Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

I cover a lot of topics for the Lexicon, but there are some that I shy away from most of the time. One of these topics is abortion. My reasons are simple: 1) it’s such an emotional issue that it’s impossible to discuss without someone getting pissed off, and 2) much like a Hannah Gadsby comedy special, there’s not much funny there. Even some of the periphery topics can get people mad.

Well, this is your warning that some of you reading beyond this point are gonna get pissed because we’re going into abortion.

In their post-Roe Handmaids Tale pseudo reality, Leftists are pushing an idea that women now will be required to take babies to term. In a double doozy of dumbassery, former Secretary of Labor and current member of the Lollipop Guild Robert Reich tweeted the following:

Forced birth in a country that refuses to protect its people from being shot down in a mass shooting.

That’s right, kids. Forced birth is apparently a thing, at least according to Leftists, which means it’s a subject that’s right in the Lexicon wheelhouse.

Damn you, Leftists.

forced birth

What the Left thinks it means – a condition created by Republicans where women are legally required to give birth under any and all circumstances

What it really means – a scary-sounding phrase without any connection to reality

For almost as long as I’ve been alive, Roe v Wade was the law of the land, making abortion a legal activity, as well as a coin of the Leftist realm. When the US Supreme Court handed down its decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization last year, Leftists not only lost their shit, but started to make up new shit to replace it. Enter “forced birth.” All the usual culprits weighed in on the subject (using the same terminology and scare tactics, I might add). Planned Parenthood, the Washington Post, The Guardian, and even the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee weighed in, offering the most tepid of hot takes. Let me give you the short version.

Abortion good. Limits to abortion bad. Oh, and limits to abortion equals forced birth.

As with most terms used in the abortion debate, forced birth is a charged term, and it’s designed to be. Leftists love to combine words that don’t necessary go together, like climate justice or House Intelligence Committee member Adam Schiff. This is done to evoke emotions in line with what Leftists want us to feel or think (or feel instead of think).

In this case, they start with a word that is intended to make us feel bad, “forced.” This shocks us because people like freedom. If we’re forced to do something, our natural instinct is to resist.

Then, we come across “birth.” (Or at least the father did at conception.) Regardless of where you stand on the abortion issue, life is a pretty important subject. We understand it on a fundamental level and revere it to one extent or another. Even the most strident pro-choicer gets the importance of life; they just don’t feel bad at killing a baby in the womb because…reasons.

So, did the Dobbs decision force women to give birth? Nope! It affirmed there is no Constitutional right to an abortion, and it left the decision to either the states or Congress. While the decision didn’t outright ban abortion, Leftists made it sound like it did, if only to continue its Handmaids Tale cosplay.

Although I’m not a lawyer since I have morals and a soul, the Dobbs decision made a lot of sense to me because it was based on simple logic and attention to details. Even though the word “abortion” doesn’t appear in the Constitution, the Left argued it was an extension of the 14th Amendment, as Justice Samuel Alito referenced in his majority opinion:

The Constitution makes no reference to abortion, and no such right is implicitly protected by any constitutional provision, including the one on which the defenders of Roe and Casey now chiefly rely—the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. That provision has been held to guarantee some rights that are not mentioned in the Constitution, but any such right must be “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition” and “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.” 

The right to abortion does not fall within this category…. Roe’s defenders characterize the abortion right as similar to the rights recognized in past decisions involving matters such as intimate sexual relations, contraception, and marriage, but abortion is fundamentally different, as both Roe and Casey acknowledged, because it destroys what those decisions called “fetal life” and what the law now before us describes as an “unborn human being.”

The TL:DL (Too Long: Didn’t Litigate) version: abortion isn’t a right at all, and the two major decisions related to it (Roe v Wade and Planned Parenthood v Casey for those of you playing along at home) weren’t consistent with the Constitution as written. Hence, states can set whatever limits they want on abortion thanks to a little thing the hip kids like to call the Tenth Amendment.

But that takes away the Left’s best weapon in favor of abortion: judicial fiat. Since that’s not on the table anymore, Leftists resort to their fallback plan, that being openly lying to people to get them outraged at the Supreme Court and Republicans deciding a baby’s life is worth as much as the mother’s. Those bastards!

But out of chaos came some ingenuity, which is shocking for Leftists considering they’re usually dimmer than a burnt out light bulb in a goth kid’s bedroom. Leftists started volunteering to take women to states where abortions are legal if they live in a state where it isn’t. Oh, and to donate money towards that end because, let’s face it, schlepping caramel macchiatos at Starbucks doesn’t pay well enough to fund it themselves.

Now imagine if these same Leftists understood economics in the same way they understand interstate travel to kill a baby. But that’s a blog post for another time…

Meanwhile back at the main point, the truth is no one is forced to give birth in this country. Some states make it more difficult to get one, but that’s not the same thing as making women give birth. What it does do is create an incentive to plan a pregnancy and take steps to prevent it before doing the horizontal mambo under the sheets if you’re not ready to be a parent. Of course, this is beyond the pale for Leftists, who treat abortion like it’s Pez. After all, showing any amount of foresight, planning, and dare I say it responsibility might…make you become a Republican!

Regardless of your position on abortion, it’s clear that Robert Reich and anyone else who is pushing the forced birth bullshit aren’t helping the matter any. If we’re going to come to a functional, albeit tenuous, agreement on the topic, we need to be honest with each other. Both sides have legitimate concerns that can only be addressed with dialogue instead of diatribes. Granted, that seems less likely than Michael Bay making a good movie, but I can hope.

And to Mr. Reich, I’m sorry your attempt to push the forced birth lie came up a little short.

I’ll see myself out…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

One of the things I’ve grown to hate about politics in recent years has been the tribalism of both the Left and the Right. It seems if someone from one side does something horrible, like killing a bunch of elderly nuns trying to cross the street, the two extremes can’t come together and say “You know, that’s fucked up.” Invariably, one side will say it was wrong and demand justice, and the other side will decry the criticism and claim it was partisan and/or fake news.

The recent revelations about Puddin’ Head Joe and his penchant for leaving classified documents where they shouldn’t be has brought out the worst of this. People on the Right (including your humble correspondent in this case) think this is a criminal offense and should be prosecuted. Leftists, on the other hand, keep trying to defend Puddin’ Head Joe while trying to make distinctions between the current fuckup and the raid on Mar-a-Lago, which is the previous fuckup.

Throughout the online debates on the topic, I see the word “whataboutism” tossed around like a football at a Philadelphia Eagles game. That means it’s time we take a turn at trying to understand it, and hopefully have fun doing it.

whataboutism

What the Left thinks it means – a tactic used by the Right to equate events that are substantively different as a means to excuse right wing criminality

What it really means – a tactic that proves both major parties suck ass

Our good friends at Merriam Webster define whataboutism thus:

the act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse

Basically, whataboutism involves diversion and deflection. Instead of taking up the accusation directly, those who engage in it try to bring in something unrelated to the original accusation to get the person levying it to either get defensive or shut down completely.

Unfortunately, both the Left and the Right engage in whataboutism on a regular basis, which makes civil debate on social media next to impossible. Then again, it may be because these debates are being done on social media, where civility is as alien as E.T., or at the very least correct spelling. It is possible, mind you, but you’d have better luck surviving while having credible information that would implicate Hillary Clinton in criminal activity than you would be to actually converse with someone on a political issue.

For the record, I do not have any information on Hillary Clinton, so if you could take that red laser point dot off my forehead, I’d greatly appreciate it. Whew! Now that’s out of the way, back to the topic at hand.

The Left has been doing its usual bang-up job trying to create distance between Puddin’ Head Joe and Donald Trump’s handling of documents. This strategy has a two-fold benefit. First, it excuses Biden while leaving Trump open to criticism. Second, it enables the “whataboutism card” for the Left. If Leftists create enough of a difference in the minds of people who don’t follow current events that closely (i.e. 95% of Twitter users), they can downplay the potential criminality while redefining legitimate criticism as sour grapes.

The problem is these two separate incidents are similar enough to warrant equal scrutiny. Both are former government officials who had confidential documents in locations where they shouldn’t have been in the first place. Spin it any way you want, but the core issue is still the same. Where things get a bit cloudy is in what each official is allowed to declassify and how it was done. That’s a debate for another time (and possibly another blog post).

When you strip away all the partisan bullshit, you can’t call the Right’s outrage over Puddin’ Head Joe’s actions whataboutism because it’s literally the same thing Trump is being accused of. And, to be fair, the Right’s criticisms have more meat with regards to how the President is being treated right now because of the way Trump was treated, with the Left’s overwhelming approval. Even then, it’s hard to get past the whataboutism label completely here since there’s the element of an unequal response, which works in the Left’s favor.

At least, it does until you realize the Left wants there to be different and unequal rules for their side. But that’s to be expected. After all, they’re our moral and intellectual superiors (just ask them).

As long as there are partisan hacks on both sides willing to be intellectually dishonest, there will be whataboutism, and there will be accusations of whataboutism, legitimate or otherwise. We may even find it creeping into our own thinking at times when we let our passions override our logic. The key to overcoming this is to keep consistent when presented with a seemingly contradictory situation.

That’s why I say both Trump and Biden need to be held accountable, no matter what. Not only does it confuse the partisan asshats, but it keeps things nice and simple. Plus, it will make for some great snarking.

Regardless of how you feel about Puddin’ Head Joe, it’s hard to deny the classified documents situation he’s in looks bad, as in Lena Dunham nude pictorial in Playboy bad. That’s why I take the Left’s whataboutism defense of Joe not as seriously as they do. Even so, it’s far too easy a trap to get into with political and ideological differences, mainly because neither side wants to be consistent. They want their team protected and the other team prosecuted until the end of time. But bad behavior is bad behavior, no matter what team you’re on, and it needs to be called out even when the partisan jagoffs accuse you of whataboutism.

When they do, feel free to do what I do and tell them “What about you shut the fuck up?”

Papers, Please

To say it’s been a rough few months for Democrats is an understatement. Oh, they were able to stem the tide of the “Red Wave” (thanks in part to idiots like Mitch McConnell), but since then they’ve been accumulating L’s like the world’s unluckiest Scrabble player.

Recently, we heard about President Puddin’ Head Joe having classified documents in the possession of a think tank (an ironic contradiction if ever there was) and just now started turning them over. Of course, his staff knew about them on November 2, 2022, but hey. Why let a little something like having classified documents six years after leaving office disrupt an election that could determine how our country is governed for the next 2 years, amirite?

If that wasn’t bad enough, more classified documents were found in Biden’s home in Wilmington, Delaware. But don’t worry, folks. Ol’ Puddin’ Head Joe kept them perfectly safe, right next to his Corvette in his garage. And it just so happens, Joe’s son Hunter stayed at that residence for a time. Wow! If you can’t trust meth-heads with a penchant for underhanded deals and possible child porn on a laptop, who can you trust?

As you might expect, Leftists leapt into action…to say a) the documents were planted, b) Donald Trump is much worse, c) Joe is cooperating, and d) it was just a mistake.

How’s that boot tasting, Leftists?

As more and more comes out about this story, the more and more Leftists want to push it under the rug, even going to far as to say this scandal might take attention away from investigations into Republican wrongdoing. Then again, it was CNN saying that, so take it with a Lake City of Salt.

Since the Right doesn’t have memories like ferrets hooked on meth, people have been bringing up how the Trump and Biden document scandals are being handled. Which, of course, prompted the Left to come up with all sorts of Oktoberfest-level pretzel logic to explain why it’s just different, okay? But is it? Let’s find out.

As President, Donald Trump had the authority to declassify documents within a specific scope, hopefully with more reasoning than “because shut up.” Some things can be declassified under different provisions within the government and by following the proper procedures. We can debate whether Trump and his team followed those procedures another time because the point is he had the authority to declassify.

The Vice-President, on the other hand, can only declassify documents he (or now she) classified or generated by his/her office. Without knowing what was found at Puddin’ Head Joe’s office, home, and garage, we can’t really tell whether he followed the process correctly. Knowing him, he forgot all about it.

As far as what former Executive officials can take with them, well…that’s where things get a bit murky. (Surprise, surprise.) There are some requirements and loopholes for Presidents and Vice-Presidents with regards to classified documents. Again, the lack of specific details gives Joe a bit of breathing room legally.

Having said that, Puddin’ Head Joe’s got some ‘splainin’ to do. If what has been reported so far is accurate (and I can’t say for certain that it is), some of the documents in question had to deal with Iran, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom, as well as China. Now, I may be wrong here, but at least half of the countries mentioned don’t like us and one of them loves us…as long as we keep giving them money and guns. No word on if Ukraine is accepting our lawyers yet, but I’ll keep you posted.

And if you got that reference, you are officially old. And cool as hell.

While the way these documents came to light differs greatly from the raid on Mar-a-Lago, it’s important not to lose sight of the basic facts here: Puddin’ Head Joe had classified documents in his possession and failed to do his due diligence in returning them or notifying the proper authorities that he had them.

Before you Leftists give me this “he turned them in as soon as he found out” bullshit, let me remind you his term as Vice-President ended six years ago. And during that time, his meth-head son has access to those documents, which in and of itself is a security risk. Not to mention, Biden didn’t come forward with these documents as soon as he found out. He waited two more months after they were discovered.

If you flipped your shit over Trump holding onto classified documents for a year and a half, your shit better be doing a Cirque du Soleil routine if you want to remain consistent. If you’re not, then take a seat. In fact, take all of the seats. Especially that old dusty one in the corner, the one with the ripped upholstery.

And while we’re here, remember how Leftists got so concerned about whether Trump was selling nuclear secrets since some of the documents seized were allegedly about a foreign country’s nuclear capabilities? I do. It was a Neal Peart drum solo of drumbeats from the Left lamenting about how Trump was guilty (without evidence of anything happening, mind you) and still allowed to walk freely amongst the people (see previous comment in parens for the reason). Now, these hawkish Leftists aren’t squawking so much. Even known Leftist and fuckknuckle Joy Behar said we give Puddin’ Head Joe the benefit of the doubt because, essentially, he’s not Trump.

No, Joe isn’t like Trump. Trump wasn’t fucking stupid enough to put classified documents in a fucking garage!

Anyway, we’re in for a shitshow as more information about Puddin’ Head Joe’s classified documents come to light and the Left tries to explain it all way without success. I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting on an FBI raid of Joe’s home anytime soon.

Unless they find more on Hunter, that is.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

After a week full of surprise twists (the #TwitterFiles exposing a lot more than anticipated), not-so-surprise twists (Leftists being wrong again about Twitter being dead), and some disappointing-but-not-surprising twists (Herschel Walker couldn’t cross the goal line to win the Georgia Senate runoff election against Raphael Warnock), we finally have a story worth discussing that doesn’t involve Elon Musk.

Brittney Griner is coming home!

Now, if you’re like me (and if you are I’m so very sorry), you have little or no idea who Brittney Griner is. I will admit I had to do a bit of digging to get the facts behind why her release is such a big deal, and I agree it is. Just not for the reason the Left wants us to believe it is.

Brittney Griner

What the Left thinks it means – a brave woman freed after being imprisoned in Russia for no reason

What it really means – a prisoner released solely due to the social justice hierarchy

When Joe Biden took over as President, I knew there would be some bad decisions coming down the pike. I mean, he picked Kamala Harris as Vice-President, a woman so unpopular with Democrats that I got the same number of delegates she did and I didn’t even run. Sure enough, there were no supply chain issues with Puddin’ Head Joe’s bad decisions, as they kept coming in like a LGBQT+ wrecking ball.

Even with incredibly low expectations, I knew somehow the Biden Administration would find a way to limbo under them with room to spare. And that’s exactly what we got with the Griner release.

Brittney Griner is a WNBA player who played in Russia during the off season (which is not that different from the regular WNBA season) and was detained after a search found vape cartridges with hash oil in them. Although what she had was legal in Arizona where Griner plays, it isn’t legal in Russia. As a result, she was sentenced to nine years in prison. Griner appealed the verdict, but was denied. Now, less than a year after she was arrested, Griner is free. A feel good story, right?

Yeaaaaah…not so much.

The terms of Griner’s release included a prisoner exchange for Viktor Bout, who just happens to be an arms dealer with the cute little nickname “the Merchant of Death.” Aside from the laundry list of activities for which he became infamous, he was also the inspiration for a Nicholas Cage movie. That alone should have kept him locked up indefinitely.

Then came Puddin’ Head Joe, who thought it was a good idea to trade Bout for Griner with the hopes of getting another American prisoner detained in Russia, former Marine Paul Whelan. Whelan has been detained since 2018 amid allegations of espionage. Although the charges seem a bit shaky, America has let him sit in a prison camp for far longer than Griner.

So, why are we getting excited over a WNBA player getting released in exchange for an arms dealer? A lot of it has to do with Griner’s identity. Not only is she a basketball player (that maybe 0.00000000001% of the population knew prior to her arrest), but she is black and a lesbian. In social justice terms, that’s practically a “Get Out of Gulag Free” Card! Throw in the fact she lobbied the WNBA to not play the National Anthem during the 2019 season to protest police brutality, and you might as well make her a Leftist Saint. You know, if they believed in that sort of thing.

Even if you strip away all of that, anybody with a lick of sense can see trading an arms dealer for a basketball player while leaving a retired Marine on the table is a bad idea. For one, it’s a fucking arms dealer! For another, it shows the world just what America values these days. If you’re an albino transsexual paraplegic Inuit midget with AIDS, you’ll get the Biden Administration working around the clock to get you home. If you’re a white guy, well…let’s just say you’re going to have to wait a while.

Like, say, the 43rd of Never.

Not to put too fine a point on this, but Bout is also a Russian fucking arms dealer! Now, who are we currently in c0nflict with on the world states? If you said Russia, congratulations! You’ve been paying attention. And if you’ve been paying attention, you can also see where this is going, but for you Leftists reading this, let me spell it out for you: Joe Biden just gave Vladimir Putin an arms dealer, all while funneling money to Ukraine…who is currently fighting Putin and Russia.

Either Griner is one hell of a basketball player, or Puddin’ Head Joe got played. And I think you know which way I’m leaning on that one.

Regardless of how you feel about Griner’s detainment (I think it’s bullshit) and release (it’s great she’s coming back home), the fact the only way it makes sense is through the lens of social justice should be concerning. We should not be making these kinds of major decisions through social justice because of the way social justice operates.

Leftists have devised a hierarchy of oppression through which they view different scenarios to determine how to react. Put another way, it’s a checklist to see how oppressed you are based on superficial factors like gender or race. Check enough boxes and, voila, you’re oppressed! But wait! There’s more! Not only will the hierarchy of oppression tell you if you’re oppressed, but it will show you how oppressed you are! And if your oppression score is lower than someone else’s, the other person gets the support because…oppression!

This makes Calvinball look like chess.

Needless to say, when you prioritize oppression by who allegedly has more of it, some people are still going to feel oppressed which doesn’t help the situation any. Then again, if Leftists were critical thinkers, we might not have Puddin’ Head Joe as President.

As it stands, Brittney Griner is coming home to a hero’s welcome while Russia gets a fucking arms dealer back and a former Marine remains in custody. Even before now, the Left has been writing pieces damning America for various aspects of our prison system or why our government should be supporting Griner because patriotism or what it says about America’s current social issues or how black women are treated in prison. Expect this trend to continue with more frequency and ever higher decibel levels.

But always keep in the back of your mind the Leftists cheering at Griner’s freedom have given zero fucks about Paul Whelan, as evidenced by a) how they haven’t talked about him before now, and b) how slowly the Biden Administration has been working towards getting him home. But when social justice overrules geopolitics and common sense, you’re bound to find yourselves in situations where the obvious answer gets rejected in favor of a worse deal than the Minnesota Vikings trading for Hershel Walker.

Oh, and one last thing. Viktor Bout is a fucking arms dealer.

Damn. Now I need some of the good eggnog…


Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The latest battleground for the fight over illegal immigration is a lot further north than you might expect. I’m talking about the Leftist haven, Martha’s Vineyard. It turns out Texas Governor Greg Abbott and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis decided to fly several immigrants to Martha’s Vineyard to show them a better life. You know, Leftist utopias where everyone is super educated and live incredibly well? Away from conservative hellholes where racism, sexism, xenophobia, and homophobia are rampant and the people are uneducated rubes?

Well, let’s just say Leftists aren’t greeting their new immigrant neighbors with open arms. In fact, Leftists are circulating the idea the aforementioned Governors with brass balls the size of, say, Pluto are guilty of human trafficking. And by circulating, I mean repeating the same squawking points with steadily increasing volume and frequency. As we’re about to find out, the squawking point has a deeper origin than even the Left has considered.

human trafficking

What the Left thinks it means – Republican Governors sending asylum seekers to other parts of the country against their will

What it really means – Leftists not understanding the issue, like, at all

Illegal immigration has a number of facets that often get glossed over in the debate on what to do with the immigrants we catch, and human trafficking is one such facet. And it’s not a once-in-a-while problem, either. The 2021 numbers show a stark picture of the scope of the human trafficking problem, but those are just the cases we know about. Government agencies from ICE to Customs and Border Protection and non-government organizations like the ACLU are sounding the alarm and efforts to reach as many people as possible are evident to anyone who’s used a convenience store bathroom can tell.

Good thing Leftists aren’t trying to demonize and/or eliminate ICE and the Border Patrol, right? Oh, wait…

So, what exactly is human trafficking? There are a number of definitions floating around there, but the general consensus involves the exploitation of people for sex, work, or services through coercion, deception, or force. For the purposes of this discussion, though, I want to use the definition provided by the United Nations:

Human trafficking involves the recruitment, movement or harbouring of people for the purpose of exploitation – such as sexual exploitation, forced labour, slavery or organ removal. Victims can be children or adults, boys, girls, men or women, and are trafficked by the use of improper means such as the threat or use of force, fraudulent schemes, deception, or abuse of power. It can occur within a country or across borders. Human trafficking is therefore characterized by an act (recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring, or receipt of people), specific means (threats or use of force, deception, fraud, abuse of power, or abusing someone’s vulnerable condition) for the purpose of exploitation (for example sexual exploitation, forced labour, slavery or organ removal).

To the Left, what DeSantis and Abbott are doing fits the UN’s definition of human trafficking perfectly because, as they frame it, they are exploiting the immigrants for political points. And since they’re being flown to different parts of the country, it’s a slam dunk, right?

Not so much. One of the aspects of the UN’s definition is recruitment. Both Abbott and DeSantis have been vocal in their efforts to try to stem the tide of illegal immigration, with Abbott taking specific action to enforce immigration law which the federal government doesn’t seem to want to do. And considering Florida and Texas are two of the top 3 states of reported human trafficking cases, I’m thinking DeSantis and Abbott might just have a vested interest in not encouraging any activity that would make those numbers worse.

In fact, it’s not Republicans who are rolling out the red carpet for illegal immigration. It’s the Democrats. By framing every immigrant as either escaping horrible conditions or wanting to make a better life here, they have done to illegal immigration what Glamour Shots did for housewives in the 80s and 90s: using tricks to hide or soften the imperfections and give a beautiful, albeit distorted, view of the subject.

Now, consider what impact that has on human trafficking. The Left makes no distinction between Raul who crosses the border illegally to find work and Pedro who crosses the border illegally to make money by exploiting people of all ages to fill the needs and wants of his clients. Maybe it’s me, but I think there’s a huge fucking difference here. Both are breaking the law, but only one of them drags other people with him into exploitation.

No wonder the Left wants people to think DeSantis and Abbott are the evil ones here. Well, that, and the fact they’re both Republicans who aren’t afraid of Leftists not liking them. If Leftists admit there are bad actors (and I’m not talking about Brie Larson) mixed in with the “good guys” coming across the border…illegally, it would not only ruin the rosy picture they’ve been painting for decades, but it would lend credence to what DeSantis and Abbott have been saying. And Lord knows Leftists hate to admit they were wrong.

There’s another reason the Left is freaking out about illegal immigrants heading to Martha’s Vineyard: DeSantis and Abbott are forcing Leftists to live by their own ideas. Remember when Leftist communities were fighting each other to get attention for being “sanctuary cities”? Well, it’s easy to make such proclamations when you aren’t dealing with a steady influx of illegal immigrants. You know, like Martha’s Vineyard? Once the immigrants start arriving, the Leftist welcome mats start disappearing, along with the signs saying “No person is illegal.”

The late comedian George Carlin made an observation about homelessness that has some application here in the form of the abbreviation NIMBY, which means Not In My Back Yard. Leftists talk a great game when it comes to helping people (usually in the form of more government), but they don’t always walk the walk when presented with the opportunity, as the citizens of Martha’s Vineyard have now.

Annnnnnnd they decided to ship their new neighbors to a military complex because…reasons?

Your compassion is underwhelming, Leftists.

When it comes to human trafficking, though, we need much more than words and stickers on bathroom mirrors. Yet, I’m not sure America is quite ready for the discussion and action needed to make real change. Both sides of the political spectrum have a vested interest in keeping the illegal immigration and subsequently the human trafficking issues alive to retain power over their respective voting blocs. But we’re dealing with human lives here, and there shouldn’t be an ideological divide. Yet, here we are.

And the Left isn’t helping matters any by throwing around accusations of human trafficking against two of the Republican Governors who have given the the most fits in the past few years. At the rate it’s going now, Leftists are going to wear out the “human trafficking” label like they’ve worn out the “fascist” label by overusing it to the point of irrelevance.

Then again, if you had as horrible a record on human trafficking as the Left does, you’d want to bring everyone else down to your level, too.

So, How’s That Sanctuary City Thing Working Out?

Remember when Leftists were all about setting up “sanctuary cities” to let illegal immigrants know they would be safe there? It became a race to see which communities would be the next to proudly proclaim “We don’t care if you broke the law to come here because we won’t enforce the law!” And for a while, it worked. It was a quick way to earn woke points and to use a souped-up Wagner Power Painter to paint anyone who disagreed with it as racist, xenophobic, insensitive, kid-haters who wanted these poor souls to die.

That worked pretty well for communities that were pretty far away from the US/Mexican border, but Texas Governor Greg Abbott had an idea: help the illegal immigrants get to the sanctuary cities. In a pure “fuck around and find out” move, Abbott started busing migrants to Washington, DC, and New York City. I mean, since those two cities are known sanctuary cities, Leftists should be thrilled that Abbott was adding to their diversity!

Not so much.

DC Mayor Muriel Bowser was the first to feel the brunt of the move, resulting in her requesting assistance from the National Guard to deal with the influx. And in a completely expected move, the Department of Defense denied her request.

Then there’s New York Mayor Eric Adams. Apparently he’s not too happy at Abbott busing immigrants to his sanctuary city. Even Leftists are calling out Adams’ reaction to the situation, albeit while spitting venom at Abbott and Arizona Governor Doug Ducey for sending immigrants to sanctuary cities.

Which is odd, given how Leftists have rolled out the red carpet for illegal immigrants. You would think they would be thrilled to live up to their word. Ahhhh, that’s the problem. Leftists love setting up rules for themselves and different rules for everyone else. While January 6th protesters get the Library of Congress thrown at them for trespassing, illegal immigrants get treated with kid gloves for doing pretty much the same thing, albeit with fewer federal agents…I mean “concerned citizens.”

Although the potential overwhelming of sanctuary cities was enough to get Leftists to get pissed, there is an underlying cause I don’t think even they want to admit. And it all stems from Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. Although a few of his ideas would apply here, the one I find is the crux of the Leftist freakout is Rule 4: Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules. This not only exposes the hypocrisy of the opposing entity, but it opens up opportunities for ridicule and criticism that the entity cannot legitimately counter.

Guess what Abbott did, kids.

By sending immigrants to sanctuary cities, Abbott has effectively showing the Left’s commitment to the concept to be a light year long and a micron deep, which to be honest was always the case. Leftists don’t want actual solutions to the illegal immigration problem since they benefit too much from the problem’s existence. But they can’t really come out and say that because doing so would expose the scam they’ve been running for decades. The advent of sanctuary cities is just the new selling point to get people to circumvent federal law and live off the generosity of American taxpayers.

And before you Leftists say “but they pay taxes, too,” there’s a bit of a difference between paying sales tax and income tax, namely the enforcement arm of the latter being a lot less nice about those who don’t pay up. Oh, and the fact they could be packing heat. More on that another time.

Say what you will about Greg Abbott (and, believe me, Leftists have), but you have to admit his solution to the illegal immigration problem was clever on a political level. Although his intended purpose was to alleviate the real border issues he faces on a daily basis, the impact of exposing Leftists as massive hypocrites, the utter destruction of the myth of sanctuary cities, and allowing cities too far away from the epicenter to get a taste of what Texas deals with was a calculated risk, one that is still paying dividends in the form of Leftist heads exploding.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If you think you’ve had a hectic week, just think of the week former President Donald Trump had. His social calendar (if not his Truth Social account) were a bit on the busy side, what with the FBI raiding…I mean visiting Mar-a-Lago looking for classified documents allegedly on the premises. Granted, I’m not sure who would want to hurt a Lago, let alone mar one, but that’s neither here nor there.

To say the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been in hot water in recent years is like saying President Joe Biden has a small problem with plagiarism: it’s accurate, but not nearly to the right magnitude. Now with the FBI under scrutiny again after their Mar-a-Lago visit, it’s as good a time as any to take a closer look at the agency.

the FBI

What the Left thinks it means – the most powerful law enforcement agency in America, full of hard working men and women upholding our laws and trying to stop criminals

What it really means – Barney Fife with less supervision

It wasn’t that long ago the FBI had a good reputation. In between J. Edgar Hoover’s trips to Victoria’s Secret, they managed to bring down criminals, keep the country relatively safe, and inspire young and old alike to be good citizens. But as all good things do, the image got some tarnish on it with some highly questionable decisions, like investigating and working against Martin Luther King, Jr. because Hoover thought he had Communist ties. (No word on if MLK had the matching suspenders.)

One could say the FBI’s image as beacons of law started to erode when Americans’ trust in government did. Watergate opened up the floodgates (if you’ll pardon the pun, and even if you don’t) as well as more than a few eyes to see the Emperor wasn’t wearing anything and Hoover himself was wearing a lace teddy and stiletto heels.

Okay, I’ve officially creeped myself out there.

From there, the agency could only watch as fewer and fewer people trusted the FBI. Of course, a history of domestic spying might make people a little paranoid…

Oddly enough, it was Leftists for the longest time who cried out the most about the FBI’s abuse of power, and with good reason. What the FBI did in the name of justice made a mockery of it in the worst way and caused serious damage to our nation for spurious reasons. But somewhere between then and now, the Left decided the FBI wasn’t so bad after all. And I think it started when Leftists ditched the love beads and Nehru jackets and put on suits and dress shoes to start working within the system they rallied against for so long. Either that or someone developed a strain of pot that made people want to join the FBI.

Saaaaaay…I might be onto something there!

Either way, when Leftists found their ways into positions of power, they did what they do best: fuck it all up through politics. Over time, the FBI has replaced actual justice with social justice and became tools of not the powerful, but the power-hungry. And thanks to the FBI, they ate very well, figuratively and literally.

As you might expect, the FBI found out it had a taste for power, too. I mean, when you are the most powerful law enforcement agency in the country and people can’t Karen their way into getting a supervisor, you tend to feel invulnerable. Oh, and did I mention they practically have unlimited funds thanks to the generosity of our Congresscritters? With that kind of power and money, you would hope the agency would work effectively.

And you’d be wrong. Here is a brief list of notable failures over the FBI’s recent history.

– ignoring red flags that Nikolas Cruz was likely to commit a crime, which lead to the Parkland, Florida, school shootings (Making David Hogg a national figure should be grounds to defund the FBI.)

– not following up on sexual abuse allegations against gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar, resulting in high-profile gymnasts making the issue public to get attention on the allegations and the agency’s failures

– playing a game of cyber chicken with Apple trying to force/coerce them into unlocking an iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters and exposing proprietary technology

– the disastrous events of Waco and Ruby Ridge

– the bungled investigation into Hillary Clinton’s emails

Ranker lists 10 more beyond these, and Wikipedia has tons more, but you see the point. Our top cops make the Uvalde Police Department look like the cops on any of the 428 “CSI” programs on CBS right now. (I’m particularly a fan of “CSI: Nome.” Not a lot of cases, but the ones they get are intense!)

Of course with all of the negative attention around the FBI in recent years, FBI agents have hurt fee-fees. No matter what they do or what successes they have, people still like used car salesmen more than the FBI. First off, welcome to adulthood. Second, people might have a higher opinion of you if you didn’t constantly fuck up.

Which brings us to the raid on Mar-a-Lago. Although the Left ate up that red meat like a hungry lion (or Ron Swanson wanting a light snack), there are some serious questions to be answered, and our good friends at the FBI aren’t quick on providing them. More superficially, however, it just doesn’t look good. The more we discover about how the warrant was issued, the worse it gets for the FBI. Seriously, the only way it could have looked any more anti-Trump would be if Peter Strzok and Lisa Page were running it with James Comey riding shotgun.

And that’s a major issue for me. Politics and law enforcement don’t mix very well because at some point the former will hinder the latter. There is a reason Justice is blind, and it’s not so bribes can be taken under the table. It’s so every person is considered equal under the law, whether you’re Nancy Pelosi’s husband or Joe Sixpack. Unfortunately, though, our justice system is full of ideologically-driven people looking to recreate the law in their own images.

Guess which federal law enforcement agency with a three-letter abbreviation has that problem right now.

For the Left, that’s the perfect breeding ground. Almost unlimited funding, almost unlimited power, the intimidation factor, and a well-documented movement to reform law enforcement to make it more Leftist-friendly. No wonder the Left has been so quick to defend the FBI lately: it’s on their side. Just remember, Leftists were the ones who came to Strzok and Page’s defense, saying their text message on phones that belonged to the government (i.e. us) were private and shouldn’t be made public.

Even though these text exposed them as being anti-Trump and overtly willing to undermine his election.

Oh, well. I’m sure the FBI will get right on that investigation as soon as they charge more January 6 protestors for crimes that would normally get a slap on the wrist instead of years in jail awaiting sentencing.

Right now, the Federal Bureau of Investigation is Fucked Beyond Infinity because it’s lost sight of what it’s job and duties actually are. Nothing short of a wholesale refurbish would solve the problems the FBI has right now, but as long as the Left has its tentacles in it, nothing like that will occur. Unless it’s to get rid of conservative FBI agents, of course. They’re super-duper-dangerous, what with their belief in the Constitution and following the laws as written.

In the meantime, the best advice I can give is to not catch a federal charge. If you do, be prepared to enter a world of pain unlike anything you’ve seen since the last Pauly Shore standup show.









No One Is Above the Law…Except Us

After Donald Trump’s home at Mar-a-Lago had the FBI visit and look for alleged classified documents in his possession, the Left had a field day. Between jokes at the former President’s expense, memes recounting times when Trump made statements that now applied to him, and hoping this would finally be the thing that landed Trump in prison, Leftists were full of more hope than a Barack Obama rally.

There was also a common theme among the talking heads in the media and politics: no one is above the law. Although I’m happy to see Leftists embracing law and order for a change, let’s just say I’m not convinced they’re genuine and/or consistent in that sentiment.

Leftists being hypocrites? Heaven forbid!

Now, what I’m about to go over will likely get dismissed as “whataboutism” and there’s certainly an element of that in play. Having said that, these examples are necessary to lay out the groundwork for my argument.

For as close to an apples-to-apples comparison as I can get, we need to go back to May 2002 when former National Security Advisor Sandy Berger took classified documents out of the National Archive in his pants. (And I wish I were kidding about that last part.) After calling it an “honest mistake,” he eventually plead guilty in 2005. His punishment? Two years of probation, surrendering his law license, a loss of his security clearance for 3 years, and a promise to cooperate with investigators.

No FBI raids on his home. No wall-to-wall media coverage detailing every sorted detail of his crimes on a 25/8 continuous loop (because 24/7 isn’t enough, or because Common Core math took over telling time). Just an acknowledgement of the sentence, a hand-wave of the severity of the crime, and glowing obituaries upon the event of his passing.

Granted, Donald Trump hasn’t gone to the Great Mar-a-Lago in the Sky yet, but there is a decided difference in how the Berger and Trump document situations are being handled. Aside from a handful of balanced analyses from pundits like Alan Dershowitz and Jonathan Turley, the rule has been to assume Trump is guilty and deserves the treatment he’s gotten. Some even point to the Berger situation as precedent in the court of public opinion as a means to condemn Trump.

But there’s a bit more at play here outside of the “whataboutism.” Leftists believe in their superiority (just ask them), and try to shape the world to affirm it. When someone on the Left violates the law or acts inappropriately, it’s circle the wagons time! Only after it’s a done deal will Leftists acknowledge the actual crime, and usually as a means to dismiss it as old news.

That is if Leftists admit there was wrong-doing in the first place. Anyone remember Lois Lerner? If not, she was one of the people behind the IRS targeting political groups with connections to the TEA Party. After blaming the scandal on “low level employees,” the Department of Justice closed their investigation without Lerner being charged. Oh, sure, the DOJ report references mismanagement at all levels, but they allegedly didn’t find any laws being broken.

Unfortunately for them, there were. Lerner admitted to singling out applications for tax exempt status with the words “TEA Party” or “Patriot,” but argued those actions weren’t politically motivated. Yeah, and I’m the first Lutheran Pope. Where the legal violations come into play is when she turned over tax documents from the aforementioned groups to the DOJ.

Yeah. That’s illegal, not to mention unconstitutional. Remember, kids, Leftists say Roe v. Wade was based on a Constitutional right to privacy (that really isn’t in the Constitution, but play along with me here for a minute). That means the IRS violated the right to privacy of TEA Party groups. Oops.

But did the Leftists cheering the raid on Mar-a-Lago say much of anything about Lerner’s criminal and Constitutional missteps? Nope. They went along with the “low level employees” line, which was bullshit from the word go.

With Berger, Lerner, and any number of other Leftists (I’m looking at you, Eric Swalwell), no crime is too grave to excuse, or in most cases ignore, because they’re on the right side. And by “right side” I mean Left side. Bill and Hillary Clinton, Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Hunter Biden, and the whole Hee Haw Gang on the Left are a handful of examples of people who get to be above the law by virtue of being Leftists and having media Leftists (a redundancy, I know) cover for them by not covering them committing crimes.

Republicans, conservatives, and anyone else who falls outside the Leftist hivemind don’t get that treatment. If anything, they’re more heavily scrutinized to find every micron of dirt they can find to make the target of scorn look even more like Al Capone, only less honest. Speaking personally, I’m afraid opposition research will find I had an overdue library book in elementary school, which would certainly derail any hopes I had of becoming President. Or even County Supervisor of Creating Busy Work for Government Employees So They Don’t Actually Try to Do Real Work.

Why…it’s almost as if the Left’s version of law and order only goes one way!

Which, of course, to them it does. Since they are superior to us plebs, they write their own rules and excuse their own mistakes. But that’s not really justice; it’s rigging the system to one’s own benefit. Leftists will argue (without irony) this has been going on for quite some time and only through their efforts will everyone get a fair shake in the legal system. Yet, their efforts to give everyone a fair shake only reinforce the existing power structure where some people are treated better than others.

That’s called a self-own, kids.

Regardless of how you feel about Donald Trump, he was absolutely right about ideology trumping (see what I did there) justice. As more details come about about the Mar-a-Lago raid, I think we’ll see the former President proven right yet again.

And without having to lie to the FISA court, no less!

Watching the Detectives

For those who haven’t already been bored to tears by it, the 1/6 Commission will be having more hearings in September because, as they say, more evidence is coming out. The fact it’s so close to midterms is a complete coincidence, I’m sure! And with each passing day, Leftists are salivating at the findings and testimony so far. Of course, a lot of both have been utter bullshit to date, but hey…

It’s time we had a serious conversation about government-run investigations because I’m not sure we’re getting our money’s worth, and I do mean our money. Even though it helps overall because it keeps some Beltway busybodies occupied for a time and, thus, prevents them from doing real harm, it’s getting to the point where the price tag no longer justifies the results.

Now, before you Leftists get your collectivist panties in a bunch, this isn’t something I’ve just discovered because of the 1/6 Clownshow…I mean Commission. In my lifetime alone, there have been untold number of investigations into just about every conceivable political scandal from Iran/Contra to 1/6, and not one of them has resulted in any tangible benefit to us. So far, the 1/6 Clownshow…I mean Commission is following the same playbook.

The heart of the problem is these investigations aren’t honest from the jump. Oh, you’ll hear supporters say they want to “uncover the truth,” but they don’t want to uncover all of it; just the parts that will help their political allies in the near future. These investigations are designed to uncover their truth, not the truth. And there is a big difference between the two. For one, the former has two more letters.

When you start off an investigation with a bias for or against one of the involved parties, the results are going to be tainted. It’s like the old computer term GIGO, or Garbage In, Garbage Out. You can’t expect a good outcome from bad faith. And with all of the blue ribbon commissions and Congressional investigations I’ve seen, bad faith is the coin of the realm.

Take the Benghazi hearings, for example. As much time and money as we spent on trying to get to the bottom of the deaths of four Americans due to the Obama Administration’s foreign policy leaders being dumber than a bag of hammers, nobody was held accountable. Nobody got fired, arrested, or thrown in Gitmo. One of the major players, Hillary Clinton, walked away without a scratch and managed to convince enough people she would be a great President in spite of the fact she already lost once before to Barack Obama, who was George Washington compared to the Hilldog. And no matter what happened, it is still considered to be a partisan witch hunt by the Left.

Therein lies the next problem with these types of investigations and commissions: it’s near-impossible to remove the ideological bent from the process. There could be a Congressional investigation into the best flavor of snow cone and someone could turn it into a political issue. (Of course, those people are secretly working for Big Cherry or Big Grape, but you didn’t hear that from me.) A big reason for this is that in Washington, everything is political, from the shoes you wear to where you get a tuna melt on rye. When everything can be turned into a political football, truth becomes a casualty.

The funniest part of these investigations to me is how the people behind them go out of their way to try to appear bipartisan by getting people allegedly from both sides of the aisle to participate. Think of it like Affirmative Action, but for less qualified people. It doesn’t matter if the participants hang with the Donkeys or ride with the Elephants if they all have a vested interest in achieving a common goal, which usually is to deflect blame from institutional fuck-ups and find acceptable scapegoats. This results in findings that are more watered down than mixed drinks in Amish strip clubs.

Anyone remember the 9/11 Commission? If you don’t, it’s no big deal. Their findings so laughable and obvious, they were akin to “Don’t stick your fork in the toaster.” And it was done precisely to avoid dealing with the real problems, such as the FBI and CIA not talking to each other on important matters like, oh I don’t know, international terrorists plotting to take over airplanes and crash them into government buildings. In fact, I think one of the 9/11 Commission’s findings was “Don’t let terrorists take over planes and crash them into buildings.”

Yet, with all of their sage advice, are we any safer flying? Sure, the TSA can still give us complementary rectal exams with each flight, but aside from finding the occasional polyp, the answer is a resounding no. So, this begs the question of why we spent all this money and time on what was a waste of both. And the answer is simple: because Congress wanted to give some political buddies the cushiest temp job ever. No results expected, no quality checks provided. Just show up, rustle around some papers, hold a hearing or two, and collect a fat paycheck in between media appearances to talk about how important the work of the commission is and how hard the members are working.

This does a disservice to all Americans. We trust our leaders to represent our best interests, and that trust gets abused more than Ike abused Tina. Yet, whenever there’s a new scandal that gains enough momentum to inspire politicians to do something, we play the same game over and over again and get the same results.

I know Leftists really want the 1/6 Commission to be different, but it won’t be. They’re already a laughingstock in a country that helped make Rebecca Black a music star, and it’s safe to say their results are going to be vastly disappointing to the hardcore “Arrest Trump” crowd. Nothing of significance will come of it because it’s not supposed to happen. All it does is give people with more axes to grind than a lumber camp a chance to get time in the spotlight, collect a paycheck, and look good to people who are already on their side in the first place.

Then, when the inevitable happens, people who put so much faith in the outcome will be pissed off and rant about how the guilty are going unpunished because [insert partisan squawking point here]. That makes for great Twitter engagement, but it’s piss-poor when it comes to actually accomplishing something.

Going forward, I would love to see Congressional investigations outsourced to independent investigators. Maybe someone like Columbo or Sam Spade with no real agenda aside from figuring out the guilty parties and bringing them to justice. Sure, they’re both fictional characters, but after seeing how real Congresscritters do things, we could do a hell of a lot worse than letting fictional characters run things.

The Rule of Law(less)

In the aftermath of recent Supreme Court decisions that Leftists didn’t like, they’ve adopted a new plan of attack: undermining the credibility of the High Court by any means necessary. It’s even gotten to the point a Georgetown law professor tweeted out a missive calling the Supreme Court “actively rogue.”

Hoo boy. It’s one thing for a lay Leftist to tweet out something this stupid, but when it’s someone teaching future attorneys, the stupid actually hurts.

First off, Leftists need to drop the “rogue court” bullshit because, well, it’s bovine scat. Regardless of how you feel about it, the fact remains each current Supreme Court Justice went through the same process with only minor deviations from the set script. The opposing party tries to sink the nomination through stupid “gotcha” questions asked by politicians who wouldn’t know habeas corpus from a hole in the ground, while the supporting party chucks more softballs than an explosion at a Nerf ball factory. Granted, it’s supposed to be more substantive than this, but this is the Senate we’re talking about here. You’re more likely to find a virgin on a porn set than you are a smart Senator.

One of the reasons the Left is committed to the “rogue Supreme Court” line is they got played by Mitch McConnell with an assist from Chuck Schumer. To try to get some of President Barack Obama’s judicial nominees through the confirmation process, Schumer set the precedent that a simple majority was good enough to approve the nominees. Well, McConnell applied that precedent to Supreme Court nominees, even after warning Senate Democrats of what could be coming if they went ahead with the Schumer strategy.

Then, there’s the Merrick Garland situation. Due to a vacancy on the High Court, President Obama had the opportunity to nominate a Justice, but McConnell again relied on precedent to block Garland’s nomination from going forward due to the vacancy occurring during a Presidential election year. As a result, Garland went from ineffective Supreme Court nominee to ineffective Attorney General, Donald Trump got three picks, and Leftists got their panties in a bunch because they got played by a Republican, and a Southern Republican at that!

That blow to the collectivist ego is what I think is driving the “rogue court” sentiment right now. The recent decisions going against the Left’s wishes add fuel to the fires of hatred, but it’s the agony of defeat that was the spark that set the kindling ablaze in the first place. And that’s what we have to fight right now. The Supreme Court isn’t acting on its own against the Constitution, as can be seen by, oh I don’t know, reading the fucking decisions before throwing a temper tantrum?

The thing is the Left doesn’t mind courts going rogue if the end result is what they wanted in the first place. Like Roe v. Wade, for example. The reason it’s been so controversial is because its legal and constitutional standing are shakier than Jello on the San Andreas Fault during a 4.8 on the Richter Scale. Or that analogy, even. Anyway, the point is the Roe decision was eventually going to come to a head and the foundation of balsa wood and wet tissue paper it was sitting on would crumble. If Leftists wanted to avoid this problem, they would have codified legal abortion through the legislative process. However, they didn’t because a) they’re short-sighted, b) they’re dumbasses, and c) they ironically relied too heavily on the conservative nature of the Supreme Court.

Now, I’m not talking politically conservative here. What I mean is the High Court’s tendency not to undo lower court rulings unless there’s a Constitutional means to do it. As much judicial activism as there is in this country, the USSC isn’t a hotbed for it. In many cases, the rulings are based on legal scholarship, understanding of Constitutional principles, and a dispassionate approach. With abortion, however, that last one goes right out the window with Justices playing to their respective crowds. That turns any confirmation hearings into a political Kabuki theater where a lot gets said, but little of substance is found. You know, like a Kamala Harris speech.

Since the advent of “Borking” judicial nominees, politicians from both sides have figured out the art of the “gotcha” question, most of which with nothing to do with the job duties. Whether it’s asking a nominee whether Roe v. Wade is “settled law” or what a woman is, we should be collectively asking “What the actual fuck?” It’s not to develop a full picture of a nominee’s legal philosophy; it’s to try to draw rhetorical and metaphorical blood.

And now it’s being used to demand three current Justices (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett) be impeached for, get this, perjury when they said Roe was “settled law” when they were under oath at their confirmation hearings. Since most Senators have the intellectual prowess of kale, they fail to understand the fact any judicial candidates can only speak to the condition of the Roe decision at the time of the hearing because…they haven’t had a chance to rule on cases brought before the Supreme Court yet.

You know, I take back what I said about most Senators. Kale understands chronology better.

If you’re basing your entire belief of a “rogue court” on the idea current Justices lied under oath about “settled law” before they got to be Justices, you’re missing the point completely. We’re not asking the High Court to be prognosticators. Their job is to interpret and apply the Constitution to cases brought before them. And with Roe, the “settled law” was on unsettled ground.

And while we’re here, let’s get something crystal clear: “settled law” is not a thing, especially these days when lawyers find all sorts of new ways to fuck up the language in defense of an idea, let alone a client. It may be a rare occurrence, but the Supreme Court does change its mind on legal matters (and not because some evil right wing cabal with deep pockets is secretly paying them under the robes). Some of the most recent examples of “settled law” being tossed out like Charlie Sheen at an AA meeting involve gun control. After decades of rulings that have allowed strict gun control laws in cities and states to stand, the Supreme Court has changed course and overturned previous decisions based on the Second Amendment, and it looks like those more recent rulings are going to stick, at least for now.

Even if you discount that example, there’s another example that you might have heard of where “settled law” got nuked. It’s called Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, a decision that reversed the “separate but equal” ruling from Plessy v. Ferguson.

Any Leftists want to call out that “rogue Supreme Court” for undoing “settled law”?

Although a lot of the hatred is being directed at Justice Clarence Thomas, there is additional vitriol being spewed at the aforementioned Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Coney Barrett. Although the Left wants to make it about alleged perjury, the actual reason may be a lot more basic. And I mean that as in “simple” and “crude.” What do these three Justices have in common, aside from sticking in Leftist craws? They were all appointed under Donald Trump. Even though Leftists managed to beat Trump in the 2020 election, he still manages to find a way to live rent free in their collectivist heads and still have space for all of Trump’s stuff, an Olympic size swimming pool, the Taj Mahal, and at least 3 football fields (NFL, Canadian, and Arena Football).

The fact Trump’s appointees have foiled the Left repeatedly pisses them off to no end, so instead of taking their lumps and figuring out how to govern, they use the “rogue court” defense. After all, they can’t be legitimate because Trump appointed them, right! And they still maintain Trump was never a legitimate President (although voters in Wisconsin might disagree). If they can’t win, they claim chicanery. Like when they claim Senators get into office because of gerrymandering.

Yes, kids. They are just that stupid.

The Left also has a Constitutional problem when it comes to “settled law,” namely their contrary position on the Constitution itself. Remember, the Left loves to say the Constitution is a “living document,” meaning they can make up what they want to be in there and get a court to agree with them. But wait…if the Constitution can be fluid, why are some Supreme Court decisions based on interpretations of it unable to be just as flexible? Or it is only decisions Leftists agree with that are set in stone?

Things that make you go hmmmm…

To put a nice tidy bow on this piece, we need to consider Leftists are now trying to figure out how to “discipline” the Supreme Court for going rogue (at least to Leftists). All because the High Court didn’t rule the way they wanted. For all their faults, the Right understands the rules and found a way to get a long-desired goal by working within the system. They didn’t bitch and moan about how the Supreme Court was horrible and needed to be punished. They got Justices appointed, crafted legislation and legal arguments to achieve the goal, and got it done without too much drama. Calling a branch of the government “rogue” doesn’t move the needle for anyone but those who already think that way, and it doesn’t help make the argument for anyone outside of the hivemind.

Ultimately, though, it is nothing but sound and fury, representing nothing but a hissy fit from people who didn’t think they would ever have to play within the rules to get what they wanted. Now that the Supreme Court has ended that judicial gravy train for the Left, they’re left complaining, maligning, and utterly missing the point. The Right plays the long game, while the Left plays the short-sighted game, and the Left keeps losing with this strategy. Do you honestly think calling the Supreme Court “rogue” or looking for ways to neutralize, circumvent, or vaguely threaten the High Court will work?

Spoiler Alert: it won’t. And it won’t help you look any less lawless.