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

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

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

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

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

vax hesitant

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

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

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

misinformation

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

What it really means – information that damages Leftist narratives

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If there is one thing the Left excels at, it’s sucking at life. But if there’s another thing they’re good at, it’s hyperbole. If there is a problem they can market, it’s the most horrible problem ever! After the 2020 Elections and the results being more questionable than a Media Matters hit piece, many Republican-led states looked into passing voting laws designed to address the issues they saw. As expected, the Left overreacted, calling these new laws a threat to our democracy.

Then again, the Left thinks a threat to our democracy is anything from new voting laws to fines for overdue library books. It’s gotten to the point it’s become a rallying cry to get their supporters energized enough to take a day off work and…sorry, I couldn’t even type the rest of the sentence with a straight face.

Now’s as good a time as any to add the term to our Leftist Lexicon.

threat to democracy

What the Left thinks it means – a group or idea that can potentially unravel the social and political fabric of America

What it really means – an overused catchphrase that is both unintelligent and inaccurate

There is one thing I forgot to mention in my introduction. The Left is good at connecting two things that have no actual connection whatsoever. Remember, these are the folks who maintain speech can be violence, but actual violence is speech, and mostly peaceful speech at that! So, it’s not surprising the Left would try to conflate new voting laws with events that will destroy our country, move us closer to a fascist/totalitarian state, and, Marxist Utopia forbid, lead to another Nickelback album.

The problem is these new laws have gotten a bad rap (by the same Leftists who told us the 2020 Election was the most secure in history) because the Left…lied about them. Whether it’s Georgia’s proposed law that allegedly bans people from getting water while in line to vote (it doesn’t) or Texas’s proposed law that allegedly restricting access to vote (it doesn’t), the Left has people thinking any Republican effort to curtail the potential for voting fraud are politically-motivated, racist, ageist, and overall evil.

And, surprise surprise, this is by design. The Left doesn’t have any substantive arguments against the proposed laws, or at least none that doesn’t make them look like idiots. Let me put it this way. There are Democrats who are exposing the Left’s lies on these bills. No matter how you slice it, that’s not a good look.

As deceptive as this is, unfortunately it works with a lot of people outside of the Left’s bubble because it preys upon the fact most of us fell asleep during Civics 101. We are not a democracy, nor have we ever been. Whether we will be one later…well, let’s just hope it doesn’t happen unless you want to be Piggy in a live-action version of Lord of the Flies. Many Americans think we are for the reason I mentioned earlier, and it makes it harder to convince people of the truth.

And, no, a democracy and a republic are not interchangeable, nor are they close enough to be synonymous with each other. In a democracy, the people have a direct voice within the government, while the people have an indirect voice within the government through the election of representatives in a republic. A slight difference, but one that means a lot in the grand scheme of politics. For there to be a threat to democracy, there must be a democracy to threaten.

The other aspect of the Left’s latest squawking point left to tackle is why the Left makes so many seemingly minor molehills into metaphysically dangerous mountains. For this, let’s focus just on the voting laws. The purpose of the laws is to prevent people and parties from undermining elections. That is troubling to the Left because these laws shut down many of the tricks they’ve used to win elections in recent years. That gives Leftists a vested interest in shutting down these laws, even though the specifics of these laws make sense. It’s like watching a debate between Ben Stein and an agitated honey badger.  One will present the facts in a measured tone, and the other will rip your throat out if you get too close. And if you’ve ever had your throat ripped out by Ben Stein…

But just like the honey badger, the Left doesn’t care about the facts. They need people to be afraid because fear makes people malleable to the point they abandon critical thinking and focus on self-preservation. And with the Left thinking they know what’s good for you more than, well, you do, they’re going to do whatever they can to get you under their control. Then, after you die, they will control how you vote. Isn’t that nice?

Unfortunately, it’s worked again, and many people are lead to believe the new voting laws prevents people from voting, but only certain people (i.e. non-whites). The facts aren’t as sexy as the fear, so the sexy wins. But as we’ve found out with supermodels, sexy isn’t the same as smart. While the fearmongers screech about how these new restrictive laws prevent people from giving voters in line water, they leave out a little detail: it applies to everybody connected to a political campaign or movement. If it’s the Girl Scouts doing it, no problem. If it’s the National Organization for Women stumping for Biden/Harris, that’s a problem. The devil is in the details, kids, and the Left just so happens to not like to give all the details as they tell you Republicans want people of color to die of thirst while in line to vote.

Meanwhile, we here in “flyover country” have this nifty little thing called tap water that we can put in our own containers and drink to our hearts content. (Offer void in Flint, Michigan.)

As with most Leftist ideas, the best weapon is common sense. Why are the Left so up in arms about voter laws in Republican states that are often looser than voter laws in Leftist strongholds? It’s pure politics, baby. If the Left wants to turn states like Texas and Georgia blue in our lifetimes, they need to keep their cheating on the down-low. New laws mean the Left’s goal to flip red states is going to be delayed as they try to figure out new ways to cheat. To put it simply, the Left is counting on you to be scared so their status quo doesn’t change. They’re not interested in saving democracy; they’re interested in saving Democrats!

Sorry for saying the quiet part out loud, Leftists, but if you’re not going to level with us, I’m going to level with us and, spoiler alert, it’s not going to end well for you. Take your faux-patriotic self-generated OHMYGODWEREGONNADIE bunk and stick it where the sun don’t shine.

Namely, under Jerald Nadler’s beltline.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Remember when COVID-19 first became a thing a little over a year ago? Everybody was freaking out because we didn’t know if it was the common cold or the Bubonic Plague or what impact it would have on us. After it was determined to have a survival rate of over, oh, NINETY NINE FUCKING PERCENT, that should have calmed us down quite a bit.

lt didn’t, thanks in part to the CDC and Dr. Anthony Fauci giving frequent and contradictory updates like having Sybil as your investment guru. As new cases started to drop, COVID-19 hysteria started to calm down a bit.

So, naturally, there had to be a new threat to keep us locked down, masked up, and six feet away from us. Enter the Delta variant. Leftists have been talking up the Delta variant in recent weeks, suggesting it could be worse than COVID-19 and result in more death, mayhem, and Netflix binging. Is it worth the hype? Let’s find out!

Delta variant

What the Left thinks it means – a new, deadlier strain of COVID-19 that we have to take seriously

What it really means – the result of the coronavirus acting like a virus

I will advise you ahead of time that I am not a virologist, which makes it easy to dismiss what I’m about to write in this Leftist Lexicon. Leftists love to do this as a means to discredit anyone who isn’t following The Church of Leftist Science. The thing is what I’m about to say is consistent with not only actual science, but with Leftist statements about COVID-19.

Viruses have the ability to mutate, creating new strains of the original virus. These strains can be harder to address because of the potential immunity to existing treatments, stronger and/or more symptoms, and more potential victims. When there is a new variant strain, caution is warranted.

I did some digging into the Delta variant because, well, I’m a science geek. Based on what I’ve found, it appears it’s…not that different from COVID-19. Oh, sure, the usual media talked up the danger like a hype man, but once you overlook the usual suspects and get to the kernel of truth, you see the new strain is the same as the old strain by and large. There are differences that we should be aware of, but it’s not as major as we’re being lead to believe.

So, why is the Left so eager to talk about the Delta variant? I see two major reasons: 1) to make themselves look smart, and 2) to strengthen the power of the state. The first reason is easy to understand. Leftists have to feel like they are the smartest people in the room, no matter where they are. After all, they are the “Party of Science” according to them. By using scientific concepts and terminology, it makes them seems knowledgeable.

The problem is they are often wrong because they don’t understand how science works. Whether it’s Paul Ehrlich, Al Gore, or Michael Mann, the Left has a track record of the coldest of hot takes when it comes to applying scientific principles. Instead, they modify the Scientific Method to achieve whatever goals they want/need in any situation, but it always results in the Left feeling they’re smarter and better than the rest of us.

And that brings us to the second reason. The Left needs to be in control whenever possible, so they will do whatever it takes to retain and grow that control. Once the Left caught on how easy it was to play on people’s fear of COVID-19 to make them do what the Left wanted, they jumped at the chance to not let a crisis go to waste. Hmmm…where have I heard that before?

Anyway, some of the Left’s favorite governors enacted restrictions that made it hard to do anything else but knuckle under. (I’m looking at you, Gretchen Whitmer.) By picking and choosing who or what would be expected to follow the rules, the Left was able to find a way to stifle capitalism, solidify its power base, and avoid consequences for the most part. You might want to ask Andrew Cuomo how that’s working, though.

So, what does this have to do with the Delta variant? It gives the Left an excuse to reinstate the controls they had at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. After all, Leftist Governors lead the country! Granted, it was in killing old people, but leadership is leadership, right?

The best way to combat what the Left sees as inevitable is to be educated, not just on the science, but on your rights as a person. For me, masking and getting the “Fauci Ouchie” are a matter of choice and in some cases a matter of necessity. Whether I do both, one of the two, or neither is my business, and for the record I have done both for mostly personal reasons. If you don’t, so be it. I’m good with that and I hope you’re willing to accept the consequences of your decisions without asking or demanding my sanction or my money. You’re adults.

But the Left can’t handle that. Anyone who knows what they’re worth is a threat to the Leftist hivemind because that person can’t be infantilized and made to believe he/she is incapable of doing anything without Leftists. Once you get that sweet taste of freedom, you don’t go back.

As scary as the Left makes the Delta variant seem, a little research shows the existential danger the Left wants us to believe it is doesn’t quite match up to the actual science. Having said that, be careful out there. I would hate to lose a reader to any form of COVID-19.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If you listen to the Left for any amount of time (and, to be honest, why would you?), eventually the conversation will come to race. And by “eventually” I mean within microseconds. Recently, there’s been a new term that, surprise surprise, directly connects to race: white rage. Whether it’s CNN’s Brian “Mr. Potato Head” Stetler claiming Fox News’ Tucker Carlson stokes white rage or current Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark “Not Vanilli” Milley testifying the military should take training to avoid white rage, it seems the Left wants to make it a thing, and a racial thing at that.

But, just like with Critical Race Theory, it’s not exactly clear what white rage is. Good thing there’s someone who can cut through the bullshit and get to the heart of the matter. But since that person is off, you’ll have to let me do it.

white rage

What the Left thinks it means – white people’s reaction when their power and influence in the world is threatened, the most important problem in America today

What it really means – an accusation with little actual proof, but a lot of actual racism

As a white man, I get labeled with a lot of shit from the Left based solely on the color of my skin and what they believe what I believe. The Left sees me as a Bible-thumping, flyover country bumpkin who hates gays, blacks, women, albino midget Eskimos who walk with a limp, and so on. Now, to be fair, they are right about the albino midget Eskimo bit, but the rest of it is based off a serious of assumptions the Left has deemed to be true without affirmative proof.

And that’s the same basic principle behind white rage. As Leftists can’t leave a PR crisis untouched, they point to the 1/6 “insurrection” as evidence and bludgeon anyone who supports Donald Trump as someone who is one bad day away from being a mass shooter or insurgent against America. And if we’re not careful, white rage is going to create chaos (and that’s the Left’s job, darn it)!

Now, where have I heard that kind of verbiage before? Wasn’t there a movement in, say, the mid-to-late 90s that were considered to be dangerous crackpots not unlike the people the Left claim are out there waiting to strike? Why, yes. Yes, there was! It was the militia movement, and the rhetoric started to kick into high gear not long after the Oklahoma City bombing. The Left did their best to paint Timothy McVeigh as the typical militia member, even though he was kicked out of his local militia and had a record voting for Democrats, but why let the facts get in the way of a good narrative, right?

Last time I checked, the militia movement of the 90s didn’t cause any of the things the Left said would definitely happen if we didn’t do something right now. If anything, they just wanted to be by themselves to LARP as the National Guard, which is perfectly fine in my book. Just leave me be and don’t ask me to pay for your reindeer games.

Now, the Left is trying to resurrect the fear of militias and spin it into white rage. Within the Leftist hivemind, it works, mainly because a) it reaffirms their preconceived ideas about non-Leftists, and b) most Leftists today may not have even been born in the 90s or were too young to remember Militia Mania. That makes it easier to be successful than a coke dealer working on the Hunter Biden account. But here’s the thing: the fact it’s easy doesn’t make it right. Just like with the militia movement rhetoric, there isn’t anything concrete that suggests white rage is even a thing.

Except if you look at the Left.

Last year showcased a lot of violence and destruction from members of Antifa and Black Lives Matter. Although the Left swears up and down they weren’t responsible, the mugshots after the arrests show a different story. It seems most of the people arrested were…white. And the majority of BLM members? Also white. Hmmm…destroying property, attacking cops…that sounds a lot like the way the Left characterized 1/6, doesn’t it? And if 1/6 is an example of white rage, logic might lead us to conclude Antifa and BLM are examples of white rage, too.

Of course, this isn’t about logic. This is about pushing a racist narrative because the Left needs to make us believe white people are evil racist bastards. Call me conspiratorial, but I find it interesting the whole white rage concept didn’t get traction until fairly recently during a time when the Left wants to push Critical Race Theory that teaches…white people are evil racist bastards. With the pushback against CRT coming from mostly white parents, the Left appears to have scrambled to find a reason people might be against it and landed on white rage. On a side note, I swear the Left has a giant wheel with derogatory phrases they spin whenever they want to blame whites for something.

There’s a rule of thumb I’ve seen online that applies here. If you replace the racial word with a different race and think it’s racist, then it’s racist. This concept certainly applies to white rage, but there’s a twist. By assigning rage to whites only, the Left suggests no other race can get angry, which diminishes the other races’ agency. Under the Left’s constantly-changing definition of racism, that would be racism.

But in a Rod Serling-esque twist, I have to point out the ones who claim there is white rage…are white Leftists. They seem to have forgotten in their rush to make white rage all the rage who they are.

Normally this is the part where I give you advice on how to deal with the latest Leftist controversy-du-joir. This time there isn’t any advice to give because white rage is going to fall in on itself without us having to lift a finger. There is simply too much implausibility and illogic to adopt at once for it to survive much outside of the Leftist bubble. But should you run into a Leftist bound and determined to talk about white rage, ask them how they felt about the Antifa folks arrested in Portland and how they were predominantly white.

Then ask them to repeat what they said about white rage.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

These two stories are filed under “If Donald Trump did it, Leftists would lose their shit.” First, Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse got caught at an all-white private beach club. Then, Joy Behar of “The Spew”… I mean “The View” made a questionable, but funny joke after the show reported on the first openly gay active player in the NFL. Behar talked about losing interest after a report mentioned “penetrating the end zone.” Even though Whitehouse and Behar caught some flack for their actions, most Leftists defended them using the same basic defense.

They’re allies.

To paraphrase a popular credit card commercial from my youth, “Allyship has its privileges,” and it’s worth exploring in deeper detail to find out how allies obtain a Get Out of Leftist Outrage Free card.

ally

What the Left thinks it means – someone who supports causes and ideas in line with the Left

What it really means – someone who can get away with just about anything until it becomes problematic

At the risk of being accused of “whataboutism”, it’s clear any conservatives or Republicans who said and did what the aforementioned heads of knuckle said and did, the Left wouldn’t be nearly as dismissive. If anything, it would be a talking point for, oh, the next 5 or 6 lifetimes showing how bad the Right is. And that’s not speculation, kids. That’s what the Left always does.

What separates the bad behavior on the Left from the bad behavior on the right is what you could consider a body of work. Both Whitehouse and Behar have been consistent Leftists, so Leftists say we have to put their bad actions in the context of the good they’ve done. And, surprise surprise, all the good they’ve done is based around…being on the same political side! Funny how that works, isn’t it?

Take someone like Strom Thurmond. Yes, he has a history of supporting segregation, but he was also instrumental in desegregating Augusta National, allowing blacks to play on the Masters course. For all of his faults, Thurmond didn’t just pass legislation and pat himself on the back for “doing something positive”; he actually did something positive. But, as Trent Lott can attest, the Left will never forgive Thurmond or put his contributions to the black community into a favorable context.

Compare that to how the Left treats Robert Byrd, a literal member of the Klan. He spent decades sowing hate, but says he’s grown up and things are kosher?

Not to me, but if the Left didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have standards at all.

And really that’s what we’re dealing with when the Left tries to add context to a hateful comment or an off-brand message as a means to get people to assume it was just a one-off and we should move on. However, the good someone does cannot and should not be used as a shield when he or she does something reprehensible. At the risk of invoking Poe’s Law, it would be like the Left saying Adolf Hitler wasn’t that bad a guy because he was a vegetarian later in life. The two don’t cancel each other out. A bad act is a bad act. Just ask Carrot Top.

That’s where the Left gets into trouble here. By being lenient with allies, they send the message it’s okay to be an asshole as long as you think a certain way. In Whitehouse’s case, he was promoting Black Lives Matter just a year ago, but his current actions (as well as his unfulfilled promise to quit the club, only to become one of the owners) show he was never truly committed to BLM as a movement. He adopted it as a political move because all the “cool kids” were doing it.

With Behar, it’s a bit different. She has been on record many times as being pro-gay, which is absolutely fine in my book. The joke she made was off the cuff and, although humorous, could be construed as anti-gay. She tried to brush it off as not being suitable for daytime TV, which kinda pours more salt into the wound here. She didn’t apologize for the comment being possibly offensive to gays, only that it wasn’t appropriate for daytime TV. The other hosts of “The View” all enjoyed the joke, except one.

Meghan McCain, a Republican who also supports gay rights.

Guess who got more hate mail.

That should be a big rainbow flag that someone who supports gay rights, but doesn’t have a D on their voter registration card, is still not considered a full ally. Say what you will about McCain’s commitment to the GOP and her stance on the subject, but she has at least been consistent in her condemnation of anti-gay sentiments, even when they come from her fellow cohosts. In a “This Is Why Twitter Is Bizarro World” twist, many gays came to Behar’s defense, saying they didn’t find the joke offensive and we should recognize her as an ally, while others bashed McCain for not laughing at the joke.

Granted, some Leftists will say I’m cherry-picking two examples that make the Left look bad. If only that were true. People like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Louis Farrakhan have been skating on their actions, statements, and behavior. Ditto with Ted Kennedy, Robert Byrd, and Bill and Hillary Clinton. And their numbers keep growing, with the addition of “The Squad” and other duplicitous Democrats. Wow. Seems to be a bit of a pattern forming, don’t ya think?

This should make a lot of Leftists reconsider what being an ally really means. Is it saying and thinking the right things, or is it actually doing something positive outside of the political and ideological realms? Speaking personally, actions speak louder than words, and no matter how you try to spin it, Joy Behar and Sheldon Whitehouse’s actions, it’s clear they’re using their allyship as a shield to protect them from valid criticism. It’s just lip service to the people directly affected by what they say, which makes their commitment to being an ally questionable at best.

The only way to address this behavior is to call it out and hold allies to a higher standard. Remember, these are people who allegedly support your personal causes. Even if there are only a few bad actors, all it takes is some attention to these bad actors to make your cause look like Tammy Faye Bakker: clownish and bad.

And given how Sheldon Whitehouse and Joy Behar look now after their actions, that might actually be an improvement.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

It started in Maricopa County, Arizona. Republicans who suspected there might have been election irregularities in the 2020 election requested and eventually got an audit of the ballots. In the relatively short time since then, they have uncovered dealings shadier than a Nigerian Prince trying to give away his fortune via email. Then, other states started to join in the fun and Audit-A-Mania was running wild.

So wild that Colorado Secretary of State Jena “Don’t Call Me Clark” Griswold issued rules concerning audits, specifically calling out what she called “fraudits.” This echoes a Leftist sentiment getting a lot of traction these days: the audits are being done under less-than-honest means and with questionable justification.

Which means it’s a prime target for a deep dive, courtesy of the Leftist Lexicon!

fraudit

What the Left thinks it means – fraudulent audit requests from Republicans and Trump supporters designed to undermine election security

What it really means – an attempt to rewrite recent history without having to explain why their opinions have changed since 2016

Remember 2016? Why, it’s like it was five years ago…

Seriously, after the 2016 election, Leftists were up in arms about Russian collusion allegedly swaying the vote for Donald Trump. They swore up and down (both figuratively and literally) Trump was not the legitimate President of the United States and our elections were “hacked.” Sure, they could have easily figured out Hillary Clinton wasn’t a good Presidential candidate from, oh, looking back at her 2008 campaign when she crashed and burned like the Hindenburg, but no. They went with the “Trump cheated” line.

To be fair, there were irregularities in the 2016 election from both sides. Instead of using that fact to build bipartisan support for better election security, Leftists spent time and energy bitching about it and pushing a narrative they had to trump up (if you’ll pardon the pun) evidence to make quasi-believable.

And they even fucked that up.

Four years later, the same people who said our elections were fundamentally flawed when Donald Trump won now say the elections were secure and everything was fine. Yet, what changed? Nothing. In fact, most of the proposed changes to current election law have come from the Republicans with Democrats throwing in a couple of proposals that ultimately don’t deal with election security, but does have a lot to do with creating less transparency and more voters…for Democrats.

The thing is the audits put a speed bump in that process because the Left has to not only push its current agenda, but spend time and energy trying to convince people the audits are a bad idea. After all, if the audits are successful, it might get more people to look at the 2020 election as legit illegitimate. But there’s another reason, one that involves everybody’s favorite Leftist bad guy, Uncle George Soros.

After the 2000 election, Leftists were upset (as they are now), so some of them put their heads together and came up with the idea to put ideological allies into Secretary of State offices across the country. Why? Because the Secretary of State is usually the person who certifies the votes in statewide elections.

Including Presidential elections.

This effort called the Secretary of State Project received a lot of support from various Leftists. And who was one of the founding members? Uncle George himself. And who managed to wrangle up some sweet campaign cash from the Soros family?

Jena Griswold. The Colorado Secretary of State who is trying to make the case audits aren’t legit.

And the funny thing? She ran on a platform that allegedly eschewed billionaires trying to affect the outcome of elections. I’ll take “People Who Live in Glass Houses” for $800, Alex.

The big fear for Leftists, beyond not being able to hide their cheating, is people finding out about how Uncle George has been quietly pulling the strings behind the scenes for close to 20 years and possibly affecting elections. The minute an audit uncovers discrepancies, the sooner the plot gets foiled and the more likely Leftist candidates get stomped in elections because they can’t control how the votes are counted. And that, kids, puts a crimp in their ability to cheat.

Thus, the attempts to discredit the audits. If you can dismiss the validity of the need for the audits, you control the narrative and keep the status quo, which the Left has plans in place to bend even further under the guise of protecting democracy. More on that at a later time, but know the Left’s idea of protecting democracy is closer to protecting Democrats. As long as you vote for Democrats, Leftists have no problem counting your vote, even if you’re deceased and have 5 ballots sent to a single address.

However, calling the audits fraudulent only works if there isn’t a legitimate reason for them and they’re being requested to disrupt proceedings after the election. From what we’ve seen out of Maricopa County so far, I’d be hard-pressed to call them fraudulent. We’re not talking about a handful of votes impacted here; we’re dealing with thousands of votes, which can be enough to swing an election to a candidate.

Although it’s unlikely Donald Trump will be able to completely change the outcome of the 2020 election, it’s still worth the effort to ensure what we saw on Election Night is what actually happened and if it isn’t, it may be enough to inspire voters to come out in numbers large enough to overcome Leftist attempts to rig elections.

Which is what the Left has been pushing since the 2016 election, by the way.

Nobody said the Left were masters of long-term strategizing.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If there’s one thing Leftists love to do more than spending other people’s money, it’s playing with the English language. With the advent of “cancel culture,” the Left got caught off-guard a bit, but have since rolled out a new term to describe people getting rightly called out for bad behavior, either in the past or right now. Enter Hunter Biden and a couple of emails where he used a word that can be construed as negative towards blacks. Oh, and did I mention Hunter is white?

While we wait on the Left to try to walk out of the rhetorical minefield they’ve created, let’s take a closer look at this revamp of cancel culture.

consequence culture

What the Left thinks it means – holding people accountable for bad words and actions

What it really means – cancel culture with no time limit

Although it’s nice to see the Left embracing consequences for bad actions, as opposed to trying to federally subsidize them, let’s not fool ourselves. The Left believes in consequences…for everybody else. And they are the only ones who can determine what constitutes an offense and how severe it is. But the best part? They are the only ones who can determine if someone is forgiven. That’s a pretty sweet gig if you can get it, and if it has a good dental plan.

So, where does the consequence part of consequence culture come into play? If you’re a conservative or even a libertarian like me, it always applies. Even if your only crime is not being as Leftist as the hivemind, you can be a target. Just ask Ellie Kemper. She was crowned Queen of Love and Beauty at a debutante ball in 1999 connected to the Veiled Prophet Organization. As a result, she was attacked last week on social media for participating because the group had “an unquestionably racist, sexist, and elitist past,” according to Ms. Kemper’s apology.

Here’s the issue. By the time she was part of the pageant, the group had integrated. Gone were the days of white supremacy and/or exclusivity. Ms. Kemper was punished because she won a pageant from the wrong group at a time when that group had become more racially diverse. Why they chose Ms. Kemper to attack is beyond me, but then again most Leftist thinking is beyond me these days.

So, why does Hunter “I Prefer Coke to Pepsi” Biden get a pass for being a racist and Ellie Kemper get lambasted for not being one? Well, we’d better call Saul. Alinsky, that is. In his book Rules for Radicals, Alinsky gave us 13 rules that the Left continue to use. Without going into a diatribe on all 13, the basic ideas come down to how to hurt your political enemies while ensuring your allies don’t get bored with your agenda.

One of these rules in particular strikes me as apropos in the aforementioned instances: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” For the purposes of this sketch, the enemy is anyone who isn’t a hardcore Leftist. The key to this rule’s effectiveness comes down to appearances. If the Left wants you to think it has the power to hurt you personally, professionally, or monetarily, they will project an air of invincibility and popularity in the public circle. An example of this is their “right side of history” bullshit.

The obvious weakness with that argument, as well as their use of the Left’s version of The Art of War, is its reliance on illusion. Once you pull the curtain back and see who Oz really is, their strategy goes the way of disco. After that, the Left will only have the power you let them have. And with their ANTIFA and BLM squads LARPing as revolutionaries, the only card they have left in their deck is threat of violence. Then, it becomes a value decision: are you willing to ruin your life and the lives of your family members to hold a particular point of view?

That’s where the Left’s concept of consequence comes into play. Their goal is to silence the opposition by any means necessary. Knuckle under or be brought to heel. Of course, you could always pull a David Brock and become a rabid Leftist. Then, you can have all the coke binges, illegal firearms, and criminal activity you want. The Left will go out of their way to ensure you are protected from those mean ole conservatives! I believe the Mob has something similar. I believe it’s called…protection?

Wait. Is that what is at the heart of consequence culture? Why, yes! Yes it is! With a little help from Uncle Saul, the Left has perfected the art of the shakedown to the point Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton may want to take notes, and not C-notes for a change.

But remember what I said earlier about this approach’s fatal flaw. As long as the Left has to deceive to make their point, they are never going to argue from a position of power unless we give it to them. On top of that, the more they play fast and loose with who is eligible to be held accountable, the harder it becomes for them to argue in good faith. These two strikes alone are enough to undercut the Left, but the third strike come from us. The Left needs us to act emotionally so it plays to their strengths, but they will get thrown off if your reaction doesn’t match their expectations. Their overconfidence becomes their Achilles heel because it limits their ability to see other options besides the ones they assume will be the ones we will take. Deprive them of their actual strength and deny them the power they want you to think they have, and they are weaker than Logan Paul’s fight game.

Then, really surprise them by holding them accountable to the rules they set up for everyone else because…well…consequence culture.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Technology can be a two-edged sword at times. Whether it’s email or Twitter or Twitch, there will be a time when your past will come back to haunt you.

Just ask Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Over the past few days, a Freedom of Information Act request unleashed a torrent of emails to and from the sainted Dr. Fauci showing a less-than-flattering side to the good…ish doctor. The Left has rallied around him, even to the point of blaming those who are reporting on the emails for the controversy. Hmmm…is that gas I smell?

Either that, or it’s the smell of yet another Leftist Lexicon entry!

the Fauci emails

What the Left thinks it means – emails hyped by right wing media to discredit Dr. Fauci and his leadership

What it really means – emails that prove Dr. Fauci is not only fallible, but may be as bad as some have claimed he is

The self-professed “Party of Science” elevated Dr. Fauci to the point that anyone who questioned him was ignorant of the science, a right wing wacko, or both (because there is no difference between the two groups in their hivemind). With the emails being released, however, the Left is no longer talking about the science, but is talking at length about how the emails aren’t anything contradictory, hypocritical, or even newsworthy. And the Left is digging in using this defense.

You know who else benefited from this kind of digging in? Bill Clinton, post-Lewinski, if you know what I mean.

This is pretty standard for the Left when it comes to Leftists or Democrats found to be utter scumbags. Deny the allegations until the coverage gets too hard to ignore, then pretend like nothing’s wrong and it’s old news. For most Leftists, this works too well. Remember Hunter Biden’s laptop? I guarantee the Left does…and simultaneously doesn’t.

With Dr. Fauci, however, it’s a little harder to cover up, mainly because of the Left acting like Dr. Fauci’s hype men…uh, women…uh, non-binary individuals. Anyway, the point is the Left pushed all their chips in on Dr. Fauci early on and built a narrative around that act. Granted, it was done primarily to spite President Donald Trump, but the motivations don’t negate the action itself. You own this one, Leftists.

Not that you’ll recognize the problem you created with your Fauci worship. One of the Left’s greatest faults is they can never admit when they are wrong no matter what. Remember President Trump’s “very fine people” comment? There are Leftists who still believe he called the white supremacists “very fine people” in spite of the volumes of context and actual text that they get sent whenever the topic arises. I’m not a Trump fan by any stretch, but even I will defend him on this point. He never said what the Left accused him of saying, but that memo either never got to the Leftist drones, or it did but it was already shredded into a fine powder by the time it got to them. Either way, their reality may not be on speaking terms with actual reality.

At the heart of the Left’s defense of the Fauci emails is this very concept. I’m not going to spend a lot of time on specific items because a) so many others have already done it, b) it wouldn’t affect my opinion, and c) my family wants to see me at some point. However, I will say what I’ve seen so far has shown Fauci to be interested in his personal star rising, giving orders to others to figure out what to do, and pawning off “lesser” tasks related to COVID-19 research to others. In other words, Dr. Fauci became Joe Biden in a lab coat.

Even now, I sense Leftists are already penning missives about how wrong I am and/or how I’m a brainwashed anti-science Trump lover with the same number of teeth as IQ points. And that’s if they’re being kind. Meanwhile, the actual emails reflect a man swept up in a wave of popularity, but in over his head. If we’re supposed to “Follow the Science,” that implies the science is worth following. Even the most hardcore Fauci fan who is being honest with himself or herself or themselves has to be concerned by his words and attitude during a global pandemic. He couldn’t be bothered with some of the mundane details because he was so busy…going on TV shows to impress upon the viewing public he was in control and knew what was going on.

After his flip-flops on whether masks did anything, that’s when Faucimania died for me, and it should have been the jumping off point for the science-minded folks out there. The fact it wasn’t for so many, including the “Party of Science,” signifies how much the Left have invested in making Fauci untouchable and how scared people were of the multiple question marks COVID-19 created, which made it easier for the Left to manipulate people into believing Fauci. Fear can be a great motivator, but it requires rational thought to go on vacation to be truly effective.

Let’s just say a lot of people’s rational thought found a great deal on AirBNB and stayed away for, oh, over a year. Eventually, though, it will start coming back, and the Fauci emails will be foremost on our minds for a while because the discrepancies between his acts and words are hard to ignore. Not to mention, they make it harder to take his suggestions seriously. Then again, after he said to wear multiple masks after saying masks didn’t work, only to say he lied so there wouldn’t be a run on masks, most people paying attention tapped out.

Which leaves Leftists to carry Fauci’s water, which they are more than willing to do because to drop out now would mean admitting they were wrong. The Fonz was more willing to admit being wrong than the Left are. At this point, the Left has forgotten “Follow the Science” in favor of “Follow the Scientist.” Namely, the now-discredited Anthony Fauci. And it’s starting to look like the tide is turning against him, now that Big Tech is allowing people to mention the idea that COVID-19 was manmade or originated in a lab without getting the ban hammer. The looser those restrictions get, the bigger the trouble the Fauci emails become.

Now, if only they could do something about that Nigerian prince who keeps emailing me…