Author: Thomas

I'm a writer and a ranger and a young boy bearing arms. And two out of the three don't count.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

There are some things about the 1970s that I miss. Great music. The Bicentennial. The lack of millennials. Yet, there are some things I wish would stay there.

One of those things is leisure suits, but since they’re not really that relevant, we’re going to talk about inflation. If you’ve been watching your nickels and dimes lately, you’ll see those nickels and dimes aren’t going as far as they used to, say, a year ago. Hmmm…I wonder what happened within the past year that could have caused that to happen. I don’t know, but I’m Biden my time, if you know what I mean.

But if listen to the Left, this current round of inflation is no big deal and we shouldn’t freak out over rising costs. Of course, these same Leftists think Paul Krugman is knowledgeable on economics, so you can take that with a grain of salt. Meanwhile, let’s take a look at inflation from someone who isn’t notorious for being wrong.

inflation

What the Left thinks it means – a normal economic condition that shouldn’t concern us

What it really means – an economic condition worsened by bad economic policy

I recognize economics is a subject so dry it makes the Sahara Desert look like Atlantis, but I do have to go into a bit of it to give us a baseline of knowledge to understand the impact.

When the cost of business goes up, goods and services get more expensive, resulting in the producers getting less money for the same effort. The producers then have to make a decision to address the shortfall, everything from adjusting the price to firing employees. More often than not, they raise prices, which in turn affects the value of our money.

But that’s not the only thing that affects monetary value. Politicians indirectly have an impact on it through legislation, regulation, and regurgitation (of talking points). One glib comment from a politician or squawking head and the economy can tank faster than a Proud Boys stand-up act at the Apollo. Even the hint of some new taxes or regulations of a particular industry can create economic instability.

Fortunately, we don’t have a current President who is notorious for making ill-informed staaaaa…oh, crap.

Say what you will about Donald Trump (and, believe me, I have), but one thing I will give him credit for is understanding how the economy works. And before you comment on the number of bankruptcies he’s filed, keep in mind Trump has been a part of the American social fabric since the mid 80s. He’s been all over everything from casinos to reality shows to steaks to online education. He’s the orange Ron Popeil.

Compare that to the laundry list of political and media knuckleheads who can’t tell their assets from a hole in the ground, and yet have the power to impact the economy without knowing how it works. (I’m looking at you, Socialist Socialite.) And, as it turns out, these are the ones who make the statements that cause the most economic headaches.
Take the aforementioned Paul Krugman, for example. He may have a Nobel Prize, but the fact he’s wrong more often than he’s right condemns both Krugman and the Nobel Committee. I mean, would you follow the advice of someone who said the Internet was a fad and would go the way of the fax machine (it didn’t) and advised people to get out of the Stock Market after Donald Trump was elected because it was going to crash (it didn’t)?

Oh, and did I mention Krugman is also one of the people saying inflation isn’t that big of a problem right now?

Although inflation is a pretty easy concept to grasp, the Left doesn’t get it, mainly because they aren’t economically-minded (except when it comes to their own bottom lines). A big reason for that is because they rarely think of money as a tangible matter. To them, it tends to be symbolic in nature, namely as a symbol for the rich oppressing the poor, men oppressing women, and so on. As a result, their “solutions” to the problems they make up…I mean find are simplistic. Just take X amount from Person A and give it to Person B and all will be right with the world!

Of course, they never see themselves as being Person A because they love spending other people’s money on stuff they want. They see money as power, which I can grant them to an extent. As long as they have money, they think they have power, but only they know how to use it property. Just ask them. That’s why there are a lot of rich Leftists out there. And the irony of their greed while chastising others for it is not lost on your humble correspondent.

The problem is their lack of understanding of the actual costs of inflation usually winds up hurting the people Leftists always want to court come election time. When prices go up, the ability for a significant chunk of the population to buy even basic goods goes down. The Leftist solution is to give more of other people’s money to that population while getting them to believe they deserve it, or should I say entitled to it. It works great to keep rich white Leftists in power, but it sucks if you’re constantly on the economic treadmill trying to make ends meet. But it’s never the Left’s fault. It’s always someone else. For example, President Joe Biden blamed the rising cost of beef, chicken, and pork on…wait for it…the meat producers! To believe that, though, you have to believe the Left had no influence on prices skyrocketing due to inflation when they have control over the laws getting passed and policies getting enacted.

But they don’t care because a) they assume everyone is as dumb as they are, and b) most of the Leftists who are okay with rising inflation make enough money to afford it. And it all goes back to their greed. After all, as long as it doesn’t inconvenience them, the Left is fine watching people suffer at their hands.

The Party of Compassion, everybody!

In order for us to weather the self-inflicted economic storm, we need to use our heads when it comes to spending. Cut coupons, comparison shop, budget for needs rather than wants, and do what you can to keep costs down, including learning how to make or grow what you might need to buy. Granted, not everyone is Bob Villa or has a green thumb, but it’s never too late to pick up some pointers or ask questions from those who are more knowledgeable. The one currency that never experiences fiscal ups-and-downs is human kindness. Even if today’s more divisive world, you can find someone willing to lend a hand in times of need.

The other thing we can do, which might a bit harder, is to vote for candidates with a strong understanding of economics. This isn’t a “Vote Straight Ticket Republican” idea, since the knuckleheads who got us into this mess come from both major parties. Take a hard look at what a candidate says and grill him or her on the economy. If they give a half-hearted or nonsensical answer, strike them from your short list. If they give a solid answer or an answer that checks out from the research you do ahead of time, give them a second look. Even if they aren’t your favorite person, ask yourself if you can afford a popular dullard impacting any part of the economy and vote accordingly.

The dollar you save might be your own.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As I’ve noted a few times in these missives, the Left doesn’t do long-term thinking, or thinking in general to be fair. Since Democrats took control of the Senate back in 2020, the Left has been drooling over the potential policy gains they could make. But there was a problem, or more accurately, two problems named Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. Both identify as Democrats, but aren’t necessarily on the Leftist bandwagon. Which means, Leftists hate them.

Manchin and Sinema have been on the lips of many Leftist vipers, including our favorite Socialist Socialite most recently decrying how things would be so much better if they would just put party above country and vote the way they’re supposed to. (I’m paraphrasing, but that’s the general gist of the Socialist Socialite’s tweets.)

Normally, internal struggles within the Democrats brings a smile to my face, except when it makes the Left mad. Then, I laugh a lot. Either way, it’s time we look at the two Senators responsible for so many Leftist breakdowns.

Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema

What the Left thinks it means – Two Democrat Senators who prevent any and all progress from being made

What it really means – Two Democrat Senators who understand the role of the Senate better than the Leftists

Back in the day, the Founding Fathers envisioned a two-body legislative branch: the House, which would be responsible for listening to the people and proposing legislation, and the Senate, which would be responsible for thinking through the logistics of what the House sent them. Today, neither body is particularly interested in listening to the people and the hardest thing most Senators deliberate about is their belly button lint. Just be glad Jerrold Nadler isn’t a Senator, kids.

When it comes to Manchin, he’s garnered the ire of the Left for years because he’s an exception to the rule. I may not always agree with his decisions, but it’s clear he doesn’t just think about what his party wants. He actually thinks about what the voters in his state want. That bastard!

Then, there’s Sinema. On paper, she’s a Leftist’s wet dream. She’s attractive, bisexual, and was able to beat a Republican to win her seat. She’s practically Katie Hill, but without a thing for staffers. I think you see where this is going, but I love to say it. Eventually her star in Leftist circles dropped when she decided to vote the way her constituents wanted instead of how the Left wanted her to vote.

The reason for the Left’s dismay is the same in both cases: they feel entitled to Manchin and Sinema’s votes because of their party affiliation. Granted, the Right has the same problem, but they aren’t as butthurt as the Left are. To wit, there aren’t any Republicans trying to force Lisa Murkowski to vote a certain way through insults, invectives, and appeals to popularity, but there are a lot of Leftists who keep bringing up how Senate Democrats need to either pressure Manchin and Sinema to vote “the right way” or strip them of their committee assignments.

Yeah, I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say the Left’s approach isn’t going to work because…how can I put this delicately…pissing off the people you’re trying to persuade doesn’t end well.

Of the two, I think Manchin has an easier road because he’s established himself in his home state of West Virginia, which means better name recognition. Combine that with the fact West Virginian Democrats tend to be more purple than blue (which Manchin understands far better than the Leftists suggesting he should be primaried), and he could fall into a coma and still win reelection. (Not that I want that to happen, mind you.)

Sinema, on the other hand, hasn’t been in office that long, so she will see far more pressure from constituents in a bluer Arizona. If current polling is accurate (and even that has to be taken with a lake of salt), Democrats see her unfavorably, lagging behind fellow Senator Mark Kelly and President Joe Biden. That may have been before Biden’s recent Afghanistan debacle, though. Either way, she does have an ace up her sleeve: non-Democrat voters. There is a segment of the population who think the Left go too far and look for people who buck the party or try to put the brakes on their agenda. Sinema checks those boxes and looks sympathetic, especially when she’s being attacked constantly by Leftists. Whether that will be enough to overcome the Leftist exodus from her corner will be seen soon enough.

The impact of Manchin and Sinema’s reluctance to join the Left on matters ranging from eliminating the filibuster to statehood for the District of Columbia cannot be overstated. With the Senate so close to the political tipping point, Democrats need every vote they can get, including those from more Left-leaning Republicans, to advance their agenda. The more Democrats break away from the leadership, the harder it gets for Democrats to get anything done. Even with Kamala Harris as the appropriately-yet-ironically-worded trump card in a 50-50 tie, Senate Democrats need to be able to get to 50 votes to force the issue. Let’s just say it gets harder to get to 50 when you keep lambasting two of the Senators necessary to pass what you want.

The Left also overlooks two other Senators who tend to vote with the Democrats, Independents Bernie “Five House Socialist” Sanders and Angus “Burger” King. These two could be under the microscope next, provided they decide to actually be independent. Fortunately for the Left, Sanders and King tend to roll over like a dog wanting belly scritchies, so the Left doesn’t attack them much. If Manchin and Sinema would do the same, the Left wouldn’t have a reason to attack them.

But I don’t think that’s in their character. They have strong beliefs and, dare I say it, character, which make the Leftists attacking them look petty by comparison. (Of course, they are petty, but that’s beside the point.) For the self-professed party of inclusion to be so exclusionary when it comes to ideological matters draws the curtain back so we can see what’s motivating the Left to attack Joe Manchin and Krysten Sinema: lust for power.

Either that or they’re just assholes.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The world has some really evil people in it, but there is one who is at the top of the heap. His actions have caused thousands of COVID-19 deaths, threatened millions more, and doesn’t follow the science like the way we’re told it has to be followed. I’m speaking of, of course, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Or at least that’s what the Left thinks of him.

With the attention DeSantis has garnered with the Left, I think it would be worthwhile to do a deep dive into the Governor to see if we can pinpoint why the Left hates him with the passion of a thousand suns.

Ron DeSantis

What the Left thinks it means – a cruel, incompetent governor who will kill as many people as he can through bad decisions

What it really means – Donald Trump with better impulse control

I think we’ve hit on the main reason the Left hates DeSantis, but more on that later.

Trying to keep track of how well different governors have been doing with the pandemic is like trying to calculate the color bleen: theoretically possible, but more likely to be maddening, and definitely pointless. While the sensible thing would be to count the number of cases and the number of deaths, the Left kept changing the rules to soften the blow of the multiple custerfucks from Democrat governors and to criticize Republican governors who had enough sense to, you know, not put COVID-19 patients in nursing homes where those susceptible to it were.

Among these eeeeevillll Republican governors was Ron DeSantis. While the Left fawned over Andrew “Sexual Assault and Letting Old People Die Are a Part of My Culture” Cuomo, DeSantis actually did the job Cuomo was being lauded for doing without actually doing it. And for that, the Left hates him.

Well, along with being a threat to the Left’s plans to keep the White House in 2024. And given how the current guy is doing, DeSantis only needs to keep breathing to beat him. If you think the Left had a hate boner for Donald Trump, prepare for one that will last far more than four years and will not require seeing a doctor because DeSantis dares to do something Donald Trump did and continues to do: call out the Left when they lie about him.

Let’s just say the Left has been very busy lying about DeSantis.

As I’ve noted before, the Left hates anybody who fights back against them in any way, and I do mean any. Even a marginal disagreement over policy can turn you in to persona non grata in Leftist circles. Just as Lawrence Summers, a former Harvard President whose only crime was to note men and women are better at different tasks and fields of study. How scandalous! When it comes to DeSantis, though, the Left have been having fits over how he and his communications director keep calling them out.

Of course, Leftists have fits at the drop of a hat, so that’s nothing new.

There is a line of thought that the reason Leftists are going so hard at DeSantis is because they’re afraid he’s going to run in 2024. I agree with this to a point, but I think there’s a bigger fear at work here. The Left is afraid of a 2016 repeat where a candidate who wasn’t supposed to win actually does. It wasn’t that long ago that the Left underestimated Donald Trump (when they weren’t using him as a ratings boost, I might add) and miscalculated just how unpopular Hillary Clinton was (or at least how clueless the Left is when it comes to acknowledging the screamingly obvious).

If current trends continue, 2024 is going to come down to an established Leftist pawn…I mean candidate in Joe Biden, an inexperienced Leftist pawn…I mean candidate in Kamala Harris, and whomever the Republicans put forward. If current trends continue further, the Republican candidate is going to be Ron DeSantis, which works against the Left. Whether the Left supports the doddering old fool or the doddering young fool, they will have a hard sell for the American people, although not as hard a sell as when they tried to convince people to vote for Hillary.

The other aspect that scares the ever-loving bat snot out of the Left is DeSantis isn’t as unpredictable as Donald Trump was. Oh, DeSantis is as passionate and driven as Trump was, but he has a better control over his passions and words, which makes him Trump 2.0: all the Leftist butt-whuppin’ with a smaller likelihood of mangling the English language. That alone makes DeSantis dangerous to the Left. Oh, they’ll still paint him as a racist/sexist/homophobic/bigoted/fascist/religious nutjob/Hitler-wannabe, but it won’t affect him while having the potential to pimp-slap the Left in the process. Because…lack of self-awareness.

While DeSantis isn’t going to be everyone’s cup of Earl Gray (I’m looking at you, Lincoln Project), there is something to be said of someone who doesn’t take shit from Leftists and lets them know exactly what he feels about them. If some people have their way, that something will be “Mister President.”

For others, it will be “Skippy.” Don’t ask me why.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The year was 2001, and it was an even bigger odyssey than Arthur C. Clarke or Stanley Kubrick could have ever imagined. We were still reeling from a contested election, and making all sorts of hanging chad jokes in the process. We were still learning about the evil that is Nickelback. And there was the War on Terror, which sent thousands of young men and women to the Middle East to fight with different factions, such as the Taliban.

Now, 20 years later, we’re leaving Afghanistan (at least in part) and leaving it to…the Taliban.

As much as I like reruns, there is a logical limit to everything, except Leftist rhetoric. While the Left is trying to put a positive spin on the debacle…I mean successful withdrawal from Afghanistan, we would be remiss if we didn’t take a look at the new boss, who is the same as the old boss.

the Taliban

What the Left thinks it means – bad guys who are better than the far right in America

What it really means – terrorists who should have been wiped from the face of the Earth when we had the chance

In the aftermath of 9/11, we were looking for the people responsible for the multiple attacks on America and landed on the Taliban, both figuratively and literally. After some fighting, the Taliban were removed like David Duke at the NAACP Image Awards. Then, we did something which, in retrospect, was kinda dumb. Like inviting David Duke to the NAACP Image Awards.

We let them go.

Instead of curb stomping them, we let them get away, including one Osama bin Laden. You know, the mastermind behind 9/11? Although we eventually found and killed bin Laden, that didn’t kill the Taliban. Quite the opposite, actually. That’s because of the nature of Middle Eastern terrorism.

Even though there are multiple terrorists groups operating in the Middle East, they aren’t exactly working out of different Q’orans. Their main purpose is to spread Islam worldwide through conversion, coercion, or, their personal favorite, killing the non-believers. So far, they haven’t been that successful with the first two methods, but with the third option, they’ve done a bang-up job. Literally.

And the Taliban are no different. They will be as bad as they were in 2001, if not worse. That means women and children will be endangered, rights will be restricted, and we will have to learn more hard-to-pronounce names to at least appear to be educated on the goings on. And it means our political leaders will have no clue of what’s going on in the first place.

Case in point, the Biden Administration. Instead of worrying about the destabilization of the reason and the geopolitical implications of the Taliban regaining power in Afghanistan, our fearless leader and his ever-on=the-ball Administration are concerned with…the Taliban being inclusive. And remember, kids, Joe Biden is supposed to be the foreign policy expert.

In other words, we’re boned.

Although the Biden Administration is willing to take the Taliban at their word, there are two big reasons we shouldn’t. One, they have no reason to follow through with any agreement they make with us. Granted, I’m no expert on the Muslim faith, but when their interpretation of their holy book makes it okay to lie to and kill non-believers, I’m pretty sure they’re less trustworthy than a car dealership working straight commission and with a lot full of lemons that would make Country Time want to file a lawsuit against them.

Oh, and the second reason? They’re freaking terrorists!

Of course, this hasn’t been a problem in the past because we used to have a good intelligence network in that part of the world. Then, some Leftists (such as the Commander in Briefs, Bill Clinton) got it in their heads that getting intelligence from terrorists might make us look bad. Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news to the Left, but the best intelligence against the bad guys comes from the bad guys. The result of our insane pearl-clutching can be seen where the Twin Towers once stood.

Am I blaming Bill Clinton for 9/11? No, but it’s hard to argue his actions didn’t have at least some bearing on what lead up to it, including the infamous briefing that amounted to “Osama bin Laden may try to do something with airplanes at some point down the road” written by the same group of people that thought satellites could do a better job of getting secret information from terrorists than having actual people on the inside.

The point is the Left got us into this mess by inadvertently giving terrorists what they want and getting nothing in return. This is because the Left’s version of foreign policy is always having to say we’re sorry. That’s sure to get you a lot of friends, but very few will be allies, especially if there’s hard work to be done. You know, like trying to execute a mass exit from a country where the enemy is heavily entrenched and now has access to the toys we’re abandoning?

The Left isn’t the sole party to blame here, but they are the ones who keep setting the rules of engagement and making the blunders that lead us into having to deal with groups like the Taliban on a regular basis. Unfortunately, there’s not a lot we can do until our leaders change their minds on how to deal with the Taliban. And if I could humbly offer a suggestion, one that I’ve held since 9/11.

Go back to the original rules of engagement, namely 1) take out the enemy, 2) take or break their stuff, and 3) do steps 1 and 2 in such as way that it makes the enemy reconsider whether they want to continue hostilities. If so, repeat steps 1-3. If not, then they might be willing to knock off their shenanigans for fear of us repeating steps 1-3. In recent years, we haven’t had the courage to even attempt step 1 without feeling guilty. We need to stop feeling guilty when it comes to dealing with people who want us dead.

Until then, we will have to put up with history repeating itself. in other words, a geopolitical version summer TV.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

To put it mildly, social media have impacted our culture in widespread and somewhat disturbing ways. One of the cultural areas infected…I mean affected by social media is language. You know it’s gotten too far when Grandma says spells out OMG in response to anything.

After the 2020 Presidential election, Leftists have found a new way to refer to former President Donald Trump: TFG, or The Former Guy. Yes, the geniuses who gave us Faux News (not quite the burn the Left thinks it is if you know how to pronounce “faux”), GQP, and DeathSantis have come up with another term to describe/dismiss someone they hate. Whether it works is subject to how close to the Leftist hivemind you are.

Now, time to put a bit more thought into the term than the Left have.

TFG

What the Left thinks it means – a way to refer to Trump without mentioning his name because it annoys him

What it really means – the new way the Left tries to “otherize” Trump because he annoyed the Left

Back in the days of the Soviet Union, the Russians perfected the art of rewriting history when it came to troublesome countrymen, no matter how high-up they were with the Party. Photographs would be altered, history would be changed, and the troublesome person would be made not to exist. As much as the Left would love to wipe out the last four years, it’s hard since the object of their derisions was so public.

When faced with that obstacle, they figured out the next best thing, at least to them: refer to him as TFG. That way Trump doesn’t get mentioned, but those in the know get a clear message of who the original poster was talking about. In the Left’s hivemind, it deprives Trump of what he wants (publicity). And it gives them a little perverse joy in the process, so that’s good, right?

Yeah, not so much.

Even though they’re not mentioning Trump by name, the fact remains he’s still on their mind. (And, no, that’s not a typo.) I believe the term is “living rent-free.” The more the Left obsesses about Trump, no matter what they call him, the more it’s not going to matter. There’s a new President to deal with, and if your previous attempts to go after Trump are any indication, even a ham sandwich would be able to beat your indictments. There is zero upside to the Left’s tactic here. It doesn’t move the needle to get people to support them, wastes time (and brain cells), and can be easily disregarded by the intended target.

That leaves only one other possible reason the Left refers to Trump as TFGL they want to be communists. Okay, I’m only half-joking about that. What I mean is the Left wants to adopt the Soviet method and erase Trump from history. Using TFG as often as they do, they think it will accomplish that, but instead it will “otherize” him.

There is a tendency among some people to turn ideological opponents into either non-entities or the worst possible people in the world. In either case, the targets of such an approach are “otherized.” Unfortunately, it’s not limited to Leftists. Many politically-minded people do this to characterize anyone who doesn’t fall in line with their political mindset as the next coming of Hitler, but meaner. Sometimes the characterizations are on the money, but most of the time they don’t. That’s the problem with assumptions: they make an ass out of u and mptions.

The other problem with “otherizing” people is it dehumanizes them. As much as the Left hates Trump and wants him to go away, he’s still a human being. A flawed, loud, and at times boorish human being, but a human being all the same. When you treat someone like they don’t deserve an iota of respect, that you detest his or her very existence, it stimulates a darker part of your psyche, one that allows you not to feel anything when something bad happens to them. The Germans call it schadenfreude. I call it being a heartless dick, which could apply to a few Germans if you really think about it.

Seriously, though, “otherizing” people reflects on the hatred and ignorance of the people doing it. And before any Leftists reading this say “But you’re doing it, you hypocrite,” you may be right to a point. The only difference is I don’t hate Leftists. I think they’re wrong and power-mad, but I can’t bring myself to hate them like they hate me for two reasons: 1) I recognize their humanity, and 2) I’m getting too old to hate others. Hate takes up a lot of energy and it gives the person or thing you hate a level of control over you.

So, by reducing Trump to three letters, Leftists are unwittingly admitting he controls them. Of course, to anyone paying attention over the past 4-5 years already know that, but it’s always nice when the Left acts accordingly.

The way to respond to Leftists using TFG is to repurpose it. Each letter can be used to express an alternate and opposite intention. While the Left uses it to refer to “The Former Guy,” why not agree because it means “Trump’s Great, Friend” or “Terrific, Great, and Fantastic” to you? You can come up with your own versions, but by using a little intellectual ju-jitsu, it can turn a negative into a positive.

Plus, it will confuse or anger Leftists, so…win-win!

MeToo, But Trump!

In case you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably heard Andrew “I’m Not Fredo, But I’m as Smart as Him” Cuomo has resigned as the Governor of New York after allegations of sexual harassment and assault against female employees. And that’s after a year of the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) slobbering over how well he deal with the COVID-19 crisis.

No word from around 10-15,000 elderly constituents who died as a result of Cuomo’s ineptitude. Granted, I’m not a doctor and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but even I understand that putting infected people near others who are highly susceptible to the infection isn’t a good idea. But that’s a blog post for another crime…

After the allegations came to light, Leftists came forward and…waited for the Attorney General’s report to come out before taking the stunning and brave position that Cuomo needed to step down. Even now, though, Leftists are finding ways to discredit the findings to avoid looking like they were wrong. But their favorite is “What about Trump?” because apparently the former President did far worse than Cuomo is alleged to have done and with greater frequency.

Here’s the thing. The allegations against Cuomo have been investigated and found to be credible, credible enough for law enforcement to further pursue the former Governor. The allegations against Trump, though scandalous and equally as disgusting, have not been investigated fully, so we don’t know how valid they are. Yet, the latter’s allegations are treated as gospel truth while the former’s allegations are being taken through the spin cycle (and I’m not talking about laundry, either).

The obvious duplicity is low-hanging fruit, but there another angle not a lot of people have taken so far, and it involves the MeToo and Time’s Up movements. These movements were designed to help women come forward and fearlessly call out sexual abusers in positions of power.

You know. Like…oh, I don’t know…Andrew Cuomo?

That’s where the Left’s lack of consistency comes into play. While waiting for the facts come out is the right tactic, the Left doesn’t apply that standard consistently. In looking at the timeline of the “Luv Guv’s” actions, there were enough red flags to trigger bulls for miles around, but no one within Leftist circles took the care to notice and apply their own logic. With Trump, the mere allegations were enough to warrant a full-blown investigation into each and every claim, no matter how shaky the evidence was. Ditto for Brett Cavanaugh. But when it came to Cuomo and when it comes to other Leftist figures, it’s a wait and see if anyone remembers after the stonewalling concludes.

At the heart of the matter lies the Left’s attitude towards women. As long as they can use you for their ends, Leftists will always be behind you (which, as we’ve seen with Cuomo, may not be the best place for them). The depth of that support, however, isn’t that great because the Left will always view you as helpless and incapable of succeeding without their help. And anytime women fail, the Left has any number of ready-made excuses that protect women by deflecting blame.

Just don’t see through the Left’s bullcrap or assert yourself without their help. Otherwise, you’re not a real woman to them. And, yes, I’ve seen Leftists say that to women who disagree with them, including a former Secretary of State.

I’m not sure, but I think that’s misogyny.

When you consider this, it makes the Cuomo story into a whole new and creepy direction. And it leads to another question: how many women have to endure the kind of behavior Cuomo and other Leftist males before the Left shapes up? Let’s just say I’m not holding my breath. As with every group within the Leftist hivemind, women are treated as chess pieces to be moved and sacrificed as desired. Although I’m sure there are women who would be flattered at the attention of a powerful man, it doesn’t make it any less troublesome for the Left.

Nor does it make the “But Trump” defense any more valid. A scummy action is a scummy action, regardless of political affiliation. If even one of the allegations against Trump is investigated (by someone other than Leftists on Twitter) and found to be legally actionable, I will be among the first to demand charges be filed. And Leftists will, too.

The only difference? I won’t be a hypocrite when I do it.

Sometimes Less Is Moratorium

Last week, the nation’s Capitol was awash in moratorium fever, and not even a cowbell would have quelled it. House Democrats started beating the drums about the end of the eviction moratorium put in place due to COVID-19 and told us it was important that it get extended by the end of July. Of course, they knew about this in June, but they just had to get it taken care of with mere hours to spare.

Any parent who has worked until 2 AM on a science project due later that day for a son or daughter knows this feeling.

As much as I would love to dunk on the process in this case, the actual subject of this piece is the eviction moratorium itself. What started off as an act of kindness in the midst of a fracking pandemic has become a hot button issue where very few people pushing for the moratorium extension have fully thought out the implications. (I know. I’m as shocked as you are that a dumb Leftist idea wasn’t planned.)

The eviction moratorium seeks to forgive past due rent due to the economic impacts of the pandemic. With businesses either slowing down or going out of business altogether, it made sense to allow some flexibility. The only problem with that is some people will take advantage of it. What was considered a safety net was quickly and easily turned into a hammock, all with the help of people like the Leftists pushing to extend the moratorium. Between the handful of economic relief checks and the changes to the unemployment process, it became easier and more profitable to sit at home and let the government take care of the details than it was to find a new job.

Oh, and to spend the “free” money on big-ticket items instead of, you know, paying the rent as outlined in the rental contract.

Wait a minute…am I saying the renters had to sign a contract to live in someone else’s property? Yes, yes, I am. Maybe they didn’t cover this at Leftist colleges and universities, but a rental agreement is a contract and getting Big Daddy Government to step in on your behalf doesn’t negate the contract. At least, not yet. If Leftists get their way, the federal government will be able to undo any contract it wants, even ones they’re not a party in. That in and of itself should scare you, but if not, I can put on a Frankenstein’s Monster mask and say it because, damn it, I care.

But this has a much larger impact than what the Left want to believe. Instead of sticking it to landlords, who are often regular people instead of megacorporations, the moratorium extension has the power to make it so the megacorporations get to own more rental property. Here’s how. When you are the owner of rental property, your income is dependent upon rental income coming in on a regular basis. COVID-19 put a King Kong-sized monkey wrench into this situation. Instead of being able to count on rental income, the owners either had to take the lumps without expecting to get paid or wait for a government bailout. And since the latter doesn’t quite fit with the Left’s strategy or their understanding of basic economics, the landlords had to eat the losses. Great if you’re a renter struggling to find a use for a Bachelors degree in Albino Native American Feminist Slam Poetry Studies, but bad if you’re the landlord.

If the moratorium becomes a permanent thing, it’s likely fewer people will rent out properties, provided those properties aren’t foreclosed upon due to…non-payment! Once the properties get foreclosed, usually anybody can snatch it up including a little organization called BlackRock. BlackRock just happens to be one of the largest property management companies in the country. Oh, and I forgot to mention they have former employees working in the Biden Administration as economic advisors after serving in government roles under President Barack Obama.

Scummy as hell, but hey. No mean Tweets, right?

Now, here’s the Rod Serling style twist. By pushing for the federal government to extend the eviction moratorium, Leftists are making it possible for a corporation to corner the rental property market. Brilliant! But I’m sure the Socialist Socialite has already figured that out and is lobbying against the moratohhhhh yeah, she’s in favor of it. Just goes to show you people can get a degree in something and still not know a damn thing about it.

Anyway, the Leftists pushing the moratorium haven’t thought through the issue carefully enough to be informed. Then again, that’s never stopped them before, so it’s not that hard to imagine they would spout off about the moratorium without considering the economic and legal implications which will screw over members of their base while enriching at least some of their donors.

At least there aren’t mean Tweets, though, amirite?

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With the change of Presidents, there tends to be a change of federal officials. One of the recent changes is in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, which if you think about it is an awesome way to start a party. Instead of party tips, the BATF helps to regulate the items in their name and to enforce the laws/regulations surrounding them. And former ATF agent David Chipman wants to be in charge of it.

This got me thinking about the nature of the organization and its place in this world. The Left obviously tolerate it or else they would be attacking it constantly (while simultaneously not doing a thing to get rid of it because reasons). And we could do worse than a former agent heading up the organization, right? Well, that’s a sticky question, as we’ll find out!

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

What the Left thinks it means – a necessary government agency charged with the purpose of protecting Americans

What it really means – what would happen if you gave Paul Blart federal policing power

The ATF as we know it came into being in 1972, the decade that gave us the Pet Rock, polyester leisure suits, and disco. But unlike the three things I just mentioned, the ATF hasn’t gone out of style and still affects society. For the most part, they’ve kept out of the public eye and done their jobs. But when you’ve seen what they’re doing, it’s usually not because they’re handing out hot dogs and balloons for the kids. Just ask David Koresh…oh, wait…

Regardless of where you stand on what happened to the Branch Davidians, it’s clear the ATF doesn’t always do the right thing. The Clinton Department of Justice’s investigation admitted the ATF screwed up, but blamed the fiery outcome on the Branch Davidians because, well, reasons. If someone with the kind of power the federal government wields makes a boo-boo that results in property destruction, mass death, and bad PR for decades to come, we might not want it involved in our daily lives. Even if these mistakes are few and far between, it’s hard to overlook them.

Which bring us back to David Chipman. Seems he was on the ground in Waco and had a part in how everything went down. Doesn’t that instill a buttload of confidence in his leadership?

Typical government incompetence aside, the real problem I have with the ATF is redundancy. I’m a simple man, so I skew towards simple things. But Leftists don’t like simplicity because it makes it harder for them to install bureaucratic “upgrades” to consolidate their power base. Remember, the sole purpose of bureaucracy is to become necessary to as many people as possible, and the ATF is no different.

Think about what is in the name of the agency. Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. Alcohol and tobacco are considered to be drugs. If only there were an agency already in existence that would handle drugs…oh, wait! We have one: the Food and Drug Administration! With a little work, two-thirds of the ATF’s focus would be taken over by an agency that actually deals with drugs. And I’m guessing the policing actions would come in handy when trying to get drugs approved, too!

That leaves the firearms. For the Leftists and the Constitutionally ignorant (but, I repeat myself), the Second Amendment gives people the right to be armed if they want. Still, there are some elements such as background checks that might be necessary to determine if a potential owner lacks a serious criminal record or has issues that might prevent him or her from operating the gun safely. Well, why not put that responsibility on the Department of Justice? If they have time to issue threats against Republican Governors who might defy the notion of a national mask mandate, they could spare the time to do a couple of background checks.

“But what about the ‘well-regulated militia’?” Leftists might ask. Simple. If you’re going to use that approach, it would fall under the Department of Defense. Either way, the ATF goes the way of an elderly person moving next door to a COVID-19 patient in a New York State retirement community. (And, yes, that was a Cuomo joke.)

With all of this, the next logical question is why we need a Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. And the logical answer is…we really don’t. So, why do we keep it around? Easy. Our government officials don’t want to get rid of it. The same goes for any number of agencies and programs currently in place across multiple Cabinet offices and departments. Just think of the ATF as a federal office that went through a copier, oh, 943 times.

Even so, it still has quite of bit of influence over our lives, especially for purveyors and fans of booze, drugs, and guns. As nice as it would be to see someone like a Ted Cruz or Rand Paul tear David Chipman not just a new one, but several, the fact remains the ATF isn’t essential to the operation and defense of our country. To that end, we shouldn’t have Chipman testifying and looking like a giant albino flounder because there shouldn’t be an office for him to occupy in the first place. The only way to end it is to keep on our elected officials to cut the fat. (And, no, that’s not a threat of violence against Jerrold Nadler.)

And this is where the Right needs to make good on their stated desire for smaller government, not big government they can control. The fact we have one government agency, let alone multiple ones, existing when they don’t need to be is a black eye to Republicans and conservatives. Either get rid of the excess, or just say “Hey, I only said I’m for small government because I wanted your votes and money.” Then we will know what kind of snakes you are and who we will need to vote for to get rid of you.

I hear there’s a guy from Ireland who’s pretty good at getting rid of snakes.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Regardless of where you fall on the “to vax or not to vax” question, it’s easy to see there are a number of Americans who aren’t getting the COVID-19 shot, and the Left is having a hard time figuring out why. They’ve done everything they can think of: commanding, coercing, and even bribery, but there is still a significant portion of the population passing on the “Fauci ouchie.” So, the Left has adopted a new term to describe those who absolutely refuse to get the COVID-19 shot: vax-hesitant.

Is the Left right…I mean correct? Are they completely more off-base than a shortstop looking to steal second against a pitcher and catcher who come from the Pee Wee Herman School of Athletics? Only one way to find out. Well, technically there are more, but there’s only one that will allow your humble correspondent to write a lot of words with the occasional joke thrown in for good measure.

vax hesitant

What the Left thinks it means – people who are still scared to get the COVID-19 vaccination for whatever reasons

What it really means – people who are exercising a choice concerning their bodies that the Left doesn’t approve of

When you really think about the situation, it boils down to a matter of personal freedom. Whether you’re a hardcore anti-vaxer or someone who is merely vax hesitant, the point is there are people out there who have an issue with a government body telling them they have to get an injection to be part of society. They feel, and understandably so, these types of medical decisions should be personal, private, and a kept between a doctor and a patient.

Hmmm…now, where have I heard that kind of logic before? Could it be…from the Left when talking about abortion? Why, yes! Yes it is!

The fact the Left hasn’t discovered the duplicity of their positions between abortion and getting a vaccine is huge, yet not surprising. After all, these are the same folks who conflate speech they don’t like with violence. But it opens up an interesting dilemma, especially with the ones who insist there needs to be a government mandate to get vaccinated. You can say “my body, my choice” all you want, but this is an actual situation where your actions need to match your words or else it can and will be used against you by Republicans, most specifically pro-life Republicans. In other words, you’ve just given them the victory on abortion. Oops.

Then, there’s the racial aspect of this. Yes, I know I’m playing the race card here, but for once it’s appropriate. Although the vast majority of anti-vaxxers are seen as white Trump supporters, the fact is there is a significant number of vax hesitant folks aren’t white. In fact, they’re members of the black and Hispanic communities who may have taken the advice of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris when they said not to trust the vaccine coming from the Trump Administration. You know, the same folks who are now saying the vaccine can be trusted even though nothing has really changed…except the President and Vice President? Yeah, they’ve been paying attention along with the rest of us and finding the numerous flip-flops that makes John Kerry sue for copyright infringement more than a little concerning. Plus, there’s this history of other medical advances being tested on blacks in particular. Can you say “Agent Orange” boys and girls? I knew you could.

But wait, there’s more! The Left is attempting to lump in the extremes of the anti-vax side into the same group so they can be disregarded with the same wave of the hand. The issue is they really can’t be lumped together very well. Yes, there are the hardcore anti-vaxxers who will drag their feet no matter what, but there are two other groups: the aforementioned vax-hesitant group, and the anti-vax mandate group. We’ll get to the former in a bit, but I want to focus on the latter for a moment.

The anti-vax mandate group has a position worth discussing. It’s not anti-vax per se, but it’s anti-forced-vax. There’s an old saying about the camel’s nose in a tent. Well, the vax mandate has the potential to be not just the nose, but a whole caravan of camels taking up residence inside the tent and putting a Vacancy – Camels Welcome sign outside of it. And, to be honest, they’re right. Recent history alone has numerous examples of how government doing something for the common good has turned into the government taking more power than originally promised. And once the government takes power, they’re more likely to get along than to give it back. The anti-vax mandate crowd just wants us to make up our own minds about whether to get vaccinated and to not stick our noses (camel or otherwise) into the business of others. You know, treat people like adults?

That brings us to the vax-hesitant crowd. Although it’s similar to the anti-vax mandate group, it’s less about personal freedom and more about a lack of confidence in the process getting the vaccine into the public’s hands. Even the most strident pro-vaxxers promoting the COVID-19 vaccine are hard-pressed to hand-wave away the facts, namely how the current vaccines were developed under emergency circumstances and haven’t been fully tested. Put another way, we are the Beta test, and oddly enough it may cause people to get the Delta variant. And that lack of testing is a valid concern. Speaking as someone who has gotten the shots, I can say I haven’t been negatively affected. If anything, I’m getting 5G from my brain alone!

Seriously, though, the vax-hesitant have legitimate concerns that the Left can’t counter with dismissal, appeals to authority, or, their favorite, dishonest mockery. If we are to trust the science, as the Left wants us to do (unless the science contradicts them), it can’t be based on anything but the facts. You can’t take short cuts and get favorable results. At least, that’s what the guys who allegedly came up with cold fusion found out the hard way

What makes the Left’s obsession with getting everyone vaccinated so funny to me is how much they have to risk for the expected reward. Giving up on favorite voting blocs and bedrock issues won’t mean much if they fail to grab the power they want. And the Left tends to overreach like a poker player confident he or she has won a big pot before another player reveals a better hand. As we’ve seen in New York, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and California, the power grab is already making the Governors of those states less popular than the Chicago Cubs management right now.

If you want to fight for your right not to get the vaccine (and your right to party, coincidentally), recognize the Left’s attempts to make anyone opposed to getting it look like selfish meanie-heads. They are really pushing for full vaccination for some reason, but they aren’t giving us solid reasoning behind it; just “because science.” Just like with global climate change, the more the Left threatens and dismisses legitimate questions, the weaker their arguments are. And with the COVID-19 vaccinations, the arguments are wet-paper-sack-versus-Freddie-Kruger weak.

It seems the Left is going to a lot of trouble for little pricks. And for the vaccinations, too!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

It’s official. The Biden Administration is engaging in the War on Misinformation! As we breath a collective sigh of…well, utter confusion to be honest, we’re left with some serious questions. What is considered misinformation? Who determines what constitutes misinformation? What is Joe Biden’s favorite flavor of ice cream? (Okay, that last one wasn’t really mine. That’s an actual question asked of the President by a “reporter.”)

Ice cream question aside, we’re entering a strange new territory, one where the rules of reality as we know them are null and void. It’s to the point we’re one ironic twist away from a Rod Serling voiceover. This isn’t just a Leftist ploy; this is a question of reality itself, and we’re not even college-age stoners. Well, you might want to light up a fatty and settle in because this one is going to get weird.

misinformation

What the Left thinks it means – false information that damages society

What it really means – information that damages Leftist narratives

As I’ve noted before, the Left has a love/hate relationship with the truth. They love it when the truth backs them up, and they hate it when the truth doesn’t back them up (which is most of the time). With the advent of a Donald Trump Presidency, however, they started hugging the truth tighter than a “popular” girl’s prom dress. And, surprise surprise, the Left found misinformation with every Republican/conservative statement, no matter how factual the statement was. There’s a reason Trump supporters and others have come up with the #TrumpWasRight hashtag, and it’s not because they’re cult members.

It’s because, well, Donald Trump was right.

But the Left can’t bring themselves to admit the truth. After all, they claim reality has a liberal bias (except when it comes to the number of genders, the effects of Welfare on the poor, and the absurdity of the government spending money to prop up the economy, just to name three). When the facts don’t fit, the Left does its best to either memory hole the truth or poison the well (not literally, unless you count Flint, Michigan) by attacking the source instead of refuting the information.

I’ve covered an aspect of this previously when I discussed media “fact checkers”, but for those who haven’t read it yet, here’s the short version. Most fact checkers you’ll find are tainted by biases, especially well-known and oft-circulated ones like Snopes and FactCheck.org. They would scrutinize every word Donald Trump said to find the worst possible interpretation while giving Joe Biden as much leeway as a needle thrown in the Grand Canyon. Yes, I know this smacks of “whataboutism” but it’s not wrong. Check out Politifact’s recent “fact check” on whether President Biden wants to ban handguns, which is a direct quote from the man. Let’s just say Politifact’s interpretation is the fact checking equivalent of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. (Speaking of which, does Melinda get half of the foundation in the divorce?)

To bring this all together (finally), this process of partisan fact checking lends itself very well to misinformation. Combine that with social media’s lax and contradictory application of misinformation standards and you see the crisis for what it is. It’s like trying to get a sip of water from a firehose. There’s a good chance you’ll get something, but you’re more likely to get overwhelmed by the sheer volume being sent your way.

And that’s only part of the problem. Our attention spans are getting shorter than…wait, what was I talking about? Oh, yeah, attention spans! With the sheer amount of information we get on a daily basis, we have to pick and choose what we consume, which makes it easier for misinformation to get around. After all, if someone with some authority says something and it gets repeated by others, it must be right, right? Oh, by the way, Dr. Fauci, phone call on line 5, one for each of your positions on masking.

I don’t disagree with the notion misinformation can be destructive, but it gets more destructive when it becomes politicized because all politics is personal on some level. That’s why political attack ads are effective and still being used today. Where I part company with the Left is in the danger assessment. The Left claims misinformation can be deadly, citing the number of COVID-19 cases and President Donald Trump’s mishandling of the pandemic. If only we had followed the science and listened to our non-Trumpian leaders, we could have saved millions of lives!

Except not even the Left follows the science completely and gives off misinformation on the regular to sustain the notion President Trump made the pandemic worse. He could have taken other actions, sure, but while he was trying to get a handle on the situation, the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) gave constantly changing information. First it was “you don’t need masks” to “wearing masks is a sign of Asian hate” to “OHMYGODTHEWORLDISGONNADIEUNLESSYOUMASKUPANDQUARANTINEINPLACE” to “don’t trust the vaccinations because Trump rushed them to the public” to “maybe you should get them if you’re in a high risk group” to “OHMYGODYOUNEEDTOGETTHEFAUCIOUCHIEORYOUWILLKILLEVERYONE.” Put simply, the people who are so concerned now about misinformation are the ones who benefitted most from it politically and ideologically. If that and the gradual escalation of hysteria aren’t huge red flags that can be seen from orbit, I don’t know what to tell you.

Actually, I take that back. I do know what to tell you: be smart about what news you consume and do your own research before taking a stand. Not only will you be able to develop intelligent opinions, you will be able to ferret out the bad actors, and this time I’m not talking about Tara Reid. And don’t buy into the idea misinformation is in the eye of the beholder. It doesn’t matter who initially distributed it or what their intentions were or what greater good they think they’re serving. If something is wrong, it’s wrong. End of story.

And whether it’s the federal government or Big Tech doing it, I’m not a fan of the current crop of self-professed determiners of truth and falsehoods being the ones to dictate reality to us. Some of these folks are confused by the idea there are only two genders, for the love of Pete! Do you want these nozzleheads anywhere near the decision-making process on what is misinformation?

Anyway, I wish the Biden Administration the best of luck in their battle against misinformation. I mean, it couldn’t be any worse than our showing in the War on Drugs, right?