the corporate world. That’s normal, but it’s not impossible to overcome if you plan accordingly.
This isn’t to give the Right a pass when they suggest graduates stop eating avocado toast to make ends meet. That’s a simplistic viewpoint that doesn’t help the problem. If you want to help, offer your knowledge on how to budget and determine how to recognize needs versus wants.*
*Offer void to anyone in government right now
Student loans have become a necessary evil (emphasis on “evil”) due to forces outside of the borrowers’ control. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, we should strive to address the core issues and bring them under control so college students and their families don’t spend restless nights worrying how to pay for an education and focus on ore important activities.
Like heavy drinking!
Month: April 2025
Extremist Makeover- Harvard Edition
It’s been a rough few years for the good folks at Harvard University. Controversies ranging from alleged plagiarism by one of the administrators to, well, a whole lotta antisemitism on campus have turned the faces of alumni and administrators…crimson.
I’ll see myself out.
Okay, I’m back. Now, I may not have an Ivy League education, but I have a few ideas to help Harvard out of its current situation.
First off, you have a Code of Conduct that everyone is supposed to follow, but it’s not. When you have a set of rules and you ignore them, it doesn’t end well. You might wind up like Congress!
Seriously, though, the Code of Conduct shouldn’t just be a good idea that occasionally gets enforced depending on the situation (or more specifically the ideology of the offenders). Either have it or don’t. And if you have it, use it!
Along with this, you might want to tone down the tone-deafness when it comes to the anti-Jewish sentiment. I know things in Gaza are as unsteady as Britney Spears these days, but there is a fine line between protesting and menacing a certain segment of students who may or may not agree with Israel’s actions. Not to mention, you might have a few Jewish lawyers lining up to sue Harvard if you don’t turn the anti-Jewish sentiment from an 11 (because it’s one higher) to, oh, a -43.
Now, for the administration to accomplish these two initial steps, they have to stop trying to act like the “cool parents” and start acting more like Red Foreman from “That 70s Show.” Take control of the situation, hand out punishments appropriate to the offenses, and stick to your proverbial guns. Don’t try to reason with the offenders. Don’t coddle them or encourage them. Lay down the law, or in this case the Code of Conduct. And if some of the student body doesn’t like it, call them dumbasses (if you’ll pardon the vulgarity) like Mr. Foreman would do.
Also, and I hate to bring this up, but an Ivy League education isn’t as prestigious as it used to be. Granted, the quality of higher education has gotten a lot lower in recent decades, but Moose Knuckle Community College, Tire and Lube, Hairdressing Salon, and Mini Mart is no Harvard. It used to be an honor to attend Harvard, Yale, or any other Ivy League school. Now, it’s a pit stop for rich kids before they get a nepotism hire or a role in a company that looks more at where you went to school than whether you can actually do the job.
You know, like Congress!
Yes, I know I used that joke earlier. What can I say? I like recycling!
To stem the tide, at least where Harvard is concerned, the administration needs to take academics seriously. That means attracting the best and brightest, not just to attend, but to teach. And that means finding people who want to teach, not just pawn off work to TAs so they don’t have to teach an 8 AM Advanced Bisexual Chinese Poetry About Dwarfs class.
And while we’re here, can we do something about the useless classes and majors that permeate colleges and universities these days? I’m sure there’s a market for The Philosophy of Katy Perry’s Pseudo-Space Launch, but that doesn’t mean Harvard has to offer it. Be a bit more picky than Taylor Swift when tracking down another ex-boyfriend to write songs about for a future album. Strive for the highest quality of curricula and the teachers for them. Sure, you may not get as much money by not offering the aforementioned Katy Perry course, but you won’t also get called out for offering such a vapid course in the first place, so it’s a win-win.
This next bit may be harder to address, but you won’t know if you don’t try. Find professors whose politics are closer to, say, the middle than to the freaky outer limits of the Left. This is going back a few decades, but the best professors I’ve ever had were ones who taught the coursework without interjecting politics, like, at all. I’m sure they had their ideological beliefs, but it was hard to pick out from the material being taught. Professors shouldn’t be punished for having political opinions (that’s what tenure is supposed to prevent), but it shouldn’t be the core of their teaching style, either.
Finally, have a real commitment to free speech on campus. And, yes, that means hearing from all sides, not just the ones you agree with because, believe it or not, there are some intelligent people out there on the Right. Imagine learning economics from Dr. Thomas Sowell, for example. Not only would you get a high-level education on the subject, but it would be in a manner that is engaging, challenging, and thorough.
And given the number of champagne socialists running around on campus these days, they could use an economics course or fifty.
Although it’s going to take a while for Harvard to go from laughingstock to leading the academic world, I don’t think it’s a lost cause just yet. Making a few changes will make the Harvard experience worth chasing again. The alternative is to become the academic equivalent of the “Snow White” live-action movie: underwhelming, over budget, and more sparsely populated than the hairs on Vin Diesel’s head.
Don’t Take the Church with It
The death of Pope Francis is a sad thing as all deaths are, we mourn the loss. But he was a determent to Catholicism and Christendom. A progressive Leftist which I have written about a number of times over the course of years he lead the Roman Catholic Church. And he does not follow the Gospel of Jesus Christ or the teachings contained in the Holy Bible.
It is hoped that in his last hours he came to know the errors of his ways and sought forgiveness for his many sins. And thus came to know the Lord Jesus as his personal Savior. But I have my doubts and pray that I am wrong with them.
And now the Catholic Church must find a new Pope to lead them. To be the voice of the Church as it moves forward into the 21st century. It is sad to think that most of those eligible to vote in the upcoming Conclave have all been appointed by this wolf-in-sheep’s clothing. I fear for the Catholic Church and how far it may fall. Taking with it the billions of Catholics around the world.
False teachings within the Church need to be stamped out. There is only ONE path to God and Heaven where people can be saved. That is through believe in Jesus Christ. Any other path leads to damnation and a separation from God forever.
Additionally the Catholic Church must exorcise its authority over those who profess to be members yet their actions are in opposition to the teachings of the Church and Scripture. This is especially true when it comes to politicians.
Excommunication.
Interdiction.
These are the tools available to the Church, the Pope, Archbishops, Bishops, and Priests of the Faith. They should use them as they once did when wayward nobles thought they could go against the Church.
So to the Pope-to-be, we are watching. The true followers of the Faith are watching. God is watching. You must shepherd His flock which sometimes calls for a strong hand.
Do the right thing before God which many times is the wrong thing before man. Do not get caught up in what the World thinks or wants the Church to be or do. The world is going to hell. Don’t take the Church with it.
Extremist Makeover – Disney Edition
To put it mildly, the current state of Disney is looking bleak, and this is the same company that gave us “The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes.” After getting two of the biggest intellectual properties in pop culture history in Star Wars and Marvel, it was assumed the House of Mouse would be churning out profitable movies and TV shows.
Yeah, about that…
Instead of making money, Disney started making enemies of its core audience. Sure, you had the Avengers movies which raked in tons of money, but live action versions of “The Little Mermaid” and more recently “Snow White” made less money than I did working for a fly-by-night three-day-old sushi franchise called “Still Better than Chipotle.” The fan bases that would normally flock to these movies flocked to the Interwebs to trash Disney’s offerings as “woke garbage.”
And those are the good reviews!
Granted, Disney hasn’t helped matters by putting out woke garbage under the guise of entertainment. Whether it was Kathleen Kennedy stinking up the Star Wars franchise (with the help of J.J. “I Haven’t Seen a Lens Flare I Haven’t Loved” Abrams) or the third wave of Marvel movies and TV shows that have focused more on diversity than, you know, coming up with good stories, it seems Disney has lost its way.
Well, I’m here to help in my own unique way. And considering I’m more of a Bugs Bunny than a Mickey Mouse fan, you know things are bad.
Let’s deal with the elephant in the room, and I’m not talking about Dumbo: you’re driving away potential fans with what you’re doing. I get that you want to grow your base while recognizing the diversity that’s out there, but you’re going about it all wrong. Your approach so far has been to inject the diversity you want to see in the world, wrap it in a half-baked plot, and claim whatever ism you want to blame for the inevitable poor performance. But here’s a little secret.
Not everyone who criticizes the flaming dumpster fires you call entertainment is a bigot. Yes, there are people like that in every group, but you have to try to sift through the hate and trolling to find the kernel of truth. And considering there seems to be a consistent theme of “this is bad and you should feel bad,” you might want to pay attention.
Here’s an example from my own experience. After hearing all sorts of bad things about “Captain Marvel,” I decided to give it a watch. After all, I didn’t want to judge it unfairly and I have an affinity for bad movies. I turned it off after 10 minutes because Brie Larson was so unbearable as a “girl boss” character. I didn’t get any sense of the character she was playing (and I place a good chunk of the blame for that on Larson herself) and I didn’t really care to learn anything more about her. She was just…annoying.
This is one of the things Disney capitalizes on, yet fails to understand in any discernible way: girls want to be princesses, too. Not every girl wants to be a girl boss, and not every female character has to be one to be interesting, or in Larson’s case, not be repulsive to potential fans. Even making Captain Marvel a Disney Princess in “The Marvels” falls flat because she lacks one of the major parts of being one: we like the character.
Compare this to Merida from “Brave.” Although she may be overlooked as compared to the others, she is both determined without being, well, Brie Larson-levels of annoying. And she is, now listen carefully, relatable. We can see ourselves in Merida because she goes through many of the emotions and experiences we do or have. She’s the everyman…er girl…er Princess.
Are you starting to see why “Snow White” flopped more than a drunk fat fratboy jumping into a pool during Spring Break? I’m sure Rachel Zegler is talented, but she didn’t exactly endear herself to the potential audience by putting herself over the Disney cartoon on which her role was based. Even if you wanted to do an updated version, you don’t have to dump all over the source material.
Especially when it’s one of the best animated films Disney has ever done, one that has been beloved for almost 90 flipping years!
This is Marketing 101 stuff, folks. Know your brand and protect it at all costs. In short, don’t use a major IP for an outhouse. In fact, this may be the first step towards Disney regaining its footing: require Disney execs to take a marketing class for an actual grade, minimum grade of a C+ or they get booted. I’ll even allow them to take it at an institute of higher learning suited to what appears to be their intellectual level, Greendale Community College.
By the way, #sixseasonsandamovie.
While the current execs are busy at school, find talent within the company who have an actual passion for storytelling, film-making, acting, et cetera, because these are the folks who will rebuild the foundation of the House of Mouse. Much of the pushback against Disney right now is based on the notion they’re more interested in pushing agendas than producing movies and shows people want to see. And on some level, they’re right.
You have to decide whether the agenda or the final product is more important. Look at it this way. If you want to spread an agenda, you need an audience, and nobody’s going to pay to see your agenda-driven passion project if you’re not making people want to see it. Tone down the agenda and weave it into a good story with characters we feel for. Sure, that means acting roles for the aforementioned Ms. Larson and Ms. Ziegler are going to be few and far between, but I think it will be better for everyone involved. And by everyone, I mean the audience.
Another possible option is to spin off a section of the company that will specifically work on the agenda-driven shows and movies. It will still be part of Disney, just under a different part of the company umbrella. That way you can tell the stories you want to tell without having to worry about having to make money. In short, you’re going to become the brother-in-law who moves in, sleeps on the couch, and eats all the food in the house without chipping in.
As part of this spin-off, you will need people who know about the IPs you’re bastardizing…I mean using. For that, you kinda need the fans you’ve been crapping on to help guide you. For all their faults, they care about the source material and can bring insights into the process that you might not have thought of in your dream to bring an albino quadriplegic gender-queer otherkin Jedi order into the Star Wars universe. Or at the very least, they can devise a canonical reason why such an order exists instead of relying on “muh fee-fees.”
Ditto for the Marvel IPs. Your decisions have turned a guaranteed money-making machine into a product that is lucky to recoup its money. Sure, they hit all the ideological marks you wanted, but that doesn’t mean anything if you’re not getting eyes on the product and driving away potential fans. For example, “She-Hulk: Attorney at Law” has gotten middling reviews and gotten more than its fair share of hatred, some by people who would complain about anything (basically 99% of people online), but some who have a legitimate love of the character.
Of course, when the star of said show goes out of her way to attack the fan base to this very day…yeah, not a good look.
The best way to navigate your way out of this situation is similar to that with the Star Wars franchise: come up with good stories and engaging characters and let them do the talking. And as a Marvel fan, I can tell you there are a lot of characters that haven’t been tapped, but certainly can be with the right approach and with people who actually care about them. And if you can’t find a great story during the entire history of Marvel to adapt, you’re not looking hard enough.
So, Disney, you’re not out of the woods yet, but you’re not a completely lost cause. Let me give you a piece of advice to get you back on track. Take everything you’ve done over the past few years, all the advice you’ve gotten, all the direction you’ve been given, and the like. Then, do the exact opposite. Before you know it, the House of Mouse will be back on a solid foundation.
Of a lot of money.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
The Leftist world was all atwitter (or if you prefer all aX) recently with the story of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a poor illegal alien soul who was deported back to his home country of El Salvador, allegedly without due process. Without going too far into the weeds, let’s just say you’re more likely to catch Bernie Sanders flying on a private plane than you are to understanding the ins-and-outs of this case.
Wait. Scratch that.
So, to borrow a phrase from hack comedians, what’s the deal with deportation? It’s a complicated issue that deserves sober thinking to understand the gravitas of the subject. But since I’m already a few beers into this, you’ll have to put up with me.
deportation
What the Left thinks it means – a practice that needs to be done by the book, no matter how long it takes
What it really means – the legal consequence for illegal immigration
Contrary to what Rep. Jasmine Crockett says, illegal immigration is a crime. The law in question is the Immigration and Nationality Act which, along with other laws and regulations, provides direction for the immigration and deportation processes. Seems everything should be in order, right?
Not so much.
Much like Disney with negative reviews of “Snow White,” our political class loves to ignore the laws on the books when they’re inconvenient. And let’s just say the immigration laws are mighty inconvenient to the Left. After all, that’s the use of following immigration laws if they prevent you from ensuring Democrat control? You know, aside from those laws being the fucking laws.
That’s not to say Leftists don’t follow the laws all the time. In fact, one area where they demand the laws be followed to the letter is in…you guessed it, Frank Stallone. Actually, it’s deportation, which is really convenient considering it’s our topic for this Lexicon entry. After allowing people to enter the country through our southern border like wine moms going to a Taylor Swift concert, it’s funny to watch Leftists be such sticklers to the letter of the law.
And by “funny,” I mean calculated.
I know I’ve mentioned our good friend Saul Alinsky so often I could be his agent, but one of his Rules for Radicals applies here: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Since Republicans believe in the rule of law (unless they find the laws inconvenient for political gain), the Left knows it has them in a box when it comes to immigration. If we have to follow the laws when it comes to stopping illegal immigration, we have to follow the laws when it comes to deportation.
And that’s where Constitutional law comes into play. The US Supreme Court previously ruled all aliens are entitled to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. So, that means regardless of the way they come into the country, they get their day in court.
A noble gesture in theory, but a burden in current practice, thanks to a little thing the Leftist kids like to call the Cloward-Piven Strategy. In short, this strategy is designed to achieve Leftist goals related to poverty by forcing the system to get overwhelmed. And guess how that gets accomplished: illegal immigration.
“But wait, Thomas. Wouldn’t illegal immigrants be ineligible for federal benefits?” you might ask. Or “Are you aware you’re not wearing pants?” The answer to the former is they should be, but thanks to loopholes in the law and soft-hearted and soft-brained politicians (I’m looking at you, Gavin Newsom), they gain access.
So, what does this have to do with deportation? By having to follow due process and the delays caused by so many illegal immigrants being processed over the past few years, the strain to the social safety net continues unabated.
That is, until President Trump got back into the Oval Office and decided to start enforcing immigration law. In the first six weeks, the Trump Administration deported 27,772 illegal immigrants, which is a step in the right direction. Where I think they’ve gone wrong is through fast-tracking the process. Yes, I know this plays into the Cloward-Piven and Alinsky playbooks, but it’s necessary to ensure the Left has no room to bitch. Not that it will stop them, mind you…
Nor will it stop the Left from lying. With the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case alone, we’ve seen attempts from the Left to paint him as an innocent victim denied due process and attempts from the Right to paint him as a gang-banger terrorist who has been legally deported back to his home country of El Salvador. Well, the truth is a bit murkier than these extremes are letting on.
First off, Kilmar Abrego Garcia freely admits he entered the country illegally, but has received a court order preventing him from being deported back to El Salvador out of fear of being attacked by a rival gang. So, not only have we confirmed he’s a member of a gang (MS-13 to be exactly, and I ain’t talking about Microsoft) and that he’s not supposed to be here, but he’s already had due process. But he also has a court order that should have protected him from deportation, as well as a questionable designation as a terrorist.
That means…well, a whole lotta shit, to be honest. If we deport him, we run afoul of the legal process. If we don’t deport him, he will still be affiliated with MS-13 which could put us in mortal danger.
Congratulations. We’re now in Kobayashi Maru territory.
The only way forward is being transparent, follow the law, and, oh yeah, stem the flow of illegal immigration to give the system time to catch up. And guess what the Trump Administration is doing? They’re cracking down, and that’s resulted in reduced encounters at the US/Mexico border. It’s a start, but there’s still a lot more to do.
First of all, let’s stop treating gang members like terrorists. Not only does it set a bad precedent for future Presidents, but it gives Leftists ammunition to call the deportation process into question. And, let’s face it, it’s not exactly the swiftest nor the clearest process in government. Plus, it elevates gang members, which only feeds their egos and gives them enough bravado to commit bigger, more audacious crimes. That, in turn, may cause other gangs to try to play catch-up, making the gang problem even worse.
Second, as much as the Trump Administration wants to rush through the deportation process to get results, we have to play it by the book. It won’t stop Leftists from lying or making gang-bangers look sympathetic figures, but it cuts the due process complaint they have off at the knees. And at the very least, it will make Leftists look like Cotton Hill, which will never fail to make me laugh.
Lastly, it’s long past time we overhaul our immigration and deportation policies. And that requires taking a hard look at our border policies. We can’t keep letting anyone with a sob story (and without paperwork) walk in unexamined while others jump through bureaucratic flaming hoops to gain legal entry. As draconian as Leftists think Trump’s border enforcement may be, it’s working. That gives us time to get our house in order.
If you really think about it (and I have because I’m as boring as an Amish rave), the deportation issues we’re seeing now are an outgrowth from the immigration issue. The more illegal immigrants come into the country, the more deportation orders have to be made once they’re caught. Of course, Leftists will continue to push for sanctuary cities and sanctuary states because, well, they don’t have to deal with the aftermath since they live more in the suburbs than where the illegal immigrants are.
So, let me float this idea, one that I’ve modified from Governors Ron Desantis and Greg Abbott. While they flew illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities and states, I want to send them to the residences of those who insist on being sanctuary cities and states. Preferably, to the houses of those politicians who made those things possible. Maybe that will drive home the point that illegal immigration isn’t something we should encourage.
Or, at the very least, we can point and laugh as we give Leftists exactly what they said they wanted.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Election integrity has been a pretty hot topic in recent years. (Candidate integrity, on the other hand, not so much.) To address this, the House of Representatives voted on the SAVE Act, or as the kids like to call it the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act. The short version is it updates existing legislation and includes ways for people to prove their citizenship so they can vote.
Which means Leftists are upset over it. Of course, it’s a day ending in “day” so they’re already upset about something. But this time, they’re pulling out all of their favorite shits…I mean hits. It’s sexist, racist, anti-trans, and, this is a new one, a poll tax because people might have to pay to get documentation.
So, is the SAVE Act the second coming of racist voting laws or a step towards more secure elections? And is this another lame segue into a Lexicon entry? The answers are coming up!
the SAVE Act
What the Left thinks it means – a Republican bill that disenfranchises voters by making it more difficult for people to vote
What it really means – a Republican bill that requires voting adults to be, well, adults
According to the bill itself, there are a number of methods of identification that will work to prove citizenship for the purposes of voting, ranging from a drivers’ license with REAL ID to a birth certificate to a marriage certificate and so many others. And even if you don’t have that documentation handy (which, realistically, you should, kids), the bill provides for a way to attest to your citizenship so you can vote. Should be a slam dunk, right?
Not quite.
The Left have been able to convince some of our fellow talking meatbags that requiring identification to vote is a bridge too far. It’s just way too complicated, expensive, and inconvenient to get identification, let alone use it to vote. And as Leftists love to tell us, voter fraud isn’t a thing. Until it is. Then, it’s not that big of a deal because it’s so rare.
That’s what we call “moving the goalposts,” kids.
The fact there’s voter fraud at all concerns me, regardless of who does it. One of the bedrock principles America has is we get to vote for our leaders. Granted, the last few Presidents don’t really speak highly of our ability to find good leaders, but the point remains. Voter fraud erodes that bedrock to the point we don’t even know if the candidate with the most votes will be the winner after the dust settles.
And no, Mrs. Clinton, you don’t fall into this category. No matter how hard you protest, you lost the Presidency because the popular vote isn’t what decides who gets to be President. Now, put on your Make America Great Again hat and shut the fuck up.
At the core of the Left’s assertion regarding voter identification is a belief some people are incapable of fulfilling the task of obtaining the necessary documentation for a myriad of reasons: age, inconvenience, cost, and so on. And, yes, these can be barriers, but they aren’t insurmountable if you’re willing to put in the work.
Cue Maynard G. Krebs.
And I’m only half-joking about that. Leftists are always down for making it easier to vote, mainly because that’s how they can game the system. When you set expectations higher than “must be solid matter,” it irks the Left because it makes them have to do actual stuff to overcome it. You know, like farming out voter fraud efforts to a Leftist organization with ties to our good friend Uncle George Soros.
But I’m sure that would never happen, amirite?
Although they’d be hard pressed to admit it, underneath the Left’s efforts to beat back anything even remotely related to election security is a very bigoted assumption: the less fortunate can’t advocate for themselves. To the the Left, these folks are incapable of much, so they need champions to speak for them. Enter the Leftists! Only they can defend the rights of those poor souls to do nothing constructive for themselves!
That’s mighty white of them! Often, quite literally!
However, by doing this, the Left treats the less fortunate as lessers in every aspect. This reduces these adults to children, incapable of doing anything without Leftists. And what confuses me more is there are people willing to be treated like children because it’s easier than being a ward of the state than a participant of it. I guess I’m just wired differently, what with me being a fan of Atlas Shrugged, “The Prisoner,” and personal freedom.
And, oddly enough, freedom is one of the ways the Left tries to convince people the SAVE Act will curtail theirs. That’s by design. By pumping up the fear, the Left whips up a frenzy, albeit an incredibly uninformed one. There’s a good possibility those who think they’re going to be negatively impacted already have all they need already. If they don’t, there are options that may or may not involve money and aren’t that inconvenient.
But the Left doesn’t want you to know that. They want you to be afraid.
And what’s more, the SAVE Act has only just passed in the House. The Senate still has to take it up, so if you’re affected by it or think you are, you have time to get that documentation or help someone else get it.
But the Left doesn’t want you to know that. They want you to be angry.
Is it just me, or does anyone else see a pattern forming here? It’s almost as if the Left want people not to learn about the SAVE Act and would rather gas up a mob because…well, that’s a good question. Purposely misleading people typically doesn’t end well once the people find out. And with the favorability ratings of the Democrat Party hovering just above that of STDs, they’d better hope people don’t find out anytime soon.
That’s not to say I’m completely happy with the SAVE Act. There are some unintended (or possibly intended) consequences that will affect women, trans people, and anyone else who has had to deal with name changes. It’s already a hassle to get even basic information and documentation updated (thank you, bureaucracy), but to add that hurdle to a Constitutionally protected right? That’s a Bridge to Nowhere too far.
The solution is somewhere in the middle. To balance out the need for election integrity and the need to protect the rights of eligible voters, there should be a way to identify eligible voters that can be cross-referenced with a database that can be updated regularly. Maybe a card of some kind, one that confirms a voter is registered…
Nah, nobody would be dumb enough to invent that. Forget I said it.
All that said, the SAVE Act has good intentions and is attempting to solidify trust in our elections. Maybe the Senate can make some adjustments to address the concerns I raised. Only time will tell if the SAVE Act will be an asset or a liability.
Oh, and before I forget, the answer to my second question is yes.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Since Donald Trump was reelected, people have kept an eye on the economy since that was one of the areas he ran on. After all, President Brick Tamland’s economy was one of the world’s biggest dumpster fires (in spite of Leftists saying everything was fine like Kevin Bacon in “Animal House”). So, naturally, we were curious what Trump could to to put out the fire.
And apparently, he’s big on tariffs.
Tariffs are a touchy subject because there are so many people talking about them, but very few who understand them. So, just like social media on any day ending with “day.” Since there are so many armchair economists spouting off, I might as well give it a go.
tariffs
What the Left thinks it means – an indirect tax on goods and services that will hurt everyone
What it really means – an economic bargaining chip if things are done right
Since I’m only an armchair economist, the good folks at Investopedia have a pretty good explanation of what tariffs are and how they can impact us. For the purposes of this sketch, tariffs are additional taxes levied on imports designed to get the exporting countries to cut us a deal. This is what I mean when I say they’re an economic bargaining chip.
The problem comes when the country whose goods are getting slapped with tariffs doesn’t want to play ball. That can lead to economic and diplomatic strife if both sides continue to jack up tariffs like they’re a tub of popcorn and a small pop at a movie theater. Anything larger than a small pop requires a credit check.
The way the Left sees tariffs is correct, but only to a point. Yes, tariffs can cause prices to rise, but it’s not a guarantee. However, it does cause shitty memes.
If you’re not into clicking links, let me describe the meme. The title is “How Tariffs Work” and it pictures Donald Trump pissing into a fan and getting hit in the face with his own piss. Cute? Maybe. Funny? Possibly. Accurate? Wellllll…not so much.
The meme’s assumption (provided I don’t get smacked by Chris for stealing his “In the Meme Time” bit) is tariffs will always backfire, especially when it comes to Trump. But what happens if they don’t? The cartoon doesn’t even consider that possibility, which shows at best a surface understanding of basic economics.
Which means Leftists aren’t prepared to talk about the companies who have already decided not to test Trump on tariffs and made arrangements to avoid or lessen their impact. Their squawking points only go as far as “things are going to be more expensive.”
You know, like things under President Brick Tamland?
But there is one element the Left keeps overlooking when complaining about tariffs: Trump is pushing for reciprocal tariffs. Basically, it’s a tit-for-tat move. The higher the tariffs on us, the higher Trump will set the tariffs on them. And needless to say, we’ve been on the wrong end of the tariff game with a lot of countries. We will have to see what this will do because I’m not sure anyone knows what will happen.
Especially not the Left.
When it comes to economics, Leftists are as smart as Eric Swalwell among female Chinese spies. They know a few terms and can bullshit their way through a discussion (provided it’s shorter than a ferret’s attention span after a quadruple espresso laced with truck stop speed), but when it comes to actual knowledge, they are lacking. Want proof? One of the Left’s favorite economists is Paul Krugman, a man whose accuracy percentage looks like the ERA of a really good pitcher.
The reason for this is simple: Leftists don’t get economics. Remember, Leftists thrive on emotion, and you just can’t fee-fee your way to a good economy. There are hard and fast rules, concrete numbers, and historical data to contend with, which make it harder for Leftists to digest. That’s why they tend to make emotional appeals when they talk about economic issues. Once you accept them as valid, they take the high ground.
Which explains the Left’s approach to the tariff issue. They want people to believe only the worst of outcomes awaits us, just like they do with any Republican or conservative idea. DOGE is intrusive. Closing the Department of Education will make students dumber (to which I say how could you tell the difference). And tariffs are totally bad.
Which is why other countries have tariffs on our shit. Because tariffs are bad, m’kay?
I think the Left’s objection to Trump’s tariffs stems from a belief America deserves to have to pay more for foreign goods because we have it so good here. To them, America is wealthy, so we can afford to pay jacked up costs (except when it comes to shit like healthcare, student loans, the cost of living, etc.). Although we are still one of the prime movers of the global economy, we should be more frugal in what we buy and from where. As the song says, “You’d better shop around.”
Either that or, “Do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do.” I always get those two songs mixed up.
Anyway, I’m going to take a wait-and-see approach to Trump’s tariffs. It’s way too early to dismiss them as a failure or a success, but try telling either extreme that in their rush to be right. If Trump can make good on his promise, all the better. If not, he’s going to have to do some fast talking to get himself out of this mess, which will give Leftists plenty of fodder for the 2026 midterm elections. It’s a pretty big gamble, so let’s see if we hit the jackpot or don’t have a pot to piss in.
Oh, and Leftists? Can you learn how to meme, for the love of Pete?