Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

There was a time in our nation’s history when we were scared of communists and what they were capable of doing. The less psychologically grounded of us saw communists everywhere from school boards to boxes of breakfast cereal. (I knew there was something off about the sun on the Raisin Bran box!) Then, we realized communists were less threatening than a Nerf marshmallow (and only slightly less appetizing) and the “Red Scare” was over.

Now, the people who laughed at the “Red Scare” have a scare of their own: they see fascism everywhere. It’s gotten so all-encompassing, Leftists have resurrected a Nazi term to describe law enforcement officers, that being the Gestapo. Although I’m not sure what a chilled vegetable-based soup has to do with anything…wait, that’s gazpacho. Never mind.

Since there’s not much to talk about with gazpacho, let’s look at the Gestapo instead.

the Gestapo

What the Left thinks it means – the group of fascist enforcers oppressing minorities

What it really means – an overused term designed to defame law enforcement doing its job

Back in the days of Nazi Germany, there were numerous enforcement arms to keep order and beat back opposition. One of these was the Secret State Police, or Gestapo. To put it mildly, they were not nice people. Surely, anyone who gets called the Gestapo would be guilty of the same atrocities, if not worse and/or more, right?

Wellllllll…that’s stretching things more than Reed Richards at a yoga retreat.

Remember, the Left has been calling Republicans Nazis for decades. That includes Mitt Romney, who is the human equivalent of dry white toast. And the same Mitt Romney Leftists praised for standing up to President Trump. What a difference a decade makes.

Well, that, and a new villain for the Left to turn into Hitler 2.0.

Of course, this is by design. Leftists love to paint themselves as the last line of defense between democracy and authoritarianism, even as they resort to authoritarianism to “defend” democracy. But since they’re on the “right side of history” it’s okay to be utter hypocrites apparently.

With increased scrutiny on illegal immigration, the Left’s new favorite fascist straw men are ICE agents. After all, they’re…let me check my notes here…enforcing immigration laws. Those bastards!

To any rational person with a semblance of knowledge about the illegal immigration issue right now, the ICE/Gestapo comparison makes as much sense as anything Queen Kamala the Appointed says. But that hasn’t stopped the Left from making the comparison whenever possible.

And speaking of Queen Kamala, her stumbling mate Governor Tim “I’m a Football Coach and Don’t Know What a Pick Six Is” Walz was one the voices making the connection. At a recent Oversight Committee meeting, Democrats kept hammering this comparion like they were carpenters working straight commission. If I didn’t know better, I would think they were anti-law enforcement! I mean, didn’t the Left say attacks on law enforcement were signs of being traitorous anti-Americans?

Oh, wait. That was the FBI.

When FBI agents started to go after President Trump, the Left cheered. Doesn’t matter whether the charges were more full of shit than Port-A-Potties at a music festival catered by Chipotle, what mattered was the FBI was just going their jobs in enforcing the law. And why not? I mean, it’s not like FBI personnel were giving money to Democrats…oh, wait

Surely I can’t be the only one to see the irony here. Leftists who bent over backwards to defend the FBI against accusations of political biases by invoking the “just doing their jobs” line are now getting their collectivist panties in a wad over ICE agents doing their jobs. I wonder what could be different?

Oh, yeah, they’re not in charge of ICE anymore. It’s under the leadership of the Trump Administration, which is totes full of fascists because shut up fascist. And since they’re totes fascists, ICE is the Gestapo!

Except…they’re not. If you pay attention to the video footage (which I do because I make stamp collectors look like extreme athletes), there’s no torture, no cases of excessive and unjustified violence, nothing anywhere near the level of actions the actual Gestapo took. It’s political hyperbole cranked up to 948, only because the Left’s dials don’t go up to 950 yet.

Normally, we could chalk this up to politicians being bullshitters, but these aren’t normal times. In fact, we may have blown past the exit to normal a few light years back and we’ve turned off the GPS telling us to turn the fuck around.

In recent years, support for political violence against opponents has risen on both sides of the gulf between parties and ideologies. In case I haven’t made myself crystal clear on this, political violence is a non-starter with me, regardless of who is the target. This is how terrible shit starts, shit you shouldn’t wish on your worst enemies because it tends to boomerang at some point. Not to mention, it makes you look like a total douchecanoe.

With the Left’s framing of ICE as the modern day Gestapo, they’re encouraging, if not out and out justifying, violence against ICE agents. Invariably, this is going to make some Leftists froggy, so when they jump, they’re going to be met with force. Then, the Left will decry the violence against peaceful protesters (who just happen to be looting, burning, and assaulting people other than ICE agents) and gin up support to fight back against the “Gestapo” just like their WWII-era relatives did.

One tiny problem with that. Well, more than one, but this is the one I want to mention here. You see, political violence against the opposition is part and parcel of the 14 characteristics of fascism as observed by Umberto Eco, or at the very least an outgrowth from them.

In other words, Leftists are trying to out-fascist the people they claim are the fascists because democracy or something.

And given how many times Leftists have supported rioting, looting, arson, and the like within the past 5+ years (I’m looking at you, BLM), it’s not out of the realm of belief that they’re okay with the current anti-ICE riots going on in California right now. After all, they’re on the “right side of history” according to them. Of course, if they knew history to begin with, they wouldn’t be trying to downplay the violence they’re explicitly and implicitly encouraging.

But no matter how much the Left cries “Gestapo” in lieu of “Wolf” it’s still bad optics that will only encourage more people to support ICE in the short term, and possibly the long term. The longer the chaos in California continues, the more people are going to support efforts to stop it.

Especially if they pull a real dick move and do something like mocking a working mother trying to get to work while these overgrown toddlers “protest.” But I’m sure no Leftists would be that fucking dumb, right?

Never mind.

Keep doing what you’re doing, Leftists. I’m sure being on the wrong side of public opinion will work this time!




Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

There’s a popular saying on the Right: the Left can’t meme. Mainly because…they can’t meme. Hey, there’s actual science behind it, so we have to Trust the Science, right?

This week, I was introduced to another example of this, that being the Left’s latest attempt to get one over on President Donald Trump. In an attempt to draw attention to the tariff situation, they created an acronym, TACO, which stands for “Trump Always Chickens Out.” And when one Leftist comes up with an idea, it’s a surprise, but it also gets spread around as the funniest thing ever.

So, let’s just say this week’s Lexicon has me hungry for Mexican food.

TACO

What the Left thinks it means – a clever acronym that shows Trump always backs down from his tariff threats

What it really means – a damn stupid acronym that failed to make a meaningful impact

To understand TACO, we must understand the underlying issue, that being tariffs. As I’ve written previously, tariffs can be used as a negotiation tactic, which is what President Trump has tried to do. Sometimes it’s worked, sometimes it hasn’t. Overall, we’re still making our way through the uncertain waters post-Tariff-A-Palooza.

One of the problems the Trump Administration faces is the President flip-flops on the matter more than John Kerry cooking pancakes at an IHOP working straight commission. That has given the Left ammunition (which is funny considering they hate guns, but love violence) to mock the President. Hence, the idea Trump always chickens out when it comes to making tariffs more than empty threats.

Unfortunately for the Left, that idea is based on a lie. There have been some notable successes that extend beyond merely funding the government, not the least of which being former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigning.

You’re welcome, Canada.

Meanwhile, the Left thinks TACO is not only a factual statement, but a winning strategy. They went so far as to rent a taco truck to give away tacos in front of the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington, DC. Now, I’m not one to pass up free food, but apparently I’m in the minority in our nation’s capital because that taco truck stunt resulted in the truck leaving early and Leftists getting mocked on social media.

And now, they’re getting mocked in a blog post. I’m sure they’ll recover somehow.

The truth of the matter is it was a fucking stupid idea to begin with, and it’s only getting worse with the Left a) defending the message, and b) doubling down on it. It did have one success, that being making Trump mad. Great work, kids. You’ve really shown us. Now what will do you for an encore? Come up with another lame acronym that spells out something stupid at a total own of the Orange Man?

Scratch that. It was stupid the first time, and the law of diminishing returns is a thing.

There is another Leftist assumption at work here. Due to their warped (and Jasmine Crockett-level stupid) perception of Trump’s immigration policies, the Left thinks Trump hates Hispanic people. At least, that’s what they keep saying over and over again because, well, unoriginal thinkers. The truth is a little muddier than that. Yes, Trump has called out Mexico repeatedly, but there’s some context the Left doesn’t want you to consider.

Leftists are pro-illegal immigration. Full fucking stop.

As simple as this is, I still feel an explanation is in order. The Left’s approach to immigration relates directly to their ability to gain and retain power. If a tighter border benefits them, they’ll support it, but more often than not, a border looser than the morals at an all you can eat brothel (and I’m not talking about an endless buffet, kids) works in their favor. To them, immigrants are a means to an end. However, not everybody who crosses our border is looking for a better life and an honest day’s work.

Hence, the Left plays on our emotions by painting all immigrants as just poor people who need our help. And if a few bad apples come across, that’s acceptable because the majority aren’t bad people.

Laken Riley was unavailable for comment.

There’s a vast difference between following the existing process to come to America and the shitshow the Left has allowed to happen, but opposing illegal immigration isn’t hate in and of itself. By conflating legal immigrants with illegal immigrants, the Left has created a ready-made excuse for any Tomas, Ricardo, and Julio who sneaks into the country. And with that excuse comes benefits ranging from luxury hotel rooms to culturally-sensitive food.

So, naturally, the Left wants people to think anyone who doesn’t appreciate the largesse extended to people who jumped the line must hate all Hispanics.

Now, what does this have to do with TACO? I may be off in left field on this, but I don’t think the acronym was a coincidence. Leftists understand how Trump acts emotionally (mainly because they trigger him), so they find ways to get under his skin to get the emotional outbursts they want. And what better way to reinforce their opinion that Trump hates Hispanics than to get him to react negatively to the TACO acronym?

Then again, these are the same idiots who thought online influencers could help Queen Kamala the Appointed become President, so it might just be a coincidence after all.

Regardless, the way the Left was pushing TACO made it seem as inorganic as a fast food burger made from microplastics and AstroTurf. They were like stand up comedians who knew a joke bombed, but would go back to the joke time and time again hoping the second, third, or even the four-hundred-ninety-eighth time would make the audience laugh.

Basically, like my blog posts, but on stage.

By trying to make TACO a thing, the Left wound up making it…well, nothing, really. It lacked the core of any online movement, social media fad, or viral YouTube video: it has to at least feel real, if not completely accidental. That’s how you get actual reach in the online space. You can’t create an audience out of thin air. These days, you have to buy it.

Seriously, though, the best the Left could hope for with TACO was it would make their sycophants…I mean followers giggle and share it with their network, comprised of, you guessed it, other Leftists! Mission accomplished, dudes/dudettes/other derivations of the word “dude” that apply.

And now, it’s become a punchline not even two weeks into it. It’s so bad Vice President JD Vance called you “the lamest opposition in American history.” And it’s hard to argue against that, really. If this is the Left’s A game, it’s coming off more like an Meh game. And it only gets worse when you consider you’ve just made JD Vance look like a mature, serious-minded adult. This shit is going to backfire on you come 2028 when Vance throws his hat into the ring against…whatever Frankenstein’s monster ticket you’ll come up with to oppose him.

Might as well get used to saying “President Vance” for 8 years, kids.










Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

In the aftermath of the electoral fiasco that was the 2024 election, Leftists have been trying to figure out why they lost so many male voters to the Evil Orange Man. And after some soul-searching and thoughtful consideration, they’ve devised a plan to win them back.

Just kidding! They’re spending $20 million on a program called SAM, which stands for Speaking with American Men. This is a departure from their usual approach, which is BAM: Browbeating All Men. While we see how the Left will fuck this up, let’s take a look at it.

Speaking with American Men

What the Left thinks it means – an effort to attract more male voters to Democrat politicians and movements

What it really means – an Astro Turf movement to try to correct a problem the Left caused

The genesis of this idea came from the same place all great political movements start: luxury hotels. So far, the big brain ideas the Left has come up with are:

– using the online space to appeal to younger men
– study the phrasing used to attract young men in these spaces
– buy advertisements in video games

Wow. It’s a wonder Leftists even have to campaign with brilliant ideas like these, amirite? But at least they’ve figured out what men are, so there’s that.

As anyone who has seen the cratering user numbers of Mastodon can tell you, the online world is incredibly fickle. One day you’re getting millions of interactions with each and every post, and the next you’re lucky to show up in the algorithm. (For the uninitiated, algorithm is what the former Vice President thinks he has when he’s dancing.)

Trying to get people to pay attention to something in this space is tricky. Yes, it’s incredibly easy to get people to act like jackasses on TikTok, but that’s because it’s fucking TikTok. But for every overnight dance craze that loses its popularity before you’re done chewing a stick of Fruit Stripe gum, there are many more that fail to do anything more than make the subject being filmed look like a jackass.

Like Leftists using TikTok to make political commentary.

Being able to get users to pay attention to anything on social media takes more than a strategy and a pretty or handsome face speaking words. It takes a message worth spreading that goes beyond a particular audience. It’s 0ne thing to go viral on BlueSky, which is a highly-moderated Leftist echo chamber to rival the Grand Canyon, and to go viral on the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter, which used to be a Leftist echo chamber until Elon Musk bought it and…well, we’re still trying to figure out what he did with it, but whatever it was it stopped being a Leftist echo chamber.

And it’s not a matter of the size of the platform, either. Naturally, you’re going to get a longer reach on a platform that has become a daily habit for most people. Leftist social media “influencer” Harry Sisson is on X, TikTok, and Instagram and his posts garner a lot of attention, but it’s all to parrot Leftist squawking points without any intellectual depth. So, naturally, he’s on the right social media platforms for his intellectual prowess. But is Sisson the right person to attract young male voters? Not unless they identify as teenage girls.

In fact, the Left has been trying to find the “white guy whisperer” for a few months now, and they’ve assembled quite the motley crew (and not the musical kind). Here are some of the people who have stepped up or have been pushed into the role.

Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota and former Vice Presidential candidate under Queen Kamala the Appointed

Doug Emhoff, the Second Gentleman under Queen Kamala the Appointed

David Hogg, gun control activist and possibly former vice DNC chair

Olivia Julianna, female Democrat social media “influencer”

Wow. With a line-up like that, the only missing piece is Naomi Wolf, who was hired to help Al Gore with his masculinity.

And for any Leftists reading this, I was joking.

The issues the Left have communicating with men have one thing in common: they’re all self-inflicted. The most obvious one is their attitude towards men in general: they fucking suck! Thanks in part to third wave feminism and a healthy disdain for the founding of this country, Leftists have found nothing good in the male of the species. And, speaking as a male, they may have a point. The stereotypical man in Leftist circles is a frat bro, one stage above Cro Magnon but with better cars. They’re uncultured, uneducated, probably drunk, and definitely backwards, but they’re the ones who hold all the power.

Which pretty much describes my opinion of most Congresscritters, but I’m sure that’s purely coincidental.

And when Leftists find someone who doesn’t align with them, they move into harangue-you-into-submission mode. They will shrilly preach about what you’re doing wrong in their eyes, why that makes you worse than literally Hitler, and call you all sorts of names. So, it’s really a mystery why Democrats keep losing the male vote…

Again, Leftists, I’m kidding.

What isn’t a joking matter is the culmination of all of that browbeating and general bitching about men. With male support of Democrats going further south than the border wall, it’s clear the current Leftist model doesn’t work anymore. Men are tired of being told we suck, especially when the majority of us don’t. Even Leftist men are often into causes to get pussy.

Spoiler Alert, guys: It never works. They’ll never fuck you, but they’ll float the idea just enough to keep you from leaving. And there’s nothing you can say or do that will be enough to remove that Rock of Gibraltar-sized block from their shoulders.

Check that. There is one thing: going full Dylan Mulvaney.

And you never want to go full Dylan Mulvaney.

And here’s the funny thing (because it’s about time there’s something funny in this piece). Men really aren’t that complicated. We like simple things, like meat, grilling, and grilling meat. Oh, there’s also booze and women. And maybe fast cars or motorcycles. Oh, and there’s sports.

Come to think of it, men might be more complicated than I think.

Seriously, though, at the heart of every man is four chambers. But aside from that, there’s a need to feel competent at the basics of life. Back in prehistoric times, men were the hunters and gatherers, thus they were the providers. Even though we’ve come a long way since then, the need to provide is hard-wired into men’s psyches. The American Dream was built on that same idea, only with two car garages and white picket fences instead of trying not to be devoured by giant lizards and avoiding tar pits.

In other words, when I was a wee lad.

Leftists overcomplicate this concept (as they often do because to them being confusing is a sign of super-duper intelligence), so they completely miss the answer to their male voting problem. Instead of nagging us to vote for Democrats because reasons, give us a reasoned argument. Or at the very least don’t sound like a harpy when you talk to us. You should have learned that lesson in 2016 after watching Hillary Clinton lose, but apparently you haven’t.

And here’s a fun fact! Many men didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris because they’re sexist and racist. It’s because they didn’t like them. And you know why we like someone like Tulsi Gabbard? Because she’s fucking hot!

No, wait, that’s not it. It’s because she doesn’t come at men like we’re the enemy. Her tone and demeanor are much more inviting and she’s more open to having a conversation even if we don’t see eye to eye. You could have a beer with her while grilling steaks and have a great time.

Try imagining Hillary or Kamala in that scenario. Even if you put it in the best AI out there, it would come back and say, “Seriously, what the fuck, Dave?”

While Leftists continue to try to attract men to their causes, they’re going to be met with more failure than Walter Mondale in 1984 until they come to terms with their misandry. Swearing more and studying how men speak will only take you so far, but to me they come off like the “How Do You Do Fellow Kids” meme. If you want to get men back in your political corner, be real.

And from what I’ve seen and heard so far, Speaking with American Men is about as real as William Shatner’s hair.





Extremist Makeover – WNBA Edition

Usually, these Extremist Makeovers involve politics, but this time I wanted to delve into a different, but no less controversial, subject. I have been a basketball fan for most of my life, starting as many kids do: shooting hoops in my driveway. But since I sucked at dribbling, shooting accuracy, passing, playing defense, rebounding, running, and pretty much anything else that is required to be good at the game, I gave up my hoop dreams. Even so, I never lost my love of the game.

That’s why it’s so disappointing to see what’s going on in the WNBA. I know it’s supposed to be professional basketball, but it reminds me more of a pick-up game at the Y. That I’m playing in. And I’m the best player on the court. The offense is spotty, the defense makes the defense played at the NBA All Star Game look like the security at Fort Knox, and there’s less hustle on both sides of the ball than a hibernating sloth whose core temperature has been dropped to absolute zero.

And that’s just Angel Reese.

I’m kidding, of course. Clearly there are women on WNBA teams that could run me out of the gym before the opening whistle, but that’s no great feat. It’s made even more apparent when a player takes a shot her teammates look like the scene from “The Ten Commandments” when Moses parts the Red Sea. The only thing less occupied than the lane in that situation may be the stands at most WNBA games.

That was before a young woman with a dream and an outside shot that she could make from the parking lot on the other side of the country named Caitlin Clark entered the league. Incredible court vision, crisp and precise passing, and genuinely a fun player to watch all by herself. And she’s a clear draw, if attendance, endorsement deals, and TV ratings are any indication.

Yet, the WNBA has a problem with Caitlin Clark, one they’re not ready to admit or resolve. The league simply wasn’t ready for her level of game, which puts a lot of NBA starters to shame. So, naturally, the WNBA did the sensible thing and built the league around her.

Just kidding! They let other players use her as a tackling dummy while the refs and Commissioner turned a blind eye to it. Unless, of course, Clark tried to fight back. Then, she gets called for whatever foul they can find and then has to play nice for the media scrum afterwards.

And that’s not counting the attitudes by WNBA stars and former players turned analysts. Some appreciate what Clark brings to the league, while others curse the hardwood she walks on. And it’s not just the occasional sly throwing of shade, either. There’s actual hatred behind some of the commentary, matched only by the hatred towards Clark with some of her peers.

Needless to say, the WNBC needs a lot of help. And I, being Mr. Helpful, am here to help!

The first step starts with a question: do you want to succeed, or do you want to continue being the NBA’s side piece? Let’s face it, the WNBA needs the NBA more than the NBA needs to learn what traveling is, and considering there’s so much traveling going on players get frequent flier miles during each game, that’s saying something. If you’re not aware, the WNBA is being kept fiscally afloat by the NBA, and even with the Caitlin Clark Effect in full effect, the powers that be can’t seem to figure out how to turn that into a money-making venture.

I know we’re not supposed to attribute malice to a situation that can be chalked up to incompetence, but I can’t figure out which it is in this case. That’s why my question is the key to figure out where to go from here. If you’re comfortable with the status quo, then we’re done here. Enjoy constantly losing money and try to act surprised when the doors close for good.

But let’s assume for the purposes of this sketch you want to make money. Then, the question becomes how can you improve the product you’re putting out for a fraction of the public consumption at the moment. This is easy: hire high school basketball refs. The “professionals” you have miss more calls than Helen Keller (and at least she has the excuse of being deceased). Until the “professionals” can prove they can call a full game without more errors than a Timothy Geithner tax return (talk about your obscure callbacks!), I’m afraid they’re going to have to learn how to do their jobs by watching real professionals do them.

Second, recognize what Caitlin Clark brings to the table and do what you can to protect your investment. I’m not saying let her get away with metaphorical murder on and off the court. Understand she is a once-in-a-generation talent who not only moves the needle, but can help evolve the perception of the WNBA from an afterthought to a must-see attraction. She’s already been the catalyst of change for the Indiana Fever, as the team has really built something special attracting other players who want to play with Clark.

Now, consider the fact Clark is inspiring young girls and boys (and even old codgers like me) to play basketball like she does. That means you might see more Caitlins in the near future, so you might want to seed the ground now so you’re ready when they arrive. And that means you gotta stop setting her up for failure by risking her getting injured or frustrated to the point she can no longer play. Where Clark goes, the fans will go with her.

And speaking of failures, third, stop trying to make Angel Reese a thing. She’s not a good player, and when you consider I’m saying this, you know she’s bad. She’s supposed to be an elite inside player, but her game outside of rebounding sucks. The only thing she has going for her is the fact she’s not that different from a lot of current WNBA players: more meh than marvelous, but able to make a hockey fight look like a Buddhist rave. No amount of social media posts, red carpet events, and fashion shoots will make Angel Reese any better at her actual job.

And while we’re on the subject, the league needs to have a serious sit-down with the teams and explain a very simple concept to them: you’re getting paid to play basketball. Not target certain players to “teach them a lesson” about the way the WNBA is. Not flop more than Lebron James looking for calls, only to turn around and commit a live mugging at the other side of the court. Not spending time on social media promoting themselves or beefing with other players and fans. You. Are. There. To. Play. Basketball.

For the love of all that is holy, at least try to look like you can play offense and defense. A second-year player is making you look bad, just as she did in her rookie year. This is not a time to coast on past glory or because you haven’t had to do any more before now. The game is evolving because of Caitlin Clark, and you can either catch up to keep up or find yourselves left in the dust.

Finally, you have to demand accountability from all parts of the WNBA. That means more fines, ejections, and suspensions for egregious violations, and I’m not just talking about the players here. Coaches, referees, teams, and, yes, even the Commissioner need to be held to a higher standard. Because, and I can’t stress this enough, you are a professional sports league, so start acting like it. Anybody who bends or breaks the rules gets punished. It worked on me when my parents did it to me growing up, and it will work here.

This may be a fool’s errand falling on deaf ears, but as a basketball fan, I want to see the WNBA become more than it is today. That won’t happen without major changes in personnel, attitude, and rule enforcement. Time will tell if the WNBA takes me up on my suggestions (and, believe me, I am open to salary negotiations), but I remain hopeful.

Just like that little boy shooting hoops in the driveway hoping the basketball that goes soaring over the backboard and bouncing off the roof will eventually lead to better shooting.

Well, I’m still working on that, but I’m still hopeful!




Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With the illegal immigration situation heating up under President Donald Trump, the Left has taken it upon itself to try to keep him in check. So far, that’s been limited to supporting vi0lent criminals connected to existing gangs, crying “due process” at the drop of a hat, helping illegal immigrants avoid ICE agents, and the like. And they’ve been successful…in looking like dumbfucks.

But recently some Leftists decided to push the issue at a New Jersey ICE facility under the auspices of oversight. Now, as a Congresswoman has been charged with assault against an ICE agent and other Congresscritters starting a hand-wringing letter writing campaign, I can officially say they’ve succeeded in out-dumbfucking themselves.

Not all is lost, however. Not only to we get the chance to laugh at the absurdity of the situation, but we also get a chance to further examine what oversight is. (Okay, so the former may be better than the latter, but work with me, people!)

oversight

What the Left thinks it means – making sure the Executive Branch is doing what it should, no matter what it takes

What it really means – a concept that has escaped the federal government some time ago

The first question we should ask ourselves is “What does Thomas look like naked?” After throwing up the last 3 days of contents in our stomachs, we can move to a more relevant and less vomit-inducing question: who has the power of oversight and where does it come from? To answer the second question first, when a Mommy and a Daddy really love each other…

No, wait, that’s a different question. Never mind.

The power of oversight resides with Congress as an extension of Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the US Constitution. I say it’s an extension because it’s not really codified in the Constitution and came from where all good ideas start, the Supreme Court. In Anderson v. Dunn, a unanimous High Court ruled Congress had the authority to conduct oversight as a means to uphold its rules. Not a bad ruling overall, but it had the potential to be abused.

Like we’re seeing now.

These days oversight has been mostly a joke played on us by both major parties. Instead of keeping the Executive Branch in check, Congress has decided meaningless hearings and endless investigations that lead nowhere is the order of the day. Even when the evidence is so obvious even Stevie Wonder could see it, we’re treated to a lot of sound and fury, signifying…well, less than nothing.

How many times have we watched Congresscritters preen before the cameras with gotcha questions and more interruptions than Mel Tillis with the hiccups, only to have nothing get done as a result? Lois Lerner, Hillary Clinton, Peter Strzok, Anthony Fauci, and so many others (albeit most of them tend to swing to the Left) get grilled, found to make contradictory statements (also called lying) under oath, get exposed as frauds, and then…they get to walk out without so much as a wrinkle in their dress clothes. The aforementioned Mr. Wonder has better oversight.

This is due to one thing both major parties hold dear: not giving a fuck. When Republicans are in power, they don’t give a fuck about oversight because then they’ll be under the microscope when Democrats are in power, and vice versa. After all, if all the criminal behavior in the halls of power are exposed, the country as a whole could lose faith in our government.

Or as I call it, any given Tuesday.

Although I have to give props to the Congressional Democrats who decided to put oversight into hyperdrive, they made two key mistakes. First, Congressional oversight doesn’t extend to anyone who isn’t in Congress. That means Newark Mayor and potential gubernatorial candidate Ras Baraka doesn’t get to use it to cover his trespassing. Oops. In an attempt to come up with a suitable punishment for Mayor Baraka, I have the following solution: have him remain Mayor of Newark, New Jersey.

Second, and this is important, it doesn’t excuse you from any crimes committed while you’re doing this oversight. You know…like, oh I don’t know…physically assaulting people. Although potential fistfights in Congress is an entertaining prospect, we can’t let a legitimate (albeit underused) power devolve into violence. At least not until I can secure the Pay Per View rights and a cut of the concessions.

Now, before you Leftists continue to downplay the events and turn the Congresscritters involved into heroes, let me ask you a question. Why is it this same passion isn’t being tapped into when a Democrat is in the Oval Office? And the same goes for Republicans when there’s a Republican President. The very nature of politics is shady shit, so it behooves you to keep your house in order if for no other reason than to get a leg up on your competition.

Oh, and there’s the whole strengthening the tattered fabric of this country thing, too.

There’s a reason Congressional approval ratings are more underwater than the Titanic, and not even a Leonard DiCaprio/Kate Winslet vehicle with a Celine Dion song attached to it is going to fix it. For this situation to right itself, Congress has to take oversight a lot more seriously. Not to the extent of attacking ICE agents, mind you, but closer to holding bad actors accountable, regardless of which side of the political aisle they belong.

And that means no more endless investigations and multiple hearings without consequences. If you find out someone you’re investigating broke the law, charge his/her ass! It’s going to make the judicial system in the DC area work overtime and the prisons might be a bit overcrowded, but it’s worth it if only to keep the people we elect to high office in check, even if we can’t vote them out due to them having war chests the size of the combined GDP of third world countries.

Hey, if the Chicago Cubs can win a World Series in my lifetime, anything is possible!





The War of 8020

One of the most attractive elements of Leftist thought is how they take up for the underdogs. Even when it seems impossible, Leftists will side with the less fortunate in their attempts to defeat The Man. But I never would have thought they would actively try to become the underdogs.

It’s hard for me to pinpoint exactly when Leftists went nuttier than squirrel shit, but it was between the 2022 midterms and the 2024 Presidential election, probably when they realized Donald Trump was not only going to be the Republican nominee, but that he had a good chance of defeating President Brick Tamland. To be fair, a cardboard cut-out of Trump could have beaten the President and been far more articulate in doing so, but the point is the same. Somehow Trump broke the Left to the point they would protest breathing if Trump said, “I love oxygen. Oxygen is the greatest thing.”

And I know you read that in his voice.

Regardless of what the sensible action would be, Leftists have decided to take the under in almost every hot button issue today. When it comes to trans women in biological female spaces, they went with the trans women, no matter how creepy they were. Illegal immigrants who just happened to be connected to gangs? They sided with the illegal gang members. Government waste? Pile it on, buddy!

Spoiler Alert: It’s shit like this that cost you the 2024 Presidential election.

Many people have attempted to figure out why the Left takes the losing side of issues lately with various conclusions, ranging from not wanting to give Trump a W to Leftists being utter dumbasses. And to be honest I keep going back and forth between these two extremes (although they’re probably both right). Personally, I think it’s because of how partisan the country is right now.

Not that long ago, Democrats and Republicans could disagree on how things got done, but could find common ground on issues that would benefit the entire country, like defeating the Soviet Union. Once the Soviets fell, we no longer had an outward enemy, so we turned our sights inward and found new enemies. Since then, we got consumed by the Left and the Right fighting like the US and Soviets, only without the possibility of Mutually Assured Destruction.

Nowadays, MAD would be getting off easy. With the rise of Internet and social media culture, both sides are looking for ways to “own” the other side. And this is one reason Trump is so popular among the Right: he is a master of owning the Left. The problem for the Left is they don’t have anybody who can do the same to the Right. Oh, they think they have people, but they suck at it, and if they’re being honest with themselves (which is a stretch, I know), they would admit it.

Since they can’t due to not wanting to give even a micron to Trump, they’re stuck being the party of Jesse Helms, who was notorious for often being the sole “No” vote on bills. Oh, and being racist pricks.

Hence, the reason Leftists are running for every unpopular position with the American people. (The not wanting to give Trump even a micron bit, not the being racist pricks bit.) As a result, Democrats are getting as popular as STDs in a brothel. So, how are they trying to right…or left the ship?

Swearing a lot more.

And I’m not even fucking kidding.

As someone who occasionally peppers his posts with adult language, I can appreciate a good cuss word and, when done correctly, it can add impact to a statement. The way the Left has been doing it, though, is like seeing your grandma curse: it’s unexpected and even a little off-putting. Even when some of the more junior members of Congress do it, it doesn’t feel natural to me. If anything, it feels more like a political calculation that came out of a focus group rather than any genuine emotion.

And what’s worse than the potty mouths on the Left is the fact they keep doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on their unpopular positions because…well, I’m still trying to figure that out. One thing that comes to mind is the Left’s desire to be on “the right side of history.” As noble as that sounds, it’s bullshit that falls apart under its own weight when balanced with another saying, “History is written by the victors.” For the Left’s version of history to be the right one, they have to win.

Granted, with some issues like civil rights and gay marriage, they ultimately won, but only after a prolonged struggle where public opinion shifted to adopt the Left’s position. In a world of TikTok and entitlement, though, that window shrinks significantly leaving only two options: shame the opposition into supporting the cause, or abandoning it when it gets nowhere.

Take the recent kerfluffle over the Equal Rights Amendment caused when President Brick Tamland and Vice President Kamala the Appointed tried to get it “ratified” by saying “it’s ratified.” All it took for the Left to adopt the squawking point was for the aforementioned political figureheads to put it out there. Of course, these same idiots didn’t bother to bring it up for the decades since the ERA failed to be ratified through the existing process. If it were such an important issue, the Left would have made it a cornerstone issue. And it’s not like they haven’t had control of Congress and the White House since the 80s. They had their chance, and they decided it wasn’t important enough to fight for.

So, ladies, how do you feel about voting for Leftists now?

This is going to be a major problem for Leftists going forward. The more they let themselves get played into supporting causes on the losing end of the polls just to spite Trump, the more potential voters they’re going to give away, and no amount of demanding those voters support Leftist candidates because reasons is going to change that. At some point, the political leadership will have to set aside their swearing and figure this out or else it’s going to be the year 8020 before they get a whiff of the White House again.

Not that I have a problem with that, mind you…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

In my 55 years of kicking around this ball of rock and water we call Planet Earth, I’ve seen some pretty amazing things. The first Space Shuttle flight. The Berlin Wall coming down. Internet porn…not that I know anything about that, mind you. But this past week, I saw something that caused me to almost swallow my face.

Leftists finally found asylum seekers they didn’t support.

President Donald Trump granted refugee status to white South Africans who were fleeing racial oppression at the hands of their government. So far a whopping 59 white South Africans came to America. And, predictably, the Left lost its collectivist shit over it trying to explain it away through cries of “racism” in lieu of “wolf” and whataboutism to the extent my Bullshit-O-Meter overloaded.

At the heart of this controversy is our asylum process. To put it mildly, it’s more fucked up than having Hunter Biden as an accountability buddy/crack dealer. So, naturally, it’s worth exploring further.

asylum

What the Left thinks it means – a means for oppressed people to come to America and seek a better life

What it really means – a process that needs a serious overhaul

To say our immigration policy is more fucked up than Sybil on LSD is an understatement, but we do try to set forth a semblance of a policy. In some cases, a situation is so dangerous or dire that we have to make exceptions to the normal immigration rules. That’s where the asylum process comes into play. Although it’s been abused…I mean used as a catch-all by previous Administrations that will remain nameless (but it rhymes with Slow Mindin’), there are certain criteria that have to be met before it can be granted. And even then, there’s the wonderful world of bureaucracy to deal with, which makes the process even more frustrating and/or dangerous.

This is where the Left gets things wrong when it comes to asylum. As much as “no one is above the law” has become a mantra when it comes to President Donald Trump, the Left believes the law can and should be circumvented for every Tomas, Ricardo, and Jaime that arrives at our southern border without even trying to seek asylum. Although it’s amazing elected officials are ignorant of the laws on the books and the concept that breaking these laws is a crime, it did lead to one of the most epic takedowns in Congressional history.

Oh, and a tip for the gamblers out there. If you ever bet on the number of fucks Tom Homan gives, always bet the under.

This brings us to the current situation involving the white South Africans. President Trump called what they experienced as a “genocide,” which is a gross overstatement and unnecessary given the conditions already in place. However, there are details that can move that needle one way or the other.

It started with a little thing the kids call apartheid. For almost 50 years, white South Africans treated the black population as second-class citizens at best. This was a bad idea, not just because it was racist and stupid, but because the whites were and still are vastly outnumbered. This practice got the boot in the 1990s due in no small part to Nelson Mandela.

Then, something predictable happened: the oppressed became the oppressors. Once black South Africans got into power, the urge to flip the script was too great, and the white South Africans found themselves on the wrong side of the apartheid stick.

Where things get really funky (and not in a Parliament Funkadelic way) is the passage of a law where white South African farmers had to give up portions of their land without compensation because racial justice or something. Even if you think it’s okay given how much property white South African farmers own, the civil libertarian in me (and hopefully in you) says that’s not right. If you own something and any entity takes it from you, you are due compensation of some kind, whether it be monetary, legal, or legislative.

Now, remember the criteria for asylum I referenced and linked earlier? One of them involves persecution or possible persecution on the basis of…race. And, surprise surprise, white South Africans have a pretty good case for that based on the aforementioned land law.

Oh, and there’s the “Kill the Boer. Kill the Farmer.” song popularized by anti-apartheid groups and more recently by Julius Malema, a political leader in South Africa. While Leftists swing between “it’s not about white genocide” and “it could be construed as being in favor of white genocide,” the simplest explanation is…fuck yeah it’s about white genocide, and only fucking dipshits would say it wasn’t!

Oddly enough, the Leftists who think it’s not about white genocide are the same people who take Donald Trump literally whenever he says anything even slightly controversial in a joking manner.

Regardless, the white South Africans have a legitimate case for asylum, so why is the Left complaining if following the law is so important to them? You know, aside from being hypocritical asshats. Fortunately for us, they’ve tipped their hands early and often. It’s all about racism. Sure, Leftists say it’s Trump being racist because he’s allowing white South Africans to get asylum, but it’s the other way around; Leftists want to deny them entry because of their skin color.

Simple enough, but there’s another reason related to the race issue. Leftists have tried to turn racism from hatred of another race (which it is) into hatred of another race with the inclusion of power (which is bullshit). Without going too far into the weeds, let’s just say the Left’s revised version of racism does more to create minority victims than actual racism does, which makes it racist by definition. Funny how that works out, isn’t it?

Why do I mention this? For one, it pads out the Lexicon entry a bit. But more to the point, the situation with the white South Africans puts the Left’s definition of racism on its head. They may own the vast majority of the land, but that in and of itself isn’t power. The power in South Africa is clearly on the side of the black population, so the Left’s dynamic doesn’t work. But since they can’t admit that, they pretend a) it doesn’t exist, b) it’s totes different because reasons, or c) Orange Man Bad!

The problem, of course, is the law itself. Racial persecution is clearly written and is hard to argue against in this case, but dammit the Left is going to try!

Which is why I think we need to overhaul the asylum process when we’re overhauling our immigration system. To the Left’s credit, they are correct that economic issues are a valid reason to consider offering asylum to others, especially if we want to be seen as a land of opportunity. The question becomes where do we draw the line. The way we’ve done it recently is not sustainable and creates a dangerous strain on our social safety net. If we demand these potential asylees bring something worthwhile to the table (i.e. marketable skills, a good work ethic, etc.), we run the risk of looking heartless or driven solely by materialism.

Beyond that, the current asylum process can take years. There’s tons of paperwork, red tape, and contradictory practices to overcome. So, we’re left with the challenge of streamlining the process while keeping as many relevant avenues to asylum open without stretching ourselves too thin.

Good luck with that.

Seriously, the best way I can figure out how to tick all of these boxes is to create a system to separate the different types of asylee claims to maximize the speed at which they can be processed. And with specialization, it’s going to create a stronger knowledge base overall. Instead of having to have 100 people looking at the full gamut of cases, you can have 10 people working on economic asylum requests, another 10 working on racial asylum claims, and so on. Through that process, the groups of 10 are going to gain an intimate understanding of that particular process. Then, if you have a case that covers more than one asylee area, they can be called in to offer their expert opinions.

With everything electronic these days, doing a background check and filling out paperwork can be quicker and easier. It shouldn’t take cutting down a forest for a mountain of paperwork to come here under dire circumstances. There are other reasons to cut down a forest, after all. (Just kidding, environmentalists!) And we can hire some of the Sallie Mae folks to do the background checks, which will guarantee the asylees can be found.

And finally, and this is the hardest part, we need to approach each claim the same: with a healthy mix of optimism and skepticism. Not every asylum claim is truthful, but we can’t assume they’re all fraudulent. It’s going to take some research and knowledge of world events to pick out the bad actors from the legitimately needy.

That eliminates TikTokers.

But it opens the door for people like me who are curious, compassionate, and cynical. In fact, Gen X is gonna be flush with job opportunities for decades to come, so win-win baby!

As far as the white South Africans, welcome to America, where most people will welcome you and those who don’t claim to be all about diversity. Ignore the latter and you’ll be fine. Most of us do, and those who don’t are getting something out of it, like content for a mildly successful weekly blog series written by a handsome, well hung, and incredibly sexy man.

And since you haven’t found that one yet, read mine!




My 2025 Commencement Address

Another spring has arrived, but a request to give a commencement address at a high school, college, tech school, hairdressing college, or even clown college hasn’t. So, once again a graduating class will be deprived of my words of…well, I wouldn’t call them wisdom so much as wise-assery, but the point is the same, as it the annual result. Enjoy!



Greetings, members of the Class of 2025. I know you were expecting someone like Robert Downey Jr., Katy Perry, or the San Diego Chicken, but their asking prices were a bit too steep. After a phone call full of begging and pleading, your high school/college/tech school/hairdressing college/clown college got me under one condition: that I stop begging and pleading.

Your typical commencement address tends to follow a standard formula: tell a few stories, offer some life advice, and conclude with some inspirational words that will make you feel like you can do anything. I know, because I’ve been through a few of these in my life, either sitting where you are now or out in the audience waiting for a friend or loved one to cross the stage and get a diploma or a reasonable facsimile. But if you are familiar with my work (and if you are, I’m so, so sorry), you know I’m not exactly a by-the-book guy. Which, now that I think of it, explains my grades…

What was I saying? Oh, yeah, the commencement thing.

One thing I always try to do in my speeches is give you a realistic view of the world you’re about to enter with all of your youthful enthusiasm, hope, and fearlessness. That way you’ll be prepared when the world grinds that out of you.

Not too inspiring, right? But it’s what will most likely happen unless you have a dream job waiting for you on the outside, and even then you might have to eat crap and learn to love the taste of it. That’s why they call it a dream job: if you get one, you’ll probably wake up and realize it isn’t real.

The daily grind has a tendency to make you shrink your aspirations to fix in a box of someone else’s creation. And these people are going to convince you not to aim high, but aim a little closer to medium. For most people, that’s high enough, but not everyone is like that. There are always outliers who will put their hearts and souls into a career, hoping their efforts will get noticed and rewarded accordingly.

And these people will be some of the first to get burnt out.

That shouldn’t stop you from dreaming big, though. It’s during these tough times that we get to see who we really are and what we truly believe. Not everyone handles pressure in the same way. Some rise to the occasion. Others will buckle under the pressure. And others will find a way to blame someone else for the tough times. The people in this last group are known as politicians.

Anyway, the best way to dream big is to not let your work define your life. Take up hobbies, meet people, catch a movie every once in a while, or just get out of your apartment, house, condo, or whatever you call home to see the world around you. The more your work/life balance leans towards the 9-to-5, the less of life you actually experience. So, the solution is simple: part-time or temp jobs!

Of course if you want silly things like a steady paycheck, health insurance, and, oh yeah, food, that strategy may not pan out so well.

This isn’t to say you should slack off on the clock. When you have a job, whether it be delivering pizzas or writing code for a new AI program, put your best self forward. There’s a reason why people my age are always complaining about the work ethic of younger generations: we’re old. But a good number of us were brought up with a solid work ethic, so we have expectations. Granted, you’re not us, but at least meet us halfway. Show up and show out, as the kids (i.e. you) say. Or not. Either way, if you have a job, do it to the best of your ability. Failing that, try to fake it or get a Gen X mentor. You may not like what we have to say, but we’ll be honest.

And brutally so. Let’s just say Gen X’s filters got shot off in the war. Granted, it was the Cola Wars of the mid 80s, but those wounds still run pretty deep.

Something else I should mention that will help you in the long run is to learn when your emotions are overriding your intelligence. Not every battle has to be fought, no matter how much you feel it should. And I say this as someone who has run into more than a few brick walls because I let my feelings write checks my brain couldn’t cash, and it affected my personal brand.

For those of you not up on corporate speak, a personal brand is how your coworkers and superiors see you. So, if you come off as insufferable, that’s going to stick with you until you either rebuild it through a lot of work, time, and personal reflection or find a new job. Find a way to channel your emotions in a more constructive way while on the clock. When you’re at home and have a couple of adult beverages in you, then you can complain about how screwed up things are.

Or you could exercise or something. Whatever trips your trigger warning.

If you take nothing else from my speech, I hope you take this. You may not have control over everything in your lives, but you control what choices you make. The way you approach whatever obstacles get in your way will have more of an impact on your future than you realize. That requires a little less “live for the moment” and more “live so you can pay your rent so you don’t have to live in a cardboard box or with your parents in 6 months.” Or maybe live with your parents in a cardboard box the way the economy is going.

Regardless, you have a vested interest in your future, so act like it, for the love of Pete! Yes, that means you may have to work at a dead-end job for a while to make money until your ship comes in (Pro Tip: avoid having your ship be the Titanic), but that’s how you earn your break, coffee or big. If nothing else, keeping your nose to the proverbial grindstone shows potential employers and yourself that you can tough it out to make it to the other side. And, as someone who has done that, I can tell you how sweet the fruits of your labor are.

After all, I wouldn’t be here today without me begging and pleading!

Congratulations, Class of 2025!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Have you ever spent a ton of money on something you barely use and then wonder why you’re still spending money on it? Lately, the Trump Administration has been wondering about that in the area of public broadcasting. Thanks to a recent Executive Order, National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service may find their funding cut due to allegations of bias. Of course they deny it (using the same terminology, I might add), which leads us to the inevitable question: why do Republicans want to kill Big Bird?

Or, better yet, the inevitable Leftist Lexicon entry.

public broadcasting

What the Left thinks it means – a valuable service that provides balanced and factual reporting

What it really means – taxpayer-funded propaganda favoring the Left

Both NPR and PBS are under the umbrella of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a private non-profit. They describe themselves as:

the steward of the federal government’s investment in public broadcasting and the largest single source of funding for public radio, television, and related online and mobile services.

In other words, they handle the money once they get it from us. And with an operating budget of $545 million for Fiscal Year 2025, that’s ain’t petty cash. So, what are we getting for this investment?

That depends on who you ask. If you ask the heads of NPR and PBS (or their squawking heads), they’re providing a valuable service to society, the economy, and education. To someone who used to work there, it’s become a Leftist mouthpiece, which has negatively affected the public’s trust in it. To me, a consumer of what public broadcasting has put forth over the years, it’s a mixed bag.

Remember Slobodan Milosevic? Not only is it one hell of a Scrabble score, but he was the former leader of Kosovo, accused of ethnic cleansing. As it turns out, I first heard his name while listening to NPR’s “All Things Considered,” and at the time I thought their coverage was pretty balanced. Then, when Leftists decided ethnic cleansing was bad, that coverage changed and Milosevic became Public Enemy #1. Well, #2 after Rush Limbaugh.

I bring that up to a) show off the big brain on Thomas, and b) give you an idea of the subtle biases that was already involved in NPR’s reporting. The Left doesn’t come right out and say “We’re biased as fuck and we don’t care.” At least, outside of MSNBC, and they’re not really a news channel as much as a way for Al Sharpton to keep getting a steady paycheck. Their bias comes through through less obvious means. A turn of a phrase here, a descriptive word there, and before you know it, you’re being indoctrinated.

Just ask Bernard Goldberg.

Where PBS and NPR get more cover than the traditional media is in the idea they just present facts. Welllll…that’s subject to debate. Sometimes they present facts, and other times they suppress them, like they did with the Hunter Biden laptop story. Their now-infamous statement about why they didn’t cover it?

We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.

Yeah, because who would want to hear about what’s on the laptop of the President’s addict son during a Presidential election? That would be like…oh, I don’t know…covering when the Bush twins got busted for fake IDs when their dad was President.

Oh, wait…

Setting the bias aside for the time being, there is a serious question on the table: should we be funding public broadcasting using federal tax dollars? The artist in me says we should because it provides viewpoints and entertainment people might not get otherwise. Like reruns of “Are You Being Served?” or “The Red Green Show.” The capitalist in me says we shouldn’t because PBS and NPR should be able to stand or fall on its own merits like any other media outlet. Like reruns of “Are You Being Served?” or “The Red Green Show.”

Where I come down on the question is…kinda both options? I appreciate the fact public broadcasting exists and, when the product is closer to the lofty goals of the CPB, it’s pretty fucking good. When the product is tainted by biases, the image of public broadcasting suffers.

Although it would be easier to find a time when Adam Schiff hasn’t made himself look like a dumbass, I don’t think it’s impossible for public broadcasting to change its fortunes without costing taxpayers a fortune in the process. The first step (which is always the hardest, especially if you’re drunk) is to remove any pretense of moral and intellectual superiority. You may think you’re providing pure wisdom from the gods themselves, but you’re really just college radio and public access TV stations with a trust fund. Get off the Shetland Pony you call a high horse and just talk to us like we’re fellow human beings.

And while we’re here, let’s figure out a way to reduce dependence on donations and federal funding by spinning off popular intellectual properties. Take “Sesame Street,” for example. The nonprofit behind it struck a deal with HBO to run new episodes exclusively with those same episodes being shown on PBS after a few months. Now that this deal has reached its end, there’s a possibility of Disney buying it. And considering Disney already owns the Muppets, it’s not that much of a stretch.

Imagine being able to do that with other public broadcasting properties. Yes, I understand doing so would be hard for some people to take because they think selling a property is selling out. On the other hand, it’s really no different than what the CPB already does with different foundations and companies picking up the tab for programming. And, you might actually be able to get free of the federal influence, which will give you more freedom to thrive.

Unless, of course, you want to keep donating the GDP of small island nations to get a crappy tote bag. At least with a more capitalist approach, you might be able to get a crappy tote bag for a lot less.

Meanwhile, public broadcasting could use a few more encouraging voices to help them navigate the possibility of being without federal funding. When PBS and NPR do well, tell them and, if you’re so inclined, toss them a few bucks. When they fuck up, call them out and offer constructive feedback. They may not take it, but at least you tried in a way that doesn’t come off as automatically anti-public broadcasting.

When you really think about it (and I do because the Interwebs went out at Casa de Tomas recently), public broadcasting provides us with all sorts of programming that appeals to different audiences. And, aside from the amount we kick in unintentionally via taxes, it’s free-ish. You can do a lot worse than watching a nature documentary, period dramas, British sitcoms, and the occasional Doctor Who episode.

And given what DOGE has found so far, we’ve spent money on a lot worse.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Leftists love to tell us we should be more like Europe. And who wouldn’t? America does most of the fighting on their behalf, so they can spend their money on more popular things, like universal healthcare that sucks more than Stormy Daniels working straight commission. Or would that be cum-mission?

This past week, we saw yet another way Europe is outpacing America. Not only has it adopted green energy in lieu of fossil fuels, but it has already seen a major catastrophic failure of said green energy. Spain, Portugal, and parts of France experienced blackouts (or if you don’t want to be racist, African-American-outs), putting quite a damper on things. While they’re sifting through the proverbial rubble to figure out what happened and how to prevent it from happening again, green energy has been targeted as a possible culprit.

So, naturally (see what I did there?), it makes good sense to talk about it in this week’s Leftist Lexicon.

green energy

What the Left thinks it means – renewable energy sources that should be put into practice now to save the planet

What it really means – an unreliable source of energy now that has the potential to be used more once the kinks get worked out

When you look at what green energy encompasses, you’ll notice it covers a lot of ground. In the case of solar energy, this is quite literal. The key feature to green energy is the fact it’s renewable. That, and Leftists can’t stop talking about it like it’s the Rosetta Stone for future power generation.

I know what some of you out there are saying, mainly because I’ve had your houses bugged. You’re saying, “Thomas is just going to shit on green energy again.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Well, not counting all the media folks and Leftists (one in the same) who said President Brick Tamland was as sharp as ever, that is.

As an unapologetic science geek, I love the potential green energy has to revolutionize power generation in this country and the world. The operative word, dear reader, is “potential.” Just because we can use the sun, wind, water, and other natural elements to generate power doesn’t mean we’re very good at it yet. Right now, we’re at Hunter Biden painting level, but the Left wants us to believe we’re at Bob Ross level.

So, why are Leftists promoting green energy more heavily than they’re using vulgarity to seem edgy? It’s all about control. The Left has taken upon itself to be the primary, secondary, and tertiary voices on all things science, so they have a vested interest in maintaining that level of control over what is considered science and what is considered crackpottery.

That’s how we got scientists saying there are more genders than there are people in the world. And anyone who says there are just two is just wrong!

Meanwhile in the real world, there are actual consequences to believing the hype surrounding green energy. Namely, making an ass of yourself on the Social Media Platform Formerly Known As Twitter. Take this post from former military woman and loser to Mitch “Turtle Boy” McConnell, Amy McGrath. In an attempt to get one up on Secretary of Defense Pete “Keep ‘Em Coming, Barkeep” Hegseth by suggesting green energy would save lives on the battlefield by not needing supply lines for fossil fuels.

Of course, this doesn’t mean there wouldn’t be supply lines for other things, like ammunition, equipment, and, oh yeah, food. But what do I know? I’m just a civilian whose military experience is limited to playing “Battlefield 2042.” Then again, I’m not a fucking dumbass, so there’s that.

McGrath’s sentiment reflects how the Left sees green energy as a cure-all that we should have adopted yesterday because we only have less than 10 years before the environment goes tits-up. And if I had a nickel for every ecological apocalypse that happened since I’ve been alive, I’d still be waiting on my first nickel. See, that’s another tactic they use to get us to buy into green energy: fear of a dying planet. By tapping into fear, Leftists try to override the logical side of our brains. You know, the side that usually tells us when something doesn’t make sense?

I see that’s an alien concept to you Leftists out there. Just trust me on this.

What you don’t have to trust me on, though, is the list of hurdles we have to overcome to get to better green energy.

Batteries: Green energy relies on Mother Nature cooperating with the energy generation process. What happens when Mother Nature is a stone cold bitch and doesn’t cooperate? Welllll…that’s where the need for storage comes into play. That requires batteries, batteries that will involve chemicals and minerals that can negatively impact the environment. Because nothing says “green energy” like tearing up the earth to get minerals!

Infrastructure: Since we’re not at the stage where we can implement green energy on a wide scale yet, we will have to build it from scratch. That requires a lot of start-up capital for not a lot of results in the short run. And if we have less than 10 years (according to the Socialist Socialite herself), we might not be able to see any benefits from such an investment in green energy. Not to mention, we have to keep funding really stupid shit, like Solyndra.

Government Involvement: Green energy is a workable idea, but it’s one that requires a lot of green to make happen. Enter the federal government whose idea of fiscal responsibility is only fucking over the taxpayers for $4 billion instead of $5 billion. With the kind of capital the federal government “invests” in green energy, it creates a whole new list of problems that prevents green energy from coming into its own. Bureaucracy, no real benchmarks, and the obligatory political kickbacks add to the cost and time to turn a green energy project from promising to a bigger failure than the recent “Snow White” movie.

Inconsistent Energy Production: Consistency is key to energy prodution, especially when you consider how much energy America uses. Nobody wants to see the lights flicker when you’re having open heart surgery, let alone when you’re watching a YouTube video of it. That means we need a steady stream of electricity. And that’s something green energy can’t provide yet. Like waiting for Jasmine Crockett to make a salient point, it’s hit or miss, mostly miss.

Recycling Issues: The term “green energy” implies it’s eco-friendly. Wellll…that’s not quite true. Aside from the battery issue I referenced earlier, there’s also the matter of the lifespan and disposal of the technology used in green energy. Right now, things like solar panels and windmill blades can only be used for a limited time, which means they have to be replaced eventually. And when you consider these items aren’t as biodegradable as they could be, green energy starts looking a lot less green.

People Being Dumbfucks: Although this one isn’t limited to Leftists, the vast majority of dumbfucks seem to reside on the Left. I’m looking at all of you protesting Tesla because Elon Musk and Orange Man Bad. Unlike Al Gore, Musk is actually walking the walk by addressing the battery issue I referenced earlier and initiating efforts to use more green energy. And what do Leftists do? Burn vehicles and charging stations, which puts pollutants into the air, thus fucking up the environment further than if they just had a Coke and a smile and shut the fuck up.

All that being said, I still have faith green energy can be a thing, but it’s going to take a lot of work. First, we need to level set appropriately, meaning we have to ignore the Leftist hype about it. We’re not going to see solar powered tanks within our lifetimes (mainly because it’s a dumb fucking idea), but we can take smaller steps that fall under the green energy umbrella like using biodiesel. South America has taken the lead on this with some degree of success, and I don’t see green energy taking off here without following their lead. One of the coolest things about their biodiesel is it’s not just renewable, but they’re finding ways to use more plant matter than we do with ethanol. The more we can use to produce biodiesel and other fuels, the greater the yield.

Additionally, we need to be a lot more careful with federal involvement in green energy to make sure the companies getting our money are getting results. We need the best and brightest figuring out how to address potential issues now and anticipate future issues so they can be resolved sooner rather than later. If the companies are just money laundering outlets for Leftist politicians, they’re interested in a different kind of green and I ain’t talking about ecology. (Although, I could be talkin’ ’bout Shaft because he’s a bad mutha…)

Finally, we need to call out the bad actors pushing green energy, especially if they’re burning jet fuel to attend international conventions about it. There’s this thing the kids use these days called a Zoom Meeting where you can get a lot of people together without making a Godzilla-sized carbon footprint. Granted, you won’t get to stay in fancy hotels, run up a bar tab that makes the GDP of China look like a “Take A Penny” dish, and have gourmet dinners with fellow eco-hypocrites, but you can be naked from the waist down and no one would know. Just ask Jeffrey Toobin!

While we wait for green energy to take its place as a potential alternative to fossil fuels, we must do so from a position of facts, not of doomsday scenarios that have been right as often as Kamala Harris has won a primary. Also, we need to take care of the energy sources we have and innovate to make them as good and efficient as we can.

If we don’t, you might have to read this blog by candle light.