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.
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
With the Democratic Party looking more like the Titanic, but with more holes in the hull, they are trying anything they can get their hands on as a cudgel to beat Republicans with in the midterm elections. And I’m hoping it’s just figuratively at this point. And they think they have a winner.
Affordability.
Yes, from the party that gave us “It’s the economy, stupid,” the Left is going back to the economic well to tell us how everything is more expensive, thus creating an affordability crisis that affects the most vulnerable. They say everything from groceries to health care is too damn high and it’s the Republicans’ fault.
But is it?
Let’s go spelunking into this topic, shall we?
affordability
What the Left thinks it means – an economic situation where Republicans are making things more expensive out of cruelty and greed
What it really means – the Left trying to pawn off their bad decisions onto the Right
Much like a Chinese restaurant next door to a cat hospital, I don’t necessarily trust the Left when it comes to economics, mainly because they don’t know shit about it. But instead of being hungry an hour later, if you follow Leftist economic theory, an hour later you’re poor again.
On the surface, though, they seem to have the right of this. As Senator Chris “Too Lame for a Nickname” Murphy pointed out, electricity costs have gone up, and that’s something that impacts everyone rich or poor. He even produced a graph! How can Republicans refute a graph, man????
Simple. By knowing how a calendar works.
Seems the Senator’s graph was missing some context, namely the fact the biggest increases for electricity costs came under President Brick Tamland. But I’m sure that’s just an oversight. I mean, being a Senator as well as a body double for a tackling dummy is a lot of work. It just slipped through the cracks. It’s not like Leftists would blame Republicans for making something else, like…oh I don’t know…health insurance, unaffordable. You would have to be a complete dumbass to link the end of Obamacare subsidies with skyrocketing health care costs.
Well, fuck me sideways, they did. And by they, I mean the aforementioned tackling dummy stand-in.
Of course, this would be worrisome, except for the fact Obamacare was passed without a single Republican vote. And who supported the legislation that put the Obamacare subsidies on a limited schedule? Why, that would be Congressional Democrats!
Even beyond the halls of Congress, the Left is showing their true colors by going after a YouTuber who keeps pulling the curtain back and showing how the Left sucks at budgeting. I’m referring to Caleb Hammer, the host of a series called Financial Audit where people come to him with financial problems and he offers…shall we say brutal honesty. Although he stays pretty apolitical, the Left has gone out of its way to paint him as a fascist and, thus, dagnasty evil.
Why? Because he pushes for personal responsibility rather than living in the moment and paying the piper, well, never..
Of course, there’s another big reason: he proves the Left can’t budget for shit. Actually, let me take that back. Excrement can budget better than Leftists.
That’s why I take their concerns about affordability with a healthy amount of skepticism. (The Left, not the scat.) Their concept of affordability is based less on dollars and cents and more on political opportunism with a dash of emotional manipulation. Remember, the Left said the flaming dumpster fire that was the economy under President Brick Tamland was great and the only people who thought otherwise weren’t smart enough to see how great it was. Now, they’re saying the economy is horrible and anyone who thinks otherwise is, well, not smart enough to see how horrible it is.
And that’s why Queen Kamala the Appointed is our President right now. Oh, wait…
It’s this kind of attitude that fuels so much of Leftist ideology; the (often unfounded) belief Leftists are the smartest people in any room. And, surprise surprise, it fuels the talk of affordability, too. The Left believes they know enough about how the economy really is to “educate” the rest of us about it, even when their observations are so divorced from reality they’re trying to get alimony. As a result, the Left comes off as tone deaf and out-of-touch to average Americans, not to mention pretentious, overbearing, and just fucking wrong.
This next part is going to be a little big-brained, so if you’re not into that sort of thing, skip past this part and we’ll get back to your regularly scheduled profanity-laden humor soon.
The fatal flaw with the Left’s affordability argument is the same one it faces with their arguments in favor of a living wage: it’s so nebulous it’s impractical and unwieldy to enact. Affordability varies from person to person. Elon Musk could lose $100 million in his couch cushions without it negatively affecting him (although it would make his housekeeper really happy), but it would break most people.
And don’t think I miss the irony of government officials talking about affordability when they themselves don’t have to worry about whether they can afford a night out or a tank of gas. These people can’t be bothered to think outside of their penthouse suites, expensive meals, and gated communities.
But they can be bothered to think about how they can get the average American to ignore their personal experience and listen to their bullshit. Unfortunately for us, there are a lot of fiscally illiterate people out there. And a lot of the time we’re electing them to Congress.
But more to the point, it’s easy to baffle people with bullshit if they don’t have a rudimentary understanding of the subject matter. That’s why Caleb Hammer has a steady stream of guests beating a path to his door; because they make worse financial decisions than Enron. And with accountability being a four-letter word (partially because of Common Core math), the Left has a ready-made audience for their “it’s not your fault you suck at budgeting, but it is the evil rich people’s fault” platform.
That’s the most perverse part of the affordability “crisis.” The people who caused the problems we face are the ones who claim to have all the answers on how to get out of them. And these assholes know it. Outside of having a great fiscal awakening where everyone suddenly understands economics, I don’t think we’re going to see things get better for a loooooong time.
In the meantime, though, understand affordability is just another Leftist buzzword designed to gaslight you into thinking what you’re experiencing is just a facade, just like they did with President Brick Tamland’s economy. The thing is they’re not very good at it, like hiding the ineptitude of the previous President and Vice President. But instead of trying to figure out a way to capitalize on the bread-and-butter issues, the Left would rather lie to your face, spit in it, and call you stupid.
Oh, and then beg for your votes and wonder why they lose elections.
They really aren’t sending their best, are they? Then again, maybe they are…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I’ve often said the Left loves to control the narrative through control of the English language. So much of our modern vernacular comes from the Left’s lexicon (if you’ll pardon the expression, and even if you don’t, I’m using it anyway), such as “woke,” “political correctness,” and “Joe Biden is sharp as a tack.” And when there isn’t a word that describes what they want, they invent one.
I ran across one of these new words recently. As with most things these days, it started with a message on the Social Media Platform Formerly Known As Twitter by James Woods about sitting Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson. As you might expect, Leftists didn’t take too kindly to his take on the Justice’s intellectual prowess or lack thereof, but it wasn’t until one poster used the term “misogynoir” that I paid attention because once you’ve heard one Leftist bitching about something, you’ve heard their laundry list of offenses, real or imagined. Even so, this was a new one to me, so I decided to jump down this rabbit hole for this week’s Lexicon entry.
misogynoir
What the Left thinks it means – the intersection of racism and sexism
What it really means – a new term for old bullshit
Misogynoir isn’t exactly a new term, but it has its roots in more modern history. The term was coined by black feminist Moya Bailey in 2008 to describe hatred aimed at black cisgender and trans women and is steeped in the wonderful world of intersectionality. For those of you playing along at home, intersectionality is the idea that all oppression is connected. Think of it like one long human centipede, but with weirder hair color.
This allows for people of all walks of life (except for straight white men) to claim multiple systems of oppression at the same time. Conversely, it also creates an environment where you’re playing Pokemon: Oppression. Gotta catch ’em all! The more systems oppress you, the more of a victim you become and, thus, the higher your stature is within the Left.
Which is kinda sick when you think about it, and I do because my bank account is lower than the insole of a millipede with fallen arches.
Regardless, there is one thing about victimhood that often gets overlooked in the race to see who can be the most victimized: victimhood doesn’t define you unless you let it. The Left doesn’t see it that way; they only see the victim as a helpless soul that only they can “save” by…let me check my notes here…oh, yeah, enabling them.
Yes, the same people who say trans women can get pregnant are the ones saying it’s okay for you to be a victim, to feel all the fee-fees connected to it, and, above all else, vote for Leftists so you can continue to be a victim and get paid for it by the government. After all, it’s not your fault you were born the way you are! This was put upon you by The Man, and as long as you survive, you are the living embodiment of the double bird directed towards The Man.
Say what you will about the Left, and believe me I do, but they have the ability to get people to feel oppressed at everyday shit down to a science. I guess that makes them the Party of Science…
I’ll see myself out.
Anyway, I’m gobsmacked by how many otherwise semi-normal people are willing to take up the burden of others and make it their own, even if/when the most oppression they’ve actually faced was having a Starbucks barista charge for an extra shot of coffee in their steamed milk. And the ones who seem to feel the most guilt? Leftist white women.
It’s that reason that misogynoir is even a thing.
Leftists of color know they can get whites to capitulate to whatever bullshit they can imagine because they prey on guilt. And the more victimhood they can pile on, the guiltier white Leftists feel. Pretty good work (and I mean that in the professional wrestling sense) if you can get it.
But does it actually fix anything? Not really. Much like putting a Hello Kitty bandage on a gaping chest wound, it’s not helpful and actually counterproductive. Of course, if you put some Bactine on the wound…yeah, still not helpful.
When you start oppression stacking without attempting to get to the core of why you feel oppressed, you never make progress, which is ironic considering how many Leftists call themselves “progressives.” This is by design because once you do an honest assessment of your oppression it puts things into perspective. Those who experience real trauma spend years processing it in an attempt to overcome it. But those who perceive trauma never take those steps because it would expose how little actual trauma they’ve experienced, thus it ruins their victim status.
I don’t know what Ms. Bailey experienced, so I can’t and won’t paint her as someone in the latter category. There are still racist and sexist assholes out there, and it’s entirely possible, if no probable, the Venn Diagram of both groups come pretty close to a single circle. Having said that, the idea of misogynoir seems to be pretty rare in the real world, where women of color are held in high regard for their accomplishments. And those who aren’t find themselves in Congress.
What Mr. Woods posted doesn’t mention Justice Brown Jackson’s race or gender, just her intellectual prowess or lack thereof. In order to make the statement misogynoirist, one has to insert those subtexts and fixate on them rather than the substance of the statement.
And those who are happy to do so have a problem on their hands, namely the statements of another Supreme Court Justice, Sonia Sotomayor. The “Wise Latina” herself wrote an concurring opinion on a matter before the High Court that called out Justice Brown Jackson for addressing matters that were not involved in the case before them.
So…is Justice Sotomayor misogynoiristic? She is a woman of color, so that would negate both sides of the misogynoir equation. Not to mention, she’s right about Justice Brown Jackson.
As is James Woods.
The difference is when Woods makes the statement, he’s painted as misogynoiristic regardless of the merits of said statement. When Sotomayor makes the statement, the Left gets reaaaaaaaally quiet. But we’re not supposed to notice that, kids. We’re only supposed to believe Woods is the racist and sexist here, which is the whole point. The Left doesn’t want to admit Justice Brown Jackson has been a bit of a lightweight on legal issues in spite of her bona fides (as Leftists have and will tout as a defense of her inane decisions), which has caused more than a little friction with her ideological allies on the High Court, both with the substance and the style of her decisions.
But I’m sure they’re just racist and sexist, amirite?
While I’m sure there are legitimate examples of misogynoir out there, this ain’t it, kids. The Left throws out labels as a way to defend those they see as victims to divert attention away from any substantive debate. Calling out a Supreme Court Justice for bizarre legal arguments and those alone is fair game and should be done. Inserting intent, especially negative intent against the person making the comments, isn’t. But in the realm of Dungeons and Dragons…I mean Pokemon: Oppression, no quarter is given to protect the precious, even if it makes the Left look like hypocritical assholes.
Oh, and I’m waiting for the misogynoir crowd to condemn the racism hurled at Justice Clarence Thomas by their side. If they do, I’ll be in my cryogenic chamber.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I know! I’m shocked at having a Lexicon entry two weeks in a row, too!
It’s no secret the Trump Administration has been actively working on illegal immigration, just like it’s no secret the Left is actively working to stop the Administration’s efforts because they need their votes…I mean they’re trying to help them live the American Dream.
Anyway, one of the stickiest elements of this involves birthright citizenship. The Trump Administration wants to end the practice and the Left wants to keep it so they can have gardeners and servants they can pay pennies to…I mean make great Americans out of them. Well, soon we may have our answer as the US Supreme Court agreed to take up the President’s case against birthright citizenship.
So, while the iron is still somewhat lukewarm, let’s dive into it!
birthright citizenship
What the Left thinks it means – a Constitutionally-protected method of citizenship
What it really means – an idea that has been warped into its current monstrous form
The idea of birthright citizenship has its origins in British common law and later codified in the 14th Amendment:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.
There’s a lot more than this to the 14th Amendment, but this is the part that applies in this discussion. Previously, this has been interpreted to mean if someone is born in America, he or she (still two genders) is considered a citizen regardless of the status of his/her parents. This was further underscored with the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. And it worked for the most part, with further Supreme Court decisions expanding the breadth of those who
Then we started having people coming across our border like they were trying to get front row festival seating for Taylor Swift, only without the horror of Taylor Swift actually performing. Then, as soon as these illegal immigrants had children on American soil, these children became American citizens under the law and, thus, subject to receive all the benefits (figurative, literal, and monetary) of being a citizen. This, in turn, allowed the parents to gain access to said benefits.
So, yeah. A cluterfuck just waiting to happen.
And it happened. Quite a few times as it turns out.
While the concept itself has arguably noble roots, its current practice leaves a lot to be desired, much like a Queen Kamala the Appointed Presidential campaign. But we have to ask ourselves whether the solution the President proposed is going to fix the problem or cause more.
And to be honest, I’m not exactly sure.
Before the Supreme Court weighs in on the matter, we’re left with a lot of questions, mainly because the legal experts you can find on any news network can fuck up the interpretation of “water is wet.” The way the 14th Amendment is written, at least to your humble blogger and bestest buddy, leaves enough wiggle room for the current practice to continue.
Plus, there’s the way President Trump tried to address the birthright citizenship situation: through Executive Order. Granted, this certainly isn’t the first time a President has issued an Executive Order that has shakier footing than a bowl of Jello on the San Andreas Fault during an 8.6. Having said that, there is a matter of the Constitutional process to consider.
Because the 14th Amendment is a thing, the correct process to change it is to call a convention of the states and see if there’s enough agreement to amend the Constitution. Then, there’s a litany of other hoops to jump through, including getting Congress to vote on the proposed amendment (or amendment to the amendment in this case), which will make primates throwing shit at each other look like the Algonquin Round Table. But, that’s the process.
Issuing an Executive Order doesn’t circumvent the Constitution, nor should it. As much as I want to see our immigration policy overhauled, it has to be done within the confines of the law, and I don’t think an EO is the way to make that happen. The only possible reprieve I can see for the President is the fact he is the head of the Executive Branch, which is responsible for the enforcement of the law. And no matter how much the Left wants to sugarcoat it, immigration is a legal issue, which would put it under Trump’s job description. Well, that, and being the Troll In Chief.
Not that this is going to stop the Left from puffing out their chests and acting like badasses to protect immigrants. Like Eric “Fang Fang’s Bitch” Swalwell, who said, “Trump’s not touching a single Californian on my watch.” Of course, he’s saying this as a candidate for Governor of California, so it’s only natural for him to say it as a means to get votes. One tiny problem there, little buddy.
Trump has a bigger dick than you do.
And he has more of a legal basis to do what he’s doing than you want to do, too!
It’s amazing to me that a sitting Congresscritter doesn’t understand the difference between state executive power and national executive power, but then again this asshat serves with Jasmine Crockett, so maybe he’s the intellectual tofu of the Left and just takes on the stupidity around him. Even so, it would be funny to see Fang Fang’s Bitch try to act tough when the military is surrounding the state of California. Not that Trump would do that, mind you. He’d be too busy mocking him on Truth Social, but he might let Secretary of War Pete Hegseth take a crack at it.
Having said all that, we do need to take a hard look at all of our immigration policies, not just birthright citizenship. Whether the Left wants to admit it or not, they do want open borders for some people, but bureaucratic hoops for others. Or at least that’s what one of their financiers, our good buddy Uncle George Soros, may want. Of course, the Left denies it, but they thought President Brick Tamland was sharp for years, so I’m going to take their denials with a Mount Everest-sized grain of salt.
More to the point, however, is the Left’s desire for a two-tiered immigration system. The poor are allowed to get on the public dole and protected against deportation, while others who they see as better off have to endure roadblock after roadblock just to get a chance to come here and work for a living under the rule of law. And when you throw in the concept of birthright citizenship as a means for the former to get assistance, the frustrations for legal immigrants get easier to understand, yet harder to swallow.
That’s because the Left doesn’t see legal immigration as a means to their ends. Legal immigrants have to run through a phalanx of qualifications just to get a chance to come here, and even then they aren’t embraced by the Left as much as illegal immigrants are. We can speculate as to the why, but for me it comes down to one thing.
Legal immigrants are smart enough not to fall for the Left’s bullshit by and large.
When you have the power to give benefits away like a drug dealer at Hunter Biden’s house, you have a level of power over the lives of those accepting the benefits. Remember all the videos and TikToks of people upset at SNAP not being funded right away thanks to the government shutdown? That’s what I’m talking about there. And I’m going to go out on a limb here and say the illegal immigrants who vote (and, yes, they do vote, thanks to Leftist initiatives) will always vote for the people who promise to keep their benefits rolling in.
I know I’ve gone a little off the trail here, but it’s part of the larger point, that being America’s immigration policy needs an overhaul. You know, like tearing it all down, putting a moratorium on immigration as a whole until we get our shit straight, and rebuilding it so we can reverse the trend where the illegal immigrants get a pass and the legal immigrants get the shaft.
As far as how to reform birthright citizenship, that’s going to be messy, but I think I have a solution. We have to take a closer look at the circumstances behind the citizenship. If a pregnant woman (still 2 genders) comes to America and has birth while here, that shouldn’t automatically mean the child becomes a citizen by default. After all, the child doesn’t have the ability to give consent to stay here; they are still wards of their parents, for lack of a better term. Now, if the woman comes to America through legal channels (which can be verified through documentation and computers) or asylum (which can be verified through the American consulate), then I would be more inclined to allow the child to be a citizen because the parent/parents show their willingness to follow the law.
That just leaves the illegal immigrants. For them, the road gets tougher than it is now because they haven’t gone through any channels, legal or otherwise, to become citizens or seek asylum, then the child isn’t a citizen yet. See, I have this little thing I call “walking the walk,” and I’m not talking about border crossings here. If you really want a better life for your family, you have to put in the effort to make it happen. Why? Because it’s common fucking decency. If I decide to visit a foreign country, let alone settle there, the least I can do is learn the language unless I already know it. I will suck at it, I’m sure, but it shows I care enough not to burden others with my lack of knowledge.
And that’s really the point here. If you can’t or won’t do the basic shit, you’re going to be a drain somewhere down the line. If we don’t acknowledge that, immigration is going to continue to be a problem. States like California may feel the need to overlook the issue because they love spending money to coddle illegal immigrants in exchange for cheap labor, but the country can’t anymore.
If limiting birthright citizenship to those who put in the effort to become Americans is too extreme, so be it. I’ve been called worse names by better people. But we are reaching a point where we can’t sustain the current system that plays favorites and rewards criminality (often several times over) rather than a genuine desire to be productive members of a society.
And I’m not just talking about getting jobs. When you really want to assimilate into a culture, your attitude changes. Yes, you still have pride in your past, but you also take on a new sense of pride at your present and your future. Working hard to achieve a goal is a personal investment that you don’t want to squander by not giving something to add to the great potluck that is American culture. Whether you’re bringing couscous or tater tot casserole, we welcome it!
Oh, and make sure you bring plates and silverware for yourselves, okay?
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Remember the War on Drugs started in the 1980s? I do. My brain still looks like a sunny-side up egg, but that’s not important right now. What is important is America has fought a halfhearted war against drugs and we’ve been worse for wear because of it.
That is until Donald Trump got reelected. Now, we’re putting firepower behind the War on Drugs with the Department of War taking the lead on turning alleged drug trafficking boats into the world’s most addictive flotsam. And, right on cue, the Left has a problem with it. But this week, their efforts went up a notch with several Leftists calling what the President and Secretary of War Pete “Let’s Tap That Keg” Hegseth authorized war crimes.
The accusation is pretty heavy, so let me try to make fun of it!
war crimes
What the Left thinks it means – serious and inexcusable crimes committed by the current Administration
What it really means – the next phase of the Left’s attempt to undermine the military under Trump
The concept of war crimes is rooted in the Geneva Convention (not nearly as fun as a Shriner’s convention, but I digress), and it outlines how enemy soldiers and prisoners of war are to be treated. Keep in mind this is in the aftermath of World War II, where POWs were treated worse than a British substitute teacher in Belfast, so the spirit of the document has a foundation in humane treatment.And should someone or some country decide not to play by these rules, they can get charged with war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
This is a great thing when we’re dealing with warring nations, but what about different types of wars where there aren’t warring countries? Welllll…that’s where things get a little murky, at least for me. When you consider the bulk of the military actions America has undertaken since the Geneva Convention have not been officially declared wars, it brings up the question of whether the concept of war crimes even applies here. That’s where the concept is subject to interpretation, or misinterpretation as the case may be.
Enter our good fiends…I mean friends on the Left. As I’ve noted before, the Left loves it when things are unclear because they can then inject their perceptions into the discussion, even if they’re batshit crazy. Then, by operating in the uncertainty, they can control the narrative, which is always their endgame.
This begs the question of whether blowing up suspected drug runner boats constitutes violations of the Geneva Convention. The simple answer as I see it is not really, and it’s predicated on the fact Congress hasn’t declared war yet. That gives me a chance to talk about Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution again because it’s there that we find who can declare war, and surprise surprise, it’s Congress!
If the Founding Fathers saw the absolute nozzleheads running Congress these days, they might have changed their minds, but that’s a post for another time.
Anyway, the point remains Congress didn’t declare war, as is often the case with Presidents who want to appear like a military leader against foes far weaker than we are. For everything else, there’s hookers and blow…or diplomacy. You know, whichever works.
Further complicating matters (because of-fucking-course) is the War Powers Resolution of 1973. This law requires the President to report to Congress whenever there’s the potential for hostilities to break out, but also allows the President to deploy troops for 60 days without a Congressional vote. So, I’m going to go out on a limb and say the President told Congress (and the rest of the country for that matter) that the Department of War was going to play Battleship: The Narco-Terrorist Edition well before any attacks began, so that requirement was met a looooooong time ago. And I’m gonna say blowing up shit constitutes hostilities.
And now for the best part? The President doesn’t have to have Congress do shit for 60 days, which oddly enough is roughly twice as many days as they’re in session. Granted, I’m guessing things might take a little longer than 60 days because we’re dealing with drug cartels here, but with the current makeup of Congress, a vote would most likely be a mere formality.
So, that’s why the Left went all in on the war crimes idea. If they can convince enough people what the President is doing violates the Geneva Convention, they can sway public opinion to…make drug dealers look like poor victims, I guess? (Hey, nobody said Leftists were smart.)
However, to fully understand the strategy, we need to look back at a recent video from six members of Congress who were either in the military or in the intelligence community. In that video (and in subsequent appeals in the media to take the heat off), they made sure to say the military didn’t have to obey illegal orders. Since then, not a one of the fucknuggets in the video or the Leftists who support the current thing could point to an illegal order the President issued, so that should be the end of it, right?
Yeahhhh, not so much.
The point of the video wasn’t to back up their claims so much as it was to instill doubt in the leadership from the President on down. Now, add in the war crimes element.
For those of you who need help connecting the dots, by suggesting Trump and Hegseth are guilty of war crimes, it reinforces the idea they’re issuing illegal orders, potentially eroding the confidence in the military and political leadership. And that leads to trouble up and down the ranks. If our military has to second-guess every order given, it prevents them from fulfilling their primary objectives: kill the enemy, break their shit, or a combination of the two.
Yeah. Pretty fucking dirty.
I’m sure there are going to be more legal arguments and laws bandied about on both sides of the war crimes question, but ultimately the heart of the matter is the Left is going to have a hard time explaining why blowing up drug boats and killing drug smugglers is a bad thing. And that’s not even getting into whether the actions constitute a war crime.
Not that it will stop Leftists from saying it or further suggesting the military should disobey the President. Even if the war crimes thing gains any traction, Leftists are still going to have to deal with being on the same side of an issue as drug cartels because…Orange Man Bad.
Again, no one ever said Leftists were smart.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I take a week off and the shit hits the fan. Guess that means I’d better keep churning these babies out weekly from here on out!
The news of the week centered around one man, Jeffrey Epstein. More to the point, it was centered around who he knew and what these people knew about the deceased piece of dog shit. (No offense to canine excrement.) President Donald Trump promised to release the Epstein Files, then took it back, then put it back on the table, and has now signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act ordering the Attorney General and Department of Justice to make as much of the documentation available to the public without jeopardizing the victims or any ongoing investigations.
After all the Left’s grandstanding about it, you would think they’d be happy about it. And you’d be wrong.
As much as I hate to delve into this toxic landfill of shitty people (and Jeffrey Epstein), I have to dip my toe into it. And I promise to make it not hurt that much.
Jeffrey Epstein
What the Left thinks it means – a notorious pedophile with ties to Republicans
What the Right thinks it means – a notorious pedophile with ties to Democrats
What it really means – a notorious pedophile being used as a political football to hide a much larger issue
If it wasn’t clear from my opening, I think Jeffrey Epstein was not even a passable human being, let alone good. What he was convicted of doing and suspected of doing to young girls and women is reprehensible, and anyone who even exchanged emails or text messages with him gets my side-eye.
So, why are so many Democrats and Republicans connected to him? Because he had leverage.
Politics and wealth go hand in hand more than anti-Tesla protesters making a human chain stuck together with Super Glue and industrial strength duct tape. The well-heeled and the well-dressed have walked the halls of power for as long as I’ve been alive, but it wasn’t always so blatant. Back in the old days, if you wanted to buy a politicians you had the common decency to do it under the table. Well, since that option isn’t available because of all the prostitutes doing their business under said table, it’s more overt.
That’s where Jeffrey Epstein comes into play. By being wealthy, he caught the eye of a lot of politicians on both sides of the aisle. As time went on, he amassed a lot of friends…and information that he could use as a bargaining chip to sway opinions in his favor. Money is a universal language, and Epstein was a master linguist.
But remember he played with both sides, if you’ll pardon the expression, which made him useful to both sides, if only to satisfy mutual carnal sins. This is why the Left and the Right are desperately trying to push him onto the other side. With that much infamy, Epstein becomes the proverbial millstone around the necks of the party faithful in Washington, DC.
Even with that Bizarro World tug-o-war going on, we’re starting to get a glimpse into just how deep the corruption goes in the world of the rich and powerful.
And Robin Leach didn’t prepare us for any of this shit!
It’s one thing to buy off politicians, which is done with the frequency of Jasmine Crockett saying something stupid. It’s another thing to ply them with the kind of sick shit Epstein did. And then to have people so connected in politics, tech, business, and media be involved? It’s enough to break the system, nuke it from orbit (it’s the only way to be sure), burn the remains, and shoot it into the heart of the Sun.
And you know what? I’m good with that.
It was Epstein’s death that started a domino effect where the curtain got thrown open and we got to see just what the powerful do when nobody outside of their sick clique is watching. And the fact many of these cretins get to act like they’re above the rest of us while they engage in shit Caligula would say, “Whoa! Throttle back on the perversion, kids!” You know, if he weren’t dead and all.
As sickening as what we know happened is, we’re still not sure of the extent of it, and I’m not sure anybody in government wants us to find out. After all, there are a lot of DC denizens who made their way to Epstein Island for fantasies Mr. Roarke and Tattoo could never provide. At least not without rezoning the entire island.
Of course, the lack of hard facts with regards to the Epstein files is exactly what those in power want if only to hide their sins a little longer until they can no longer hide. Then, we’ll see a whole lotta mea culpas feigning ignorance as well as contrition. They won’t be sorry for what they did; they’ll be sorry they got caught, and that’s not gonna work for me, kids. What these men and women did under the veil of secrecy should be exposed and all legal avenues to sue them into oblivion should be implemented.
That means the party’s over, scumbags.
And speaking of scumbags, let’s talk about the politicians for a minute. Those who committed crimes against young girls and women should be expelled from office, don’t care which party they represent. Kick them out, make them lawyer up, and watch them get taken to the cleaners.
Now, for the rest of Congress. You’re playing political games with the lives of people who were truly innocent victims here. It’s a little late to start caring about them now, especially after you’ve done everything you can to discredit or diminish what steps are being taken. Democrats, you can claim Trump is going to order the Epstein Files be redacted so much stock in black Sharpie pens is going to skyrocket, but we don’t know that yet. What we do know is you gave zero fucks about this situation until you could pin it on Trump. Your “Party of Women” card has been declined. Take all the fucking seats.
And as for Republicans, you gave zero fucks about this until it could be pinned on Bill Clinton. Granted, Bill being a horndog at any given time is a sure thing, but you don’t get a pass for not fighting for the Epstein Files to be released on Day 1 of Trump’s first Presidency. You didn’t help, either, so take all the fucking seats, too. And try not to sit next to the Democrats. They’re a little touchy about being on a known pedophile’s speed dial.
And having him at fundraisers.
And having ties to one of the most popular Democrat Presidents ever.
And, you know, just generally being bitchy most of the time.
Regardless, I will not speak ill of the dead any more than I have here. Jeffrey Epstein is gone and the world is better for it. Now, comes the healing and what I hope will be a course correction on the moral side.
His victims deserve it.
New Sedition
Sometimes I look at what Democrats do and say “I can see where that makes sense.” Most of the time I shake my heads and say “What in the wide world of fuck are you doing?” Today is one of those times.
It started with a video put out by former military and intelligence folks currently serving in Congress. Their message was clear: enlisted military have no obligation to obey unlawful orders. Seems harmless enough, right?
Wellllll…this is where things get messy.
As a personal aside, I will admit my knowledge of military justice is as limited as the range on Nerf gun. Therefore, I am going off my understanding of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and welcome any corrections, words of encouragement, and rotten produce you are willing to send my way.
The aforementioned UCMJ is designed to deal with legal matters within the military so that they can be dealt with in a way that doesn’t disrupt their duties. Which is killing the enemy and/or breaking their shit while at the same time making sure the same doesn’t happen to us.
Anyway, there are provisions within the UCMJ dealing with unlawful orders, namely military personnel don’t have to follow them. And that’s what the Democrats in the video are expressing, so there’s no real harm, right?
That’s where the wonderful world of sedition comes into play. Our good friends at Merriam-Webster define sedition thus:
incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority
Our laws go into greater detail, but you get the drift. Sedition is a big no-no, which I would hope former military and intelligence personnel now serving in Congress understand. Then, President Trump entered the chat and accused the Democrats in the video of seditious acts. He even went so far as to say the punishment for sedition is death.
Unfortunately for him, he got it wrong. The actual punishment is possible fines and imprisonment, so there’s that. But is he wrong about the video being seditious?
Wellllll…he kinda is. The Democrats’ defense on this is they were just reminding our military they can refuse to obey unlawful orders, which tracks. But then I started wondering why now. This message is the kind of shit military personnel get drilled into their skulls during basic training. From a military/tactical standpoint, there’s nothing objectionable in reinforcing basic knowledge. Legally, the Democrats in the video are in the clear, too.
From a political standpoint, though, that’s where there may be a case for sedition. The President has taken actions many on the Left find objectionable, from sending in the National Guard to police city streets or making drug running boats into the world’s most expensive and addictive flotsam. This latter example is the one the Left seems fixated on at the moment, with some on the Left calling it murder.
As you might expect, the UCMJ kinda frowns on murder, so to float the idea that what the military is doing to drug runners is murder might weigh heavily on the heads and hearts of those brave men and women. (Still two genders, kids!) With what they endure on a daily basis, it’s only a matter of time before someone cracks and decides to defy the chain of command by refusing a direct order he or she believes to be illegal.
That little seed of doubt is all it takes for our military to weaken just enough to break. Unlike in the world outside the military, order is what keeps things moving. It is the first, last, and only line of defense against a fully dysfunctional family feud with heavy artillery.
And these Democrats who served our country know that, or at least should know that.
That’s where I think the sedition charge sticks, if it even sticks at all. Politicians are known for being slicker than a non-stick pan covered in baby oil, and since this is more of a political line of attack, there’s a good chance they are relatively safe legally.
That’s not to say I condone what these six Congresscritters did in the name of politics. When pressed to give examples of illegal acts, these motherfuckers sputter more than Speed Buggy. Instead, they mention they’ve talked to military personnel who just so happen to say what the Left’s narrative is at the moment. Pretty convenient, I’d say.
You know, if I was a complete dipshit.
The video wraps deception in an American flag and tries to pretend it’s just a friendly reminder when it has the potential to be a bunker buster to the heart of the world’s most powerful military. I’d say they should be ashamed of themselves, but I’m not sure there’s an ounce of shame among them.
And if I may be so bold, I want to give the President some advice here. First, stay off social media before you fact check what you’re going to say. No filter works great, but not when it comes to proclaiming a punishment that is more severe than it legally is.
Second, let’s try some alternative thinking here. Don’t charge these assholes with sedition. Instead, charge them with something else and make the punishment having them pull KP duty until the Rapture.
Thanks, But No Thanksgiving
One of the things that always got me in trouble in real life or online was noticing things. Patterns, dots that could be connected but weren’t, the mannerisms of different people of varying political ideologies, how my first serious online girlfriend was a 50 year old man named Frank with body hair that would make Bigfoot look like Vin Diesel.
I still wonder how Frank is doing…
Meanwhile back at the main point, I noticed something recently that I should have seen coming a couple of years ago. (Hey, I said I noticed things, not that I notice them in a timely fashion!) It seems Americans go right from Halloween to Christmas, skipping over Thanksgiving in the process. At first, it sneaked under my radar because I still recognize Thanksgiving as a holiday, but in recent years society has treated Thanksgiving like Pluto in that for a while it wasn’t recognized as legit. But Pluto was always real to me, dammit, and so is Thanksgiving.
This is where things get interesting if your into that kind of thing. I did some thinking about the why, mainly because there weren’t any good football games on yet. What I landed on was the nature of the three holidays in question: Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas.
Halloween used to be about the fun of dressing up in costumes, some with uncomfortable masks, roaming the streets looking for houses to go trick-or-treating. Within the past decade or so, Halloween has really changed into a consumer-driven affair (with a side trip into Slutty Costume Land) where everyone has to have the best candy or costume to participate.
Similarly, Christmas had a different tone in the past than it does now. What was once a time to celebrate with family and friends with killer egg nog made with rum so strong it could double as paint thinner turned into a holiday where you hear “buy buy buy” more than N’Sync on an infinite loop. This is when stores, malls, gallerias, and other sources of yuletide commerce make most of their money. And if you’re not getting the hottest gifts for the people you love, you’re just a horrible human being.
Then, there’s Thanksgiving. Aside from being a professional and college football mecca, people just don’t pay as much attention to it as they used to, mainly because there’s no real commercialization that can be done. We’re already invested in buying turkey, ham, side dishes, and pies, so there’s no real kickback, as it were. Nothing that would make us want to go out and spend a lot of money.
And therein lies the problem.
It’s not that Thanksgiving is a bad holiday by any means. It’s just not as sexy, literally and figuratively. Thanksgiving is a time for self-reflection, appreciation for what we have, and a joy that can’t be bought with a gift receipt. The only real consumption going on involves food.
Which brings me to another discovery: we’re no longer a capitalist society. That may come as a shock to the capitalists out there, but we’ve moved into a consumerist society. Leftists will tell us this is an outgrowth of capitalism, but these are the same nozzleheads who consider Robert Reich and Paul Krugman respected economists, so I wouldn’t put much stock in their economic knowledge.
Capitalism has some rules to it, some of them right out of social Darwinism, others out of Ayn Rand’s objectivism. But one rule that is central is not to fuck with your potential customers in such a way they are unable or unwilling to buy your stuff. That’s the moral core of capitalism. After all, if your products or services cause people to die, not only is it going to reduce your customer base, but it’s going to cause bad PR and lead to the ruin of your business.
Where consumerism deviates from that is the companies will continue to nickel and dime you wherever they can, and people don’t consider that to be a deal-breaker. We’ve seen this (and by “we’ve” I mean “I’ve” because I really don’t have a life) in video games through microtransactions. Basically, microtransactions are way games convince people to buy their way to a chance at success or a cooler look, which totally looks good on a resume.
Although it’s easy to dismiss microtransactions as something only gamer nerds have to deal with, it’s gotten into the automotive market, where car companies are now selling subscriptions for automatic start capability. And that’s in addition to such things like OnStar and SiriusXM that are nice to have, but not absolutely necessary to drive a vehicle. And I say that as a guy who likes to listen to music and comedy while driving and being able to call someone if I get into an accident. More so the former than the latter, mind you.
And you know what? There are dipshits willing to pay for it! As much of a capitalist as I am, I draw the line at making people pay for stuff that should be standard issue or that will give people advantages others wouldn’t have. But there are people who only see the ends justifying the means and leave it at that. As long as they get ahead, fuck everyone else, right?
Yeah, about that. With this shift in morality (if you can call it that anymore), there’s been a corresponding shift in egotism, which makes the consumerism side of this matter even more troubling. When your self image is tied up in material goods or even the perception of material wealth, you’re willing to do anything to do better than anyone else so you get that dopamine hit.
Which explains the push for the best Halloween candy and costumes and the biggest, brightest Christmas tree and outdoor decorations, and the hottest gifts for under the tree. But you know one holiday that has nothing to do with any of those ego-driven pursuits?
Arbor Day. But also Thanksgiving.
When it comes to egotists, anything that doesn’t directly serve the “me” in a wide enough scale is not worth pursuing. And Thanksgiving tends to be more of an intimate affair, one where people think of others in some fashion or another either when feeding family, friends, or even the less fortunate. Aside from food selfies, there’s not a lot of traction to be gained on social media. In short, there’s nothing in it for them to think of someone else’s needs during this time of year.
And that’s what’s driving the “War on Thanksgiving.” Hey…that could be the name of a movement, maybe one that could generate millions of dollars.
Nah. Nobody would buy into it.
Anyway, the point I’m getting at (finally!) is we shouldn’t skip Thanksgiving to get an early jump on Christmas. I mean, stores are already prepping for Christmas while Halloween items are just hitting the shelves, so they’ve got that covered. Not to mention, they’re just putting out swimwear and putting all their winter coats on the clearance racks.
Outside of the stores, we can do a bit more about not letting consumerism take over our lives. Yes, I know we want to get out loved ones the best we can afford, but it doesn’t mean we have to overlook a major American holiday to get a head start on, well, consuming something other than turkey and dressing. There’s a reason Thanksgiving exists, people! For one, it’s to start political discussions so you can weed out your Christmas card lists. But more importantly, it’s to take a moment to appreciate humanity as a whole. Even if you don’t buy the Americanized story of Thanksgiving, just enjoy the food, fellowship, and football. We can all act like civil human beings for one day, right?
Well, considering I’m still banned from Boston Market for an incident my attorney has advised me not to explain, most of us can.
A Shutdown Shakedown
Finally, our long national nightmare is over! With 8 Senate Democrats bravely crossing the aisle, the Senate approved the Continuing Resolution to end the longest government shutdown in history! Now, things can get back to normal.
Yeah…about that…
Although President Trump has been at the helm of the two longest government shutdowns in our history, this one feels a little different because of how people reacted to it and undercut the idea Leftists have been spinning for years about SNAP and the Affordable Care Act.
Let’s start with a shallow deep-dive into governance philosophy. Many people, including your humble correspondent, believe government is there to do the things we can’t do ourselves. You know, like having a standing army to fight off threats to the country or build/maintain roads. (Although, on that last one, I’m starting to think the people couldn’t do any worse of a job. My street has a pothole so big you would travel to the Land of the Lost if you fell in. #oldmanreference) The Left’s approach to governance is the government can and should do whatever you can handle yourself because you’re not as hip and enlightened as they are.
This coming from the people who said President Brick Tamland was fine and Queen Kamala the Appointed ran a flawless campaign, I might add.
To the Left, anything that prevents the wheels of bureaucracy from running is dangerous. And it is…to them. Leftists are so self-centered in the halls of power that they feel nothing can get done without them, and their drones who stagger through said walls like Hunter Biden looking for crack follow along. Even the non-essential workers feel a sense of entitlement.
You know what they call non-essential employees in the corporate world? Dead weight.
So, when Senate Republicans refused to budge, Leftists started creating horror stories about children and old people starving, people dying without healthcare, planes falling out of the sky, and just about anything else their PR department could come up with to scare us into submission.
But then something happened, something so ironically out of left field that Leftists couldn’t have seen it coming. Entities other than the federal government stepped up and helped with food donations. Restaurants, grocery stores, churches, local charities, and regular people saw a need and fulfilled it. Sure, to the more cynical among us, it makes for good press and temporary feel-good moments, but it tells me there is still a section of our population who are willing to help their neighbors when the opportunity arises.
And that was something the compassionate Left didn’t think about, mainly because of their approach to governance. They can’t conceive of anything good coming from a source outside of Big Brother…I mean government, let alone having those good deeds actually working. Even when states started offering SNAP funds (which is only one step down from Leftist governance), it made the federal government being shut down less of a major issue to most of the country. No rioting, no looting (save for the dumbasses who told the world their “secret life hack” of stealing from WalMart via TikTok), not a lot of civil unrest. Just people going about their days and helping out where they could.
If that isn’t a sign we may need to rethink SNAP, I don’t know what is.
As far as the ACA is concerned, I’ve already delved into it in greater detail, so I’ll give you the Readers Digest condensed version. The ACA didn’t make health care affordable in the least for most Americans, and lead to more money going to insurance companies than to actually helping Americans. To be fair, the ACA did help Americans, just the really wealthy ones who already had great healthcare. Anybody with an even cursory understanding of economics could tell you getting the government involved in anything will cause prices to skyrocket because the government will always be able to print more money to fund whatever it is they want.
Naturally, that’s why Leftists were shocked by the actual numbers.
Instead of putting up their hands and saying “we were wrong about the ACA,” they continued to throw money at it and laid a trap for Republicans by voting in a deadline to keep the ACA subsidies flowing. That is, of course, assuming they thought Republicans would take back the House and Senate at some point, but that’s a hard sell for me because Leftists suck at long-term strategy. Even a party picnic for Leftists requires at least 6 months of negotiations, planning, and cultural sensitivity training just to have 3 people show up just to say they’re vegan and they only eat free range cage free vegetables.
At this point, I honestly think Congressional Democrats planned on being in power when the ACA subsidies ran out, so they could force them into any budget they wanted. Yeah, how’d that work out for ya?
As far as all of the other disasters Leftists predicted would happen with a government shutdown, few if any of them came to pass. Planes didn’t fall out of the sky, TSA agents were still doing their jobs, the military was still at the ready, national park personnel weren’t as necessary as advertised, and generally not much changed. That’s the lesson we should all take here: the federal government isn’t as necessary as the Left makes it out to be. When you let yourself become a ward of the state by ideological means, you owe everything to the state, which means whenever the state wants to take something away from you for one reason or another, they can do it, and you won’t have a say in the matter.
In other words, when you get “free stuff,” you lose some of your freedom.
Just the way the Left likes it.
But not everyone who gets “free stuff” is as enamored with the idea of being a government drone. SNAP, for example, is used to help low income families, including members of our military and the elderly. It’s hard to be so completely cold-hearted to think they deserve to be without food or at the very least assistance.
Then, there are those who use SNAP so they don’t have to spend their own money to get food. I know that’s technically the idea behind it, but it’s not the way it’s being practiced by many people in this country. The way I know this is by watching people post TikTok videos complaining about having to spend their own money on food or complaining about the food they’re getting from non-governmental sources. I have a pretty good troll detector built in from being on the Internet almost since it became a thing, so I don’t think they’re making shit up; they’re legit upset at what they’re getting or not getting as the case may be.
The Left would have you believe the latter group is just as entitled to SNAP as the former. They’re not on the same level, in my opinion. Those who need SNAP the most are the ones who are making an effort to contribute to society in some way. I have no problem with them. It’s when you choose to get SNAP and you can work, but choose not to, that it crosses the line for me. SNAP isn’t meant to be a side hustle. It’s there to help you buy food so you can live, and given how well some of you SNAP scammers live, you can afford to shell out a little for your own sustenance.
That may be the best part of the government shutdown. People exposing how much they scam the government (i.e. us) so they can live better than us. You know, just like Congress. But unlike Congress, we might be able to do something about SNAP fraud, and we have you TikTokers to thank for it.
So, with the government starting back up again in the near future, they can finally get past partisan squabbling and get back to doing their real jobs: ignoring the will of the people and passing shitty legislation.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Well, the pre-midterm election results didn’t turn out so well for the Republicans, with Democrats making strides in several contests. One area of note is in the Big Apple, where voters overwhelmingly elected Zohran Mamdani to be the next Mayor. He ran as a democratic socialist, which is just a fancy term for a regular socialist who wants Democrat donations.
Anyway, this has sparked a discussion about socialism in general. The Left is crowing about how Mamdani represents a new way forward while simultaneously telling us we don’t know enough about socialism to appreciate it.
Challenge accepted.
socialism
What the Left thinks it means – a viable socioeconomic/political model that works time and time again
What it really means – an non-viable socioeconomic/political model that doesn’t work more often than it works
The most important place to start in this discussion is what socialism actually means. You know, aside from the definition I posed above. Our good friends at Dictionary.com define socialism thus:
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
More on this third definition later.
What Leftists say is a key feature of socialism is fairness. Everything is fair, everyone contributes to the overall good, and everything is rainbows, unicorns, and unlimited trips to the salad bar with any meal purchase. Socialism’s PR has gotten so good these days, around two-thirds of Democrats see it in a positive light.
And I can understand the appeal, especially with younger voters. The current capitalist system doesn’t seem to work for anyone but the wealthy, leaving many people out in the cold. People having to take on multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water. Everything’s getting more expensive. Surely there has to be a better way forward.
There is, but socialism ain’t it, kids.
Let’s take a trip in the Wayback Machine to 1620 when the Pilgrims were making their way to what would be called America. Because there were squabbles among the Pilgrims, leaders created a little thing the kids like to call the Mayflower Compact. Although it sounded good on paper and advocated for such things as self-governance and no religious oppression, it was by and large a socialist approach.
And, surprise surprise, it didn’t work! Who could have seen this coming? (I mean aside from anyone who stayed awake in junior high American history from back in my day.)
If you think that was the only time we dabbled in socialism, there’s also Social Security. What started out with good intentions became a socialist nightmare that is running out of money, partially because of demographics, and partially because Congress has been taking money out of it for decades and not returning it.
Then, there’s public education, care through the VA, SNAP, public defenders, and other not-so-goods and service that fall under the socialist umbrella. Even when you have moderately successful concepts like public roads and fire departments, they still aren’t quite socialist because they serve a common good, while socialism just claims to serve. You can count on the remaining hand of the world’s worst shop teacher the number of socialist programs and ideas that have worked to everyone’s satisfaction.
That may be one of the underlying reasons younger voters are okay with socialism: they haven’t been taught shit about the failures of socialism, even on our shores. Sure, they learned all about how the Pilgrims were evil white colonizers who slaughtered Native Americans, but they just didn’t get to the part where they tried their hand at an early version of socialism and got their asses handed to them. But in the defense of public education, they just don’t have time to cover how fucked up socialism is because they have to make room for a deep dive into how Taylor Swift is such a cultural icon.
And I only wish I were half-kidding.
Educational standards going down like a starlet trying to get a movie deal from Harvey Weinstein aside, I don’t think capitalism has made a good enough argument to the past couple of generations, mainly because capitalists know it’s the best thing going today. Even so, it might not hurt to advertise a bit more. I mean, it’s easy to be a socialist when you have the latest iPhone, drink Starbucks on the regular, and make money posting TikTok videos. When the rubber meets the road, though, it’s a lot harder to live in a socialist society.
That’s because one of the dirty little secrets of socialism is it only works as long as they have OPM: Other People’s Money. It’s a pretty simple concept, really. If you’re spending your own money, you tend to be more frugal. If you’re spending someone else’s money, the sky’s the limit, baby!
Socialism works on the same principle. As long as they can take money from the wealthy, things can work. But then it runs into a brick wall called human nature. Even if you’re the most progressive guy or gal (gender count: still 2) out there, at some point you’re going to be confronted with the real possibility you’re putting in more than you’re getting back. Then, you have to make a value judgment: stay within the current system, or high-tail it out of there.
Then, socialism runs into the potential for income erosion. As the wealthier members of a socialist society die off or move on, that not only eliminates their protection money…I mean contributions, it puts more pressure on the next lowest wealth base. Then, if/when they’re off the books, it goes down to the next lowest wealth base.
Blather. Rinse. Repeat.
What most people who subscribe to socialism don’t understand is as long as their is wealth erosion, there will come a time when they’re the wealthiest because everyone else will be poorer than they are. Funny how that works out, isn’t it?
Even if you attempt to dress up socialism by giving it a cool name like Logan or democratic socialism, you’re still going to run into the same problems. And the reason is the same: socialism fucking sucks, man! Although if it were named Logan, it would be cool while it sucked.
Now, remember earlier when I mentioned the third definition of socialism? If not, read up a bit and you’ll see it.
Anyway, it’s interesting to note Marxists used socialism as a lead-in to communism. The way I describe it is this: socialism is communism on pot, and communism is socialism on PCP. By nature, I’ve found socialists by and large aren’t that into violence. You’ll get the occasional socialist with a bike lock and a bad attitude and tries to start something, but most of them are pretty calm. Their hearts are in the right place, as are their facial features because they’re not getting knocked the fuck out.
Communists, on the other hand…well, they’re not exactly the “live and let live” type. Violence is a part of their political brand. I can’t say for certain how many socialists would be okay with communism, but I have to think the number is higher than 1, especially when you consider the Left’s hunger for control. That’s pretty much right out of the communist playbook (or manifesto if you will). It’s almost as if communists knew socialism would fail and further steps would need to be taken.
You know, like cracking skulls and oppression?
I know I’ve shit on socialism worse than if I’d had a Triple Bean Burrito with a side order of salmonella from Taco Bell that’s been sitting in a van in the Mojave Desert since the last time Bon Jovi made a good album (which is never), but I don’t shit on socialists themselves very much. To me, they’re misguided, but have hearts of gold. Or at least would have hearts of gold until their socialist buddies found out and accused them of hoarding wealth.
Having said that, I can’t bring myself to join their ideology because I know too much. I’ve seen the fall of the Soviet Union, the crumbling of the Warsaw Pact countries, and the rise of a more egocentric approach to life in general, none of which bode well for socialism working in this country. Yet, I still wish Zohran Mamdani the best of luck in his attempt to create a socialistic utopia in a city weirder than I am. If he succeeds, I’ll admit freely. If he fails, I’ll mock him endlessly.
Let’s just say I’m betting the under on his success rate.