Month: January 2026

Iowa Gubernatorial Debate

After the first gubernatorial debate in Iowa I have a new favorite. But I will give a rundown of my opinions of all the candidates running. Even if they didn’t take part in the debate.

Representative Eddie Andrews is now my current favorite for the nomination. He has done well in the Iowa House representing his district. And continues to do so even while campaigning across the state for governor. Visiting all 99 counties.

He lacks funding, but doesn’t see that as a hindrance. He also seemed a bit unsure of himself on the stage and fumbled a bit. But not too badly.

Brad Sherman was my original choice, back when Governor Kim Reynolds hadn’t decided if she was seeking another term or not. However, after seeing and hearing him on the debate stage I have doubts. His age shows, it really does.

I was at Zach Lahn’s announcement party in West Des Moines. My opinion of him hasn’t changed and has only been reinforced. He’s a farmer and businessman, although an outsider is always good to have it’s not one of his faults. What drives me away from Mr. Lahn is his effeminate and soft spoken nature. It gives the appearance of lacking a leadership. He would easily fit into the crowd at The Garden in downtown Des Moines. But not in the Governor’s office.

Adam Steen was professional and polished. He could have easily taken the lead in this debate and contest. But, he was endorsed by The Family Leader, who in the last decade has had a number of bad picks for their endorsements. The nail in the coffin however is that Adam Steen supports the Convention of States. I cannot in good conscious support that at all. It is a dangerous form of Pandora’s box.

Lastly we have Randy Feenstra. Another Family Leader pick I might add and the current Congressman from Iowa’s 4th District. He was invited to the debate. Came to Iowa on the Air Force One with the President. But declined to attend. He is the establishment pick for Governor. He has more funds than the other 4 combined and has great name recognition.

He is not truly a deep conservative. His record shows that with easy. And the Left knows this as well. This is why Rob Sands, the Democratic candidate is hoping that the November election is between himself and Feenstra. Many know that if Feenstra is the Republican nominee, then Sands will will that November election and become Iowa’s next Governor.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Although the Lexicon primarily features issues originating in the US of A (as opposed to Canada, which is the US of Eh), sometimes the subject matter crosses international boundaries. In this case, the origin of this week’s Lexicon starts in Jolly Old England (as opposed to Canada, which is Jolly Old Eh-gland.)

It starts with an online game called Pathways (think a cheerier version of “Depression Quest”) where the user navigates through a series of events in an attempt to dissuade him or her from falling for online extremist propaganda. Welllll…let’s just say it backfired. Instead of educating users (primarily teenagers) about the dangers of propaganda, it is propaganda in and of itself by painting anyone to the right of Josef Stalin as an extremist.

I could talk all day about propaganda (as my lovely wife will tell you), but the focus of this week’s Lexicon is on the concept of online extremism. I’ll be the first one to tell you the Interwebs is a hotbed of people nuttier than elephant shit, but does that make them extremists?

Depends on who you ask.

online extremism

What the Left thinks it means – Internet propaganda designed to persuade gullible people to adopt right wing beliefs and ideas

What it really means – Internet propaganda designed to persuade gullible people to adopt any wing’s beliefs and ideas

So, where do I begin? Well, let me just start by saying online extremism is not just a right wing issue. There is and always has been a section of online culture dominated by left wing thinking, but they’ve been mostly relegated to backwater channels with an echo chamber bigger than the Grand Canyon. Or, as it’s called today, Bluesky.

That in and of itself isn’t that big a deal to me. I’m a big fan of letting people say what’s on their minds, even if I disagree with it. For one, it fosters more and better communication than banning it out of turn. For another, it’s always a good way to see where the assholes are so you can avoid them. Unless you want to point and laugh, which is easier when they make themselves known. So, there are plenty of good reasons not to silence people.

Having said all that, there are people out there who have completely lost the fucking plot and say/advocate for the weirdest shit out there. And that’s just the diaper fur community. (Safety Tip from your buddy Tom: If you don’t know, don’t look for it. Only furry evil in diapers greets you there.) Up until recently, people have been able to ignore the fringe players because they’ve been woefully unequipped to do anything about it. I knew a Pat Buchanan supporter who talked a big game, but was so short he made Nick Fuentes look like Andre the Giant. Needless to say, he wasn’t considered much of a threat.

Nowadays, it’s that kind of freak that has the power of an echo chamber telling him/her what they’re doing is completely cool and not at all too extreme. And it’s shit like this that got Renee Good shot and killed. Somewhere in her mind, she thought “running over an ICE agent is totes normal, dude” and used that thought to spur action.

Now, who could have put that idea in her head? I mean, it’s not like the Left has painted ICE in a negative light by calling them Nazis or comparing them to secret police or the Gestapo, right?

Except for Governor TIMMAH!

And Governor Gavin Newsom.

And Governor JB Pritzker.

And Senator Jeff Merkley.

And Senator Mark Warner.

And Representative Eric Swalwell.

And Representative Rashida Tlaib.

Wow. Come to think of it, there are a lot of Democrats and Leftists pulling the “ICE is the secret police/Gestapo/fascist/Nazi” card.

So, maybe the Left has a hand in the escalation of rhetoric against ICE, which is inspiring Leftist extremists to act. But remember, kids, it’s the MAGA crowd that are the violent ones because January 6th.

All that IMAX-level projection aside, online extremism is a legitimate problem, one being stoked by people we shouldn’t want to hang out with at all, man. And they all have the same problem: a messiah complex that rivals Oprah’s. With that messiah complex comes a lot of gatekeeping so only the true believers can stick around.

Naturally, that means more sensible people saying “Yanno, you might not want to drive a truck into a bunch of protesters/ICE agents” will be excommunicated and turned into the enemy, even if their opinions align with everything else the self-professed leader believes. The odd thing about these leaders of cults of personality is they often don’t have one of their own, so they borrow from someone else. Even self-styled “free thinkers” may fall victim to the kind of extremism that meets them where their biases are.

Not that this happens to too many people, right? (I’m looking at you, Bill Maher.)

Those assholes can be dangerous, what what of the followers themselves? That’s a bit of a mixed bag. The more gung ho a follower is, the more extreme he or she (still 2 genders) is likely to be. As you get further and further away from the epicenter of extremism, the less likely it is you’re dealing with an extremist. Sure, there are some who will drink the Flavor-Ade because everybody else is doing it (gotta love that peer pressure), but you’re going to find some who see the folly of it all and aren’t as willing to go along to get along.

The problem is neither side wants to separate the reasonable from the batshit insane. That would take too much effort, after all, and we don’t want people to think we’re not down for the cause because we happen to think not engaging in stupid shit is the correct path forward.

This is the time when we have to determine whether the loudest voices are the leaders or just so loud they drown out the actual leaders. I’ve seen this with the gay rights movement, the trans rights movement, the pro choice and pro life movements, the Religious Right, and so many others. And when you’re faced with the loudest voices, it gets really easy to slide into groupthink and become one of the masses, minus the “m.”

But that’s where being able to determine the difference comes in handy. If someone is loud, it doesn’t make him or her right; it just makes them harder to ignore. But is also makes them easier to mock for being loud and annoying, so there’s that.

How this applies to extremism is we have to separate the ring leaders from the ring followers because they are not always the same people. A militant trans rights activist may talk a big game, but wuss out at the first signs of it being go time. These are the ones who probably won’t decide to shoot up a Christian school, but they still have the ability to give those who do have a propensity towards violence to think the only way to fix things is to pull a “Death Wish.” They’re extremists of a sort, but more extremist-adjacent.

Think Charlie Manson versus the Manson Family members who murdered Sharon Tate, among others. The members committed the crimes, but they wouldn’t have happened without ole Charlie.

“But, Thomas,” you might be saying, “are you literally comparing trans activists to Charles Manson?” No. What I’m saying is there are some people who can inspire others to take action they might not otherwise take by instilling them with destructive thoughts. And we’re not just talking about Leftists here, folks. There are plenty of hair-triggers on the Right who would love nothing more than to start shit so they can pretend to be badasses, all from the safety of their double-wides, while others are doing the actual shit.

And all from the behind protection of a computer or phone screen.

There is a term from the Interwebs that describe these people perfectly: keyboard warriors. Now, there are some willing to put the emphasis on the latter rather than the former, which makes for a really awkward time all the way around when the fit hits the shan. (Hat tip to Larry Elder for that one.)

What Pathways gets wrong is it tries to water down the definition of extremism to an absurd degree. Even someone saying “we should be proud of being British” gets looped in with anyone who wants to put every immigrant into a chipper shredder, when that’s simply not the case. There may be some overlap between the two, but not enough to lump the former in with the latter.

Unless, of course, you’re being intellectually dishonest, which Pathways is being. The “right” course of action according to the game isn’t always the most logical. In one part of the game, you are given a choice to ignore what they deem inflammatory rhetoric, look for more information, or go from 0 to extremist by joining in the inflammatory fun. In the game, the only viable option is to ignore the rhetoric. Anything else gets you branded an extremist.

Put another way, the game punishes you for trying to be well-informed.

Which makes you more susceptible to extremist positions.

Which defeats the purpose of the game.

Unless, of course, the purpose of the game is to enable certain extremist positions…

Saaaaaaaaay! I think I’ve stumbled upon the real reason this game exists! And considering it’s targeting teenagers (who cling to popularity and clout like Hunter Biden hangs onto his crack dealer’s number), the goal is to get them to accept a set of ideas so they’ll be popular, cool, and have social clout, all without having to do anything but listen and believe.

Hmmmm…that’s a catchy little saying. I hope nobody unscrupulous ever latches onto it.

Meanwhile, what we can do to avoid being sucked in by online extremism, or extremism in general, is apply a little common sense. If you wouldn’t allow someone else to do it to you, don’t do it to other people. And if someone you know is rushing headlong towards extremism, try to pull them back. If they don’t want to come back from the edge, let them go. It may hurt, but it hurts a lot less than being buggered night after night in federal pound you in the ass prison.

Not that I know anything about that, mind you…







Joining the Fediverse

I have always been fond of the original Twitter. Before it was taken over by ads and junk that unfortunately has followed it since becoming X. But there is the Fediverse which is a microblogging system that isn’t plagued by ads. So we are joining it.

This means that you can follow the Something For Everything blog from your favorite Mastodon instance and follow us like you would follow anyone else.

Just add @somethingabouteverything and you can get our feed.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With the recent shooting of Renee Good in Minnesota, a lot of attention has gathered around a single issue. Is it illegal immigration? Nope. Is it federal tax dollars being stolen by foreign scammers? Not at all. Is it, dare I speak it, the proliferation of buttons at the Golden Globes? Yes, but also no.

The focus from both sides of the political shitshow is on domestic terrorism. The Left is pointing at ICE and saying, “See? We told you they were domestic terrorists!” The Right is pointing at anti-ICE protesters and saying, “See? We told you they were domestic terrorists!” And meanwhile back at the Hall of Justice, we have people like me scratching our heads. Mostly because of dandruff in my case, but also because I’m having a hard time understanding how both sides can come to the same conclusion from two different points of view, and yet be completely wrong about it.

Consider this my therapy session. You’re welcome?

domestic terrorism

What the Left thinks it means – right-leaning individuals in the government who are attacking average people without cause

What the Right thinks it means – left-leaning individuals against the government who are attacking ICE to try to prevent them from doing their jobs

What it really means – a term that’s waaaaaaay overused these days

American politics has never been a weak person’s game, although you wouldn’t know it by looking at current Congresscritters like Eric Swalwell or previous Congresscritters like Adam Kinzinger. I mean, we’ve had people duel over political differences, as Alexander Hamilton’s family can attest.

Having said that, today’s version of American politics is a different breed of cat altogether. To say people are on edge is like saying water is wet, fire is hot, and Al Gore is boring. People are willing to die (or in some cases let others die) for an ideological movement so they have a rallying cry. And, without even a hint of irony, they call anyone opposed to them domestic terrorists because, well, that’s how the game is played anymore.

Being a word guy, I take a different approach to word usage than most people. The impact of some words can throw a flaming tanker truck onto the world’s biggest pile of hay drier than the drinks at a Mormon strip club. And let me tell you calling someone a domestic terrorist kinda fits that bill.

Granted, each side has their own idea of what constitutes a domestic terrorist. The Left thinks it’s anyone whiter than Edgar Winter at an outdoor picnic at Ice Station Zero and more to the right than Pat Buchanan. The Right thinks it’s anyone whose hair colors don’t match anything remotely close to natural and have opinions so far to the Left they would make Karl Marx look like Ronald Reagan. Whether you’re MAGA or Antifa, you’re a dangerous extremist to someone.

And therein lies the problem.

With a political landscape so toxic, it gets frightfully easy to demonize your opponents, which ramps up the heated rhetoric. It’s not enough that your opponent disagrees with you; they are your blood enemies. And it even works within the ideological sides, as any Leftist kicked off Bluesky and any Rightist who isn’t 129,000,000% MAGA will tell you, as can your humble correspondent. I’ve been kicked out of so many ideological groups I have boot marks on my ass. Or was that from the time I spent in a sex dungeon in Amsterdam?

Never mind.

The point is when everybody can be seen as a domestic terrorist by one person or another, it dilutes the meaning of the term and makes it harder for us to recognize actual domestic terrorists. Yes, the Left and the Right have their extremists nuttier than squirrel shit, but for the most part they wouldn’t fall into the category of terrorism until they commit acts of actual terrorism.

Which brings us to the “what does that mean” section of the Lexicon entry. And, yes, I realize you ask that question all the time while reading my rants, but this is different. The good folks at Dictionary.com define terrorism thus:

1. the unlawful use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government, with the goal of furthering political, social, or ideological objectives.

2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism.

3. a terrorist method of governing or of resisting a government.

4. intimidation or coercion by instilling fear

So…that’s neat.

What this means in the context of our current political shitshow is there are a lot of people on both sides (albeit on the extremes) that subscribe to the notion their terrorism is freedom and other people’s terrorism is terrorism. But if you’re using the same tactics, it doesn’t matter if you’re red or blue; you’re a fucking terrorist.

This is why it’s important we don’t lump all of the Left and all of the Right under the same domestic terrorism umbrella. Not everyone is going to pick up arms and start shooting up a Congresscritter’s house. That’s reserved for people hired by Governor TIMMAH Walz.

Seriously, though, we’ve seen how absurd this approach is just by looking at some of the people caught up in the January 6th situation. Yes, there were some assholes in the crowd (I’m looking at you, Nick Fuentes), but not all the assholes got caught, and some of the people who were caught weren’t of the terrorist variety. Of course, that didn’t stop the Left from painting them all as domestic terrorists. Because as we all know grandmas are the real domestic terrorists, amirite?

Actually, I’m not right, in the head or otherwise.

The reason both sides throw the domestic terrorism label around like a football at a barbecue at Tom Brady’s place is because it allows the “otherization” of their perceived opponents. And, yes, Leftists, I see you doing this all the time with your “MAGAt” talk. Not that the “Libtard” calls coming from the Right are any better. Even so, there is a large difference between “MAGAt” and “Libtard” and actual domestic terrorism, but neither side wants to make that distinction because, well, it’s easy, fun, and doesn’t hurt anybody.

At least, not until the guns start firing.

And where we are right now, it’s only a matter of time. All it takes is one asshole to take it upon himself or herself (still two genders, by the way) to take matters into his/her own hands and strike a blow for his/her side. Then, we all become domestic terrorists unless we decide to take a different path.

The first step? Not calling the other side domestic terrorists unless they are domestic terrorists.

The second step is a little harder to accomplish, but it’s no less important. Call out the motherfuckers who are causing all the chaos and tell them to shut the fuck up. I don’t care if you’re Democrat or Republican, socialist or capitalist, a New England Patriots fan or wrong, we have to be brave enough to take on the more vocal provocateurs on our own side. For all of their bluster, there are more of us than there are of them, and judging solely by the idea the loudest voices are often the most chicken shit, they will run for their little hidey-holes the second someone tells them to take a seat.

Then, we get to step 3: realizing both sides of the political divide are people, not ideologies. Granted, some of those barely qualify as sentient let alone human, but we still need to try and find some common ground. I will speak for myself, mainly because I’m the only one who knows me best, but I try to remove the politics from the person and look for something we agree on and go from there.

I love Samuel L. Jackson for no other reason than he has perfected the use of the word “motherfucker.” He and I don’t see eye to eye on politics, but we can groove together on movies. Once you find that common denominator, ideology takes a back seat to fandom. And last time I checked, there has never been a world war started because of a fandom.

Now, online, on the other hand…well, let’s just leave it alone.

But you see the point, I hope. Neither side is comprised of only domestic terrorists, nor should we assume they are. I quote the great philosopher Dave Mason:

So let’s leave it alone
‘Cause we can’t see eye to eye.
There ain’t no good guy.
There ain’t no bad guy.
There’s only you and me, and we just disagree.

And if we can’t trust someone who gave us “Ooh, oh-oh-oh,” who can we trust?

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Ah, Minnesota, our neighbor to the north. (Please check local listings for the location of Minnesota in your area.) What was once the home of occasional professional sports titles (sorry, Vikings fans) is a hotbed of controversy due to a YouTuber named Nick “Don’t Call Me” Shirley. His 43 minute video exposing potential fraud with Somali-run daycares and medical facilities has put the Land of 10,000 Lakes under the microscope.

Which, of course has Leftists fuming. To be fair, though, when aren’t they fuming?

As we start seeing more fallout from this brewing scandal, I thought it would be a good time to take a look at Minnesota through my own perspective. That and the possibility of those sweet, sweet clicks.

Minnesota

What the Left thinks it means – a state unfairly targeted by the Trump Administraiton

What it really means – a state run by incompetents, fraudsters, or both

Minnesota was first inhabited by Native Americans, but eventually had Europeans show up, and they didn’t even bring a hot dish to pass! Those bastards! Eventually, it became a state in 1858 and became the home of many a Lutheran. Most of the time, Minnesota has been seen as quiet, unassuming, and above all else…normal.

That was until recently when Leftists took the state from the home of Spam and Garrison Keillor to a frosty heckscape. It’s like a hellscape, but more in line with Minnesotan phrasing. Granted, recent history has shown the state moving more to the left than a base runner leaning towards first base trying to avoid being tagged out, so the slide towards the heckscape has been slow, yet impactful.

This brings us to the current Governor, Tim “TIMMAH” Walz. You know, the guy Queen Kamala the Appointed thought would make a good Vice President for the same reason Hunter Biden would be a great accountability buddy: because you’re fucking insane. Governor TIMMAH is good at one thing, and that’s throwing shade.

Since Shirley’s video dropped, Governor TIMMAH has responded by… blaming Donald Trump, accusing white guys of fraud, and generally looking like a buffoon. You know, what Governor TIMMAH does every day.

But it’s not like he’s doing this alone, mind you. The Left is doing a lot of heavy lifting to try to protect the image of Governor TIMMAH as anything but a cartoonish crook with CNN playing the role of Atlas. They’ve tried going after Shirley and wound up looking like Governor TIMMAH as a result.

Not to be outdone, CBS (emphasis on the BS) did its own “investigation” and found nothing out of the ordinary. Because as we all know, potential billions of dollars in fraud is just ho-hum. (Note to Bari Weiss: this ain’t the journalism you’re looking for. And I hope you’ll forgive me for the Obi Wan Kenobi hand wave.)

Other outlets like NPR, MS NOW, The Intercept, and even the Minneapolis Star Tribune have helped with the heavy lifting in their own ways. Namely, by attempting to discredit Shirley’s video by discrediting the man himself. Because, as we all know, the real crime here isn’t the alleged fraud, but noticing the alleged fraud.

For you Leftists out there, that was sarcasm.

Now, if this were the only scandal plaguing the Land of Ten Thousand Fakes, we might be able to let Governor TIMMAH off with a warning. After all, he’s not the sharpest bowling ball on the Christmas tree, so he might just be dumber than two bags of hammers. Granted, he is, but that’s not important right now. What is important is this isn’t the first scandal that’s come under Governor TIMMAH’s tenure.

See, there’s a little thing the kids like to call Feeding Our Future, a non-profit organization in Minnesota designed to help feed children in need. What it became was a massive fraud case where millions of dollars were taken in, but few, if any, children got fed. But don’t worry! Governor TIMMAH is on the case! He announced a new fraud prevention program designed to address the Feeding Our Future scandal. And only 3 years after the federal government caught wind of the fraud! Way to go TIMMAH!

But, wait! There’s more! Behind the Shirley video there is another layer of corruption, that being possible fraud through the state’s Child Care Assistance Program. The state gave out money to daycare centers where there was no evidence of children actually on site with hours of operation well outside the norm. Apparently, this situation has been a thing since at least 2018 with a number of whistleblowers coming forward to advise of the potential fraud.

And Governor TIMMAH took that information…and promptly ignored it.

Along with potential Medicaid fraud.

And possible money laundering.

Oh, and maybe funneling money to Al-Shabaab, a known terrorist group operating out of…Somalia.

Hmmm…it seems there are a lot of ties to Somalia in these scandals, including to a member of the Squad, Rep. Ilhan Omar. Although there haven’t been solid links between Omar and the fraud, President Donald Trump wasted no time in making the connection. Granted, this is Trump’s standard operating procedure, so I’m not going to start demanding she address her ties or lack thereof to the Somalian scammers. Besides, she has enough on her plate dealing with allegations she married her brother to commit immigration fraud.

Or so I’ve heard.

Regardless, the Somalian connection is hard to ignore (not that the Left isn’t willing to try, mind you), and people on different sides of the political spectrum have offered thoughts as to why. Conservatives are split between whether it’s the Somali culture or the Muslim faith that drives the fraud. And the Left? Racism, sexism, and Islamophobia, of course.

Now, I can’t speak to the Somali culture part of the argument. I’ve never been to Somalia, and if I did I’m not sure I would talk about it. However, I can speak to the Islamic side of the argument because the Quran is pretty clear about how it’s totes cool to grift non-believers through a concept called taqiyya. Although modern scholars have tried to muddy the waters a bit to suggest Islam doesn’t allow deception towards non-Muslims, even the scholars admit it’s allowed if Muslims are under duress in a foreign country.

You know, like when they’re caught scamming tax dollars from Americans?

Even if you don’t buy the Muslim angle, human nature tells us people will lie to hide their deception, especially if that deception makes them money. Considering the size of the fraud and those who enabled/were enriched by it, they might have a few billion reasons to lie.

So, how do we fix Minnesota? Good question, and one where I don’t have an easy answer. Sure, we could trade the state to Canada for a first round draft pick, but it will only cause US/Canadian relations to get more sour. Rooting out the fraud would be a positive first step, but we’d be fighting the Left (who has a vested interest in maintaining/hiding the fraud) at every turn. Mass deportations? Another non-starter, unfortunately, because the money is still gone and I’m not sure the fraudsters have the cash on hand to start making payments.

Given the extent of the fraud, it may be impossible to save Minnesota without a full-blown political shift. Not that it can’t happen, but I’m more likely to trust 3 day old convenience store sushi than I am Minnesota going red in the near future.

In the meantime, we have to stay on these frauds, and not just the people stealing money from us, either. Every Leftist who says any damn thing even remotely defending or diverting attention away from the fraud needs to be challenged, not on the emotions or the attempts to divert attention away from it, but purely on the facts. Leftists hate that. Deny their bullshit reality and insert your own, and watch them screech in horror.

Of course, I have another suggestion. Leftist millionaires and billionaires talk about how little they pay in taxes, right? Send them the bill for the fraud and demand payment, like, three years ago.