Clear your calendars, kids! The hottest new piece of literature just dropped and it’s going to be a scorcher! I’m not referring to any of the 498 books Stephen King will release this week. Instead, I’m referring to the long-awaited Durham Report.
After the initial shock of discovering Leftists had their fingerprints all over the Russian collusion allegations against former President Donald Trump, the Left has done into damage control. Some said it failed to deliver any real results, while others went so far as to say it was a flop that opened the door for future misuse. Some have gone so far as to give analysis that make the whole investigation look like one big boondoggle.
Which means the truth is far more damaging than the Left wants to admit. Oh, and that it’s this week’s Lexicon entry.
the Durham Report
What the Left thinks it means – an expensive bomb of an investigation that lead to nothing and should be called out for repeating Trump’s lies
What it really means – the report the Left wishes the Mueller Report could have been
For those who are interested in the report, here it is.
For the Reader’s Digest Condensed Version, here it is.
– Leftists within the alphabet agencies attempted to paint Donald Trump as a Russian asset in 2016 at the direction of Hillary Clinton.
– There was no evidence of Russian collusion.
– The aforementioned alphabet agencies knew it, but proceeded with an investigation anyway because Hillary.
– Leftists had actual ties with Russia during the time they were attempting to make Donald Trump look like a Russian asset.
– Leftists never thought they would get caught.
So, here we are. After 4 years and $6.5 million spent, the Left is finally worried about a partisan investigation. I mean, the Mueller investigation (which was shadier than the hygiene practices at Uncle Filthy’s Botulism Emporium and Discount Slaughterhouse) only cost $32 million! How dare Republicans spend $6.5 million!
By the way, these same dickweeds complaining about the waste of money with the Durham Report are okay with sending Ukraine $24.9 billion for a war where we’re not even one of the direct participants. Granted, that figure was from January of this year, so the current number is going to be higher than Willie Nelson hanging out with Snoop Dogg in Amsterdam on 4/20.
So, let’s cut out the bullshit about the cost and look at results. The primary result is the Durham Report exposed a real conspiracy of dunces with the sole purpose of making Donald Trump look bad. First off, he does a good job of that on his own, so the Left didn’t really need to help. Second, Hillary Clinton has a sordid (and utterly mock-worthy) history with Russia.
Now, Leftists are going to say I’m using a logical fallacy called “poisoning the well” as a means to prop up Durham after a failure of a report. That would be true…if there wasn’t so much evidence out there. And it’s information the Left doesn’t want to get out because it unravels a lot of their squawking points over the past few years.
The most obvious bullshit talking point destroyed is the alleged Russian collusion with Trump. The Left needs this point to be true because it’s the only way they can explain why Trump beat Clinton in 2016. That is, if you overlook how unpopular Hillary is. She lost to an unknown Illinois Senator in 2008, for fuck’s sake! And he was only slightly more competent than she was! Not exactly a ringing endorsement of Hillary’s popularity as a political figure.
Then, 2016 happened.
From before Donald Trump took the Oath of Office to today, the Left not only conspired to slime him in the court of public opinion, but got government agencies involved to make it happen. And even then Hillary lost. Simply put, Hillary Clinton is a political fuck-up aided by other political fuck-ups pretending to be law enforcement. Law enfarcement maybe, but not law enforcement.
Which brings us to another reason the Left has to discredit the Durham Report: it exposes just how broken the FBI has been for years. The Durham Report made a point of not only showing how fucked up the FBI’s involvement in the Russia collusion story, but also offered suggestions on how to fix the problem. Personally, I think we should nuke the site from orbit since it’s the only way to be sure, but that’s probably my inner 80s teen talking.
Once the FBI’s corruption got exposed (again), the Left loses one of the weapons in its arsenal to deal with what they consider unsavory elements. You know, like pro-lifers. In order to retain some semblance of control, the Left needs the FBI, which makes the agency look a lot less credible and will fuel even more calls to investigate just how deep the corruption goes.
I don’t see a down-side here.
Especially when the Left mocked the “Back the Blue” movement while elevating the FBI to near-godlike status. That’s how you know their love of law enforcement is utter bullshit, but it’s also a pretty big tell as to why the Left has a vested interest in protecting the FBI by denigrating the Durham Report.
You know. Poisoning the well?
The Left are also making a big deal of how few convictions came from the Durham Report as compared to the Mueller Report. Although the lack of frog-marching feds is cause for concern, it’s not really that big a deal unless you’re in the business of quantity of justice rather than quality of justice. Some of Mueller’s successes came as a result of shoddy charges and dishonest reporting. Can you say Michael Flynn, boys and girls? I knew you could.
And what’s more? The Mueller Report found no sufficient evidence of collusion with Russia, which was counter to what the Left wanted him to find. The Durham Report confirms this, which is counter to what the Left wanted him to find. Maybe it’s me, but I’m sensing a pattern…
Like the pattern of behavior the Left has when bad news hits their side. First, there’s panic as they try to figure out how to spin the bad news. Second, there’s the spin, where the bad news is turned into good news (often with a good amount of gaslighting). Third, there’s “debate” as people fact-check the Left’s spin and the Left pretends the fact-checks are inaccurate. Fourth, there’s Leftist “fact-checking” which is little more than gaslighting that would make the Hindenburg look like a sparkler. Finally, there’s the call to move on from talking about the bad news because “it’s old news.”
As of this writing, the Left has gone through at least 3 of the steps with the “fact-checking” step about to kick into high gear. Give it a week or so and the “old news” calls will be coming hard and fast.
Unfortunately, we have a lingering question that I don’t think we’re going to get a satisfactory answer to: who’s going to federal fuck-me-in-the-ass prison over this? The way the justice system works now, we’ll be lucky to get the FBI Director’s secretary’s brother’s former college roommate’s cousin’s dog walker’s accountant’s former high school basketball team’s water boy indicted, and if so, it will be for something completely unrelated, like a waaaaaaay overdue library book. The fact Lois Lerner is still on the outside instead of getting 3 hots and a cot in Leavenworth is proof of that. Reports outlining criminal behavior are all well and good, but without action, they’re just words on a page. And if you expect Leftists to join in the accountability mob, I have swamp land in the Arctic Circle I’d love to sell you. In this situation, elections have lack of consequences.
And it’s not like the Republicans have the best track record in following through, either. A big reason why is because a lot of them don’t want to rock the boat too much because then they become targets for the kind of bogus investigations we’ve seen out of the Left so far. And when their dirty laundry gets put out for the world to see, it puts a King Kong sized monkey wrench in their reelection plans. Then again, many of them are in “safe” districts and states, so even if they get caught getting baggies of heroin shoved up their asses by an Asian trans dominatrix named Madame Hung Lo their approval ratings might take a dip of 0.00000000000001% because “the other side is worse.”
As much as I can’t argue that, it doesn’t help the situation. Without a desire to stand up for what is right, our little Constitutional Republic is doing to go the way of Rome. And by that I mean an expensive tourist trap with a kitschy casino counterpart on the Las Vegas strip.
So, like Las Vegas.
Anyway, we need leaders more than ever, men and women willing to buck party lines to do what is right and just. It might take a few election cycles and some “come to Jesus” moments, but if anyone can do it, America can. The Durham Report is the first step on that journey, and we best take it while we can.
Also, it will piss off the Left, so…yay!
Category: Media
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Leftists tend to freak out about things they don’t like because, well, they’re Leftists. This week’s freakout is courtesy of their favorites and ours, former President Donald Trump. See, Trump is running for President in 2024 and CNN…gave him airtime for a town hall meeting.
I know! I was shocked that a cable news network would spend time talking to a famous political figure in an attempt to get ratings!
Although Leftist freakouts are as common as bad pop music songs right now, Leftists are just as predictable with their responses: hashtag activism. For a short time, Leftists on Twitter got #BoycottCNN trending which is…something, I guess? What is a bit more certain is I’m going to mock the hell out of it!
#BoycottCNN
What the Left thinks it means – a response to CNN allowing Donald Trump airtime to spread his hateful message
What it really means – a lame response to CNN allowing Donald Trump airtime to promote his Presidential campaign
First, a bit of background. A long time ago, CNN was the place to go on cable to get news, mainly because it was the only place to go on cable to get news. For the most part, they played it straight down the line, but over time CNN became the source for many a Leftist squawking point, thanks to the Commander in Briefs, Bill Clinton. Seems more than a few of the staff were more in the tank for him than Michael Dukakis. (And if you got that reference, I’m eternally grateful.)
From there, CNN’s descent into Leftist madness (but I repeat myself) got more pronounced. And once other cable news networks like Fox News and MSNBC got involved, it was only a matter of time before the only name in the cable news game became an afterthought, as the ratings showed. It got so bad at one point that reruns of Yogi Bear beat CNN in the ratings.
A change was needed, so CNN tried to go hard against Trump in an attempt to suck off some of MSNBC’s viewership. One tiny problem: Leftists really don’t like CNN because they’re not Leftist enough. After all, they…allowed conservatives an opportunity to speak! Oh, the horror! And with MSNBC being batshit crazy enough for Leftists, CNN didn’t stand a chance.
Enter Chris Licht, who became the new boss at CNN in 2022. He decided to take a different approach, one that was unheard of a few years prior: reporting actual news. This got him branded as someone who wanted to make CNN more centrist (i.e. to the right of Stalin), which Leftists simply can’t abide because…reasons! Leftists even went so far as to call CNN “Fox News Lite” because of the move.
Let’s just say the ratings haven’t been going in the right direction yet. The reason is simple: CNN pissed off too many people. The Right won’t tune in because of the decades of carrying water for the Left, and the Left won’t tune in because they have MSNBC to parrot their squawking points without even the slightest deviation. No matter what Licht does, it’s never going to be enough.
But that’s not the issue at hand.
The Leftist response to CNN doing what it’s done for other Presidential candidates (albeit with less than stellar results) is par for the course at worst. But the Twitter temper tantrum behind #BoycottCNN is a new level of Leftist impotence and idiocy. First off, didn’t Leftists on social media try to #BoycottTwitter? Yes, yes, they did. And it worked as well as you might expect: not at all. So, they go on Twitter to pass around the hashtag!
That’s what the kids like to call a self own.
Then, there’s the “me too” aspect of this hashtag. (Not to be confused with #MeToo, which is a completely different Leftist shitshow.) As many Twitter Leftists were so quick to point out, they were already boycotting CNN, as though it were a badge of honor. At this point, boycotting CNN is like boycotting “The Golden Girls” (although I am still involved in a letter-writing campaign about Estelle Getty): it’s pretty much a moot point. They’re already swirling the drain, so losing tens of tens of viewers isn’t going to change that. Piling on, even virtually, is pointless.
But then again, pointless actions are what the Left specialize in. See also: #MeToo.
The part that really tickles me is how the Left reacted to the shift in CNN’s approach to news. When you really think about it (and I do because I need something to do while I browse Twitter), the Left is upset a news organization is moving away from propaganda and more towards actual reporting of facts…but the Left says their favorite cable news shows are already doing actual reporting…so…
Yeah. I got nothing.
I take that back. I actually got something here, and it’s all about controlling the narrative. The Left cannot abide not being in control of the flow of information, and with both Twitter and CNN moving more towards the right as a means to even the playing field, the Left fear they’re losing control of the ability to shape what people think. Which they are, mainly because they don’t understand people in general. And business. And success. And long term thinking. And…well, you get the idea.
But as with so many hashtags, the #BoycottCNN shelf-life will be thankfully short, and the damage will be minimal. Yet, the Left overplayed its hand with the boycott because it gives us an insight into how the operate and why they reacted the way they did. That gives us ammunition to use in the future while also putting their objections into context.
In the end, though, CNN is going to become a casualty in the cable news wars by its own hand. They believed in their own invincibility and didn’t plan for a future where a test pattern could draw better numbers than their prime time shows. CNN burned up a lot of its early credibility worse than Mrs. O’Leary’s cow, but if they’re truly serious about getting back to hard news without as much spin, I wish them all the best. It’s the harder and longer road, but it will bring the best outcome possible.
Plus, it’ll piss off Leftists, which is always entertaining.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
When I sat down to write this week’s Lexicon, I was originally going to write about the debt ceiling because, let’s face it, it’s sexy as hell. However, another news story has taken over the cycle within the past few days that really shows a level of insanity I haven’t seen since, well, last week.
Jordan Neely was your typical homeless guy in New York City. Threatening subway patrons. History of mental illness. Fleeing an outstanding warrant for assault. You know, the usual. Then, after allegedly threatening to hurt or kill other subway patrons, Neely met his end at the hands of a Marine who may have seen Neely attack someone earlier in the week.
And like a racially-charged phoenix, Neely came back as a martyr. Leftists came out of the woodwork to proclaim Neely as a victim of racism, a failure of the mental health system, and proof of how racist America was. Some even compared him to Jesus. Calls for the Marine to be arrested for murder became commonplace. Even members of the Squid…I mean the Squad weighed in, stating Neely was “lynched.”
And it only gets stupider from here, kids. Hang on.
Jordan Neely
What the Left thinks it means – a black homeless man who was murdered for doing nothing at all
What it really means – the victim of Leftist enabling
As of this writing, we are still discovering details that fill in some of the blanks. Here’s what we know so far.
– Neely had been arrested 44 times before his death
– He lost his mother, which lead to depression
– Friends said he was spiraling out of control within the past 2 years
– He was alleged to have said he was going to kill everyone on the train and that he didn’t care if he went to jail.
– The Marine in question may have encountered Neely earlier that week and acted to protect people.
– The coroner ruled the death to be a homicide due to the choke hold the Marine put on him
Outside of these details, we’re dealing with a lot of uncertainty. And when there are blanks to be filled, people will fill them with whatever bullshit makes them feel good. And for the Left, making Neely into the next Trayvon Martin, George Floyd, etc., is top priority.
This raises the question of why. The obvious one is to continue the narrative the Left built over the past few years. I mean, when you put so much time and energy on perpetuating the image that blacks are being attacked and/or killed by evil racist MAGA-loving white people, you kinda want to keep the money flowing in…I mean “raising awareness to change the status quo.” What’s the worst that could happen?
Jussie Smollett could not be reached for comment.
But this stems from a foundational Leftist concept: victimhood. When they’re not busy creating victims (real and imagined), the Left knows how to make bank off victimhood. And just like Oprah handing out new cars, everybody gets to be a victim! Just look at what you think is wrong with your life and, bingo, you’re a victim!
And, surprise surprise, once you’re a victim, you get to be special! Just like everyone else who is a victim!
This isn’t to say Neely wasn’t a victim, though. Clearly, he didn’t have issues so much as he had subscriptions. Homelessness (which Leftists are calling “houselessness” in a complete ripoff of George Carlin), mental health, food insecurity, just to name a few. The Left’s solution? Talk a big game about the need for reform, and throw money at the problem. You know, the usual.
As unsuccessful as this approach has been pretty much every time it’s been tried, it will surely work now!
But there’s another element at play here. The Left hates to be proven wrong or incompetent, mainly because, well, they’re experts at being both wrong and incompetent. When the facts don’t work, the Left tries to muddy the waters to avoid making them look bad.
Hence, the focus on the unnamed Marine’s actions rather than Neely’s background. Leftists even say his criminal past doesn’t justify a “death sentence” especially when all the Left said he was doing was asking for food.
Maybe it’s me, but saying “I’m going to kill people” is a little bit different from asking for a sammich. But what do I know? I only speak and comprehend the English language…
By focusing on the Marine, it takes the focus off Neely, but more importantly it takes the focus off the multiple levels of fucked-uppery the Leftists caused by being wrong and incompetent. Instead of attempting to dissuade panhandling, New York City has published guidelines about the practice, including what constitutes aggressive panhandling. (Gonna go out on a limb here and say someone threatening to kill people would constitute the aggressive variety.) And, the best part? These guidelines promise the NYPD will respond “when they are not handling emergency situations.”
Like, you know…the city becoming a hellhole with skinny jeans and manbuns.
The saddest part of this situation (aside from the numerous tepid takes from Leftists wanting to throw the Marine in jail for murder because shut up) is how many touch points prior to the choking that Leftists had if they truly cared about Neely as anything but the next cause to support. Jail time, institutionalization, therapy, rehab, job training, and many other options could have turned him from a statistic to a functioning human being.
But the Left doesn’t want that. They need a constant stream of victims to perpetuate their self-imposed image of compassionate saviors who really care about the situation, dammit! While they’re giving their Oscar acceptance speeches and patting themselves on the back for being so caring, people like Neely continue to fall through the cracks, failed by the very people who claim to want to help them.
And when they’re not letting these poor souls continue to wallow in Leftist-imposed squalor, they’re being enabled, even emboldened, by Leftist lawmakers who justify what they do to others because of their misfortune. If we don’t subscribe to that way of thinking, we’re just not as compassionate as the Left is. And they’re right.
We’re more compassionate because we want actual solutions.
Leftists will scream we don’t because Republicans are evil meanie-heads who cut funding for alternatives (that the Left themselves don’t really fund when they have a chance). Let them scream because it’s better than what they’re actually doing, which is nothing. Plus, it’s impotent rage. The Left knows they have fewer legs to stand on than a clumsy lumberjack with a chainsaw, so they have to play the compassion card and try to make us feel bad, in an attempt to make themselves feel/look good in comparison.
Spoiler Alert: it doesn’t work like that.
Furthermore, situations like what happened to Jordan Neely are going to continue as long as the Left continues to enable the criminals at the expense of the law-abiding. At some point, the law-abiding are going to push back, and it won’t be pretty on multiple levels. Look at San Francisco right now. That is going to be the Big Apple’s future sooner rather than later, and knowing how New Yorkers take less shit than a defunct septic company, it’s going to get bloody.
Regardless of what further details are going to come out about Jordan Neely, rest assured the Left will be up in arms for quite a while because someone didn’t just let him act like a potential threat. Neely’s death will be attributed to a lot of things, but it can be summarized in one sentence that you can read in Morgan Freeman’s voice.
He fucked around, and he found out.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
And now the moment you’ve all been waiting for! No, not my announcement I’m giving up blogging. This is an even better announcement!
This week’s Lexicon has next to nothing to do with trans people! And in fact the only reference will be in the lead-up to this week’s topic!
In the aftermath of a Nashville school shooting that left 6 people dead and a trans person accused of pulling the trigger (see, I told you!), the Left went into full “push for gun control even though criminals don’t obey laws” mode. As pro-gun control groups swarmed the Capitol, three Democrat politicians joined in the festivities, using a bullhorn and approaching the front of the Tennessee House chamber to chant. Which got 2 of them expelled.
And also made these three politicians, Justin Jones, Justin Pearson, and Gloria Johnson, into a Leftist superhero team they’ve deemed the Tennessee Three. Which makes them perfect for mocking!
the Tennessee Three
What the Left thinks it means – three strong and brave people who are standing up to the NRA
What it really means – three politicians milking dumb policies for short term success and long term irrelevance
The Left love to circulate a meme that mocks the Right’s responses to mass shootings in America with the idea being the cycle is never-ending because no one does anything meaningful to stop it. If only we had stronger gun laws, like red flag laws and assault weapon bans, we could break the cycle and protect our communities!
Because tough gun control laws totally work so well in Chicago, Washington, and other Leftist udopeias…I mean utopias.
The gun control movement’s approach never changes, which makes it frightfully easy to lather, rinse, and repeat with every mass shooting (which is another weird term that has no clear definition, like pornography or Shia Labouf’s acting chops). Although gun control gets a little more traction because of this, most of the time their efforts fall flat. The Left attributes this to the power of the eeeeevilllll gun lobby, but I have a different hypothesis as to why gun control keeps failing to catch fire, if you’ll pardon the pun.
Gun control works less often than Kamala Harris.
Of course, Leftists point to states with the strictest gun laws having lower rates for gun-related deaths. (Their sources? Pro gun control groups like Everytown for Gun Safety and the Giffords Law Center.) And if you look at the states as a whole, you’d tend to agree.
Then, you wouldn’t know the dirty little secret behind the state approach: it hides how deadly many Democrat-run cities are. By broadening the focus to the state level, it obscures what really drives those numbers, which makes it easier for the Left to lie about them and blame Republicans for their allies’ ineptitude.
Now, what does this have to do with gun control? For one, it shows how dishonest the Left has to be when it comes to gun violence to try to make a point. The Left runs on the need to curtail gun violence, but they can’t even fix the shit they break. So, instead of, you know, fixing things, they blame Republicans for their lack of action to solve the problems they create.
And these assholes mock Republicans for times when the Right doesn’t accept personal responsibility?
Which brings us back to the stars of this melodrama, the Tennessee Three. While the Left elevates these three, it’s important to note they broke Tennessee House rules. That, and the fact those mean ol Republicans believe actions have consequences, lead to the current false narrative these three were victims.
No word yet from the 6 actual victims of the shooting on how they feel about the Tennessee Three.
The Left consider the Tennessee GOP’s “fuck around and find out” response to the Tennessee Three to be politically and racially motivated, considering two of the three happen to be black. As far as the political part, I have two words: fucking duh! Of course it’s political! Gun control and protests are political in nature, so any reactions that come from them are also going to be political.
Of course, the Left frames it as bad because three of their foot soldiers got caught. Much like the reason they tried to avoid bringing up the gender identity of the shooter (sorry, I lied earlier), the Left has to hide those little details that add context to advance the ideas they want. The gun control argument is all about deceit. Oh, and utter dumbfuckery. But if we didn’t have deceit and dumbfuckery here, I wouldn’t have a weekly column topic, so there’s that.
Meanwhile we still have a gun control problem, not a gun problem. Given the sheer number of guns Americans have, if guns were really the problem the Left say they were, they would be a bigger factor in the number of deaths per year. As it turns out, they’re not. In 2020, there were 45,222 people killed in gun-related incidents, with most of them being suicides. In that same year, this number didn’t even crack the top 10 of leading causes of death Granted this was a COVID year, so they might have squeaked in at number 10 otherwise, but the point is still the same. Guns aren’t the problem.
Even if you think strengthening gun laws is the answer, consider the fact there are already tens of thousands of gun laws already on the books at every level. Throw in the “Gun Free Zones” and you might as well open up a shooting gallery…oh wait, that’s Chicago on an average weekend!
And here’s a fun item to consider. When you look at the recent mass shootings, the majority of them were committed by…people who beat the current system. You know, the one you assclowns set up in the first place. What’s your next move? Create more hoops that mass shooters will zip through like they’re in Cirque du Soleil?
Which brings us to another problem with the gun control movement: the sheer number of laws makes it impossible to enforce them. More laws means more laws that won’t get enforced and zero gets accomplished. Well, except for more people dying, that is.
Maybe it’s me (and I wouldn’t be surprised if it is), but it seems the Tennessee Three are part of the problem. They make loud statements, get on TV thanks to Leftists, get glowing (albeit demonstratively bullshit) newspaper articles written about them, and rake in the adoration. In other words, the political circle jerk that always happens after a mass shooting (that don’t occur within Democrat-run cities, that is).
And with the accusations of racism, since the two black members were expelled while the white woman wasn’t (by 1 vote, by the way), the Tennessee Three have hit a Leftist goldmine. All by being assholes on the job. If that’s all it took, I would be a CEO!
And all on the bodies of 6 people sacrificed at the altar of gun control failure.
Of course, no one on the Left is going to say it because they have a vested interest in keeping gun violence front and center (as long as it can be blamed on Republicans). They have to keep the wheels greased, right? And then they can come out and show how much they CARE, dammit!
But if they really cared, the Tennessee Three would reject gun control as being a failure. Then again, that would require a level of self-awareness not even the smartest Leftist could muster.
By the way, Cindy Sheehan is on line one. Something about how the Left uses their own until they stop being the flavor of the month.
White Pundits Can’t Jump
Since the end of the 2023 NCAA Women’s Basketball tournament, there’s been a lot of talk from fans and pundits alike. Not because it was an exciting game, but because of a gesture, or more precisely two gestures.
On one side, we have University of Iowa player Caitlin Clark, who used John Cena’s “U Can’t C Me” gesture during the tournament. Then, in the waning moments of the title game, LSU player Angel Reese did the same gesture (among others) back to Clark. When criticism of the latter started coming out, Leftists and their minions went right to playing the race card. Some even went so far as to say Clark’s post-game reaction (which was more gracious than anything said about her from the aforementioned Leftists) was a rejection of MAGA culture.
And, not surprisingly, they’re missing the point. Several points, in fact.
Remember when Leftists were pushing for more civility waaaaaaaaay back in 2020? Yeah, well, they’re fucking liars, but you already knew that. In this case, civility was thrown out the window because…Clark did it first. Yes, they went there, just like a four year old might. And just like a four year old’s argument, it doesn’t make it right. Whether you believe Clark’s gesture was inappropriate shouldn’t make a similar gesture by another player right, either.
But, I guess when you’re white, you always have to say you’re sorry.
To her credit, Clark has defended Reese and tried to put the controversy behind her. Which, of course, the Left can’t do because racism! To them, calling out Reese was tantamount to a double standard (which are the only standards Leftists have), instead of recognizing the lack of sportsmanship. If anything, Reese’s actions were dismissed as “trash talk” that only offended anyone who never did anything competitive in their lives.
Yeah, about that…
Without going too much into my less-than-illustrious basketball career, I’ve set foot on a basketball court and have felt the joy of victory and the agony of doing champions after a defeat. What Reese did was the height of disrespect and poor sportsmanship at a time when a lot more people had their eyes on the game than in previous years.
Because of Caitlin Clark.
Clark’s story is one of hard work, humility (for the most part), and being the best player on the court throughout the season. While that didn’t necessarily help her cut down the net after the finals, it’s something to be emulated. And what’s more, she recognizes who is watching her. While Reese has the championship, Clark has a self-made legacy.
But Clark and Reese aren’t the only people who deserve the spotlight here. Instead, let’s turn our attentions to two other players who truly elevated the sport I love, South Carolina’s Aliyah Boston and LSU’s Jasmine Carson.
I watched the press conference after Iowa beat South Carolina to get into the championship game, and to say I was impressed by Boston’s maturity, composure, and attitude would be an understatement. To showcase this, here is a link to that press conference because I truly lack the words to do it justice. I don’t know where Ms. Boston is going to end up, but I do know she has the right attitude and mindset to succeed.
Then, there’s Carson, whose 21 points off the bench in the first half for LSU was a difference maker. Reese might have been the star of the team, but Carson was the heart, and she seemingly could not miss in that first half, even sinking a shot to end the first half. And each time I saw her hit a 3 pointer, I saw absolute joy on her face. She was having the game of her life and the time of her life at the same time.
Two examples of players who showed more maturity and self-awareness than one of the focal points of the controversy. But who are we continuing to talk about? Angel Reese. Who is continually being defended for being a piss-poor winner? Angel Reese.
And who is ignoring the better angels in lieu of the more visible and outspoken “star”? A whole fucking lot of us.
To gin up a racial component when the real issue is a lack of sportsmanship is cynical and unnecessary. But when all you have to work with is race, everything becomes racial. Meanwhile, some of us are still content with the whole “content of one’s character” bit Martin Luther King, Jr. talked about extensively.
And for anyone who thinks I’m holding Reese to a higher standard than Clark, think again. I’m holding them both to the same standard: be gracious in victory and defeat. And yet, some people can’t help but find a way to limbo under than standard without even bending over 1 degree. Caitlin Clark may still have a ways to go, but I think she’ll be just fine as long as she doesn’t forget who she is and where she came from.
For Reese, I can’t help but pity her. She has the spotlight now and her talent will take her as far as she wants to go, but only if her attitude lets her. Fame, or infamy as the case may be, is fleeting. Without a good head space to go along with it, that fame will disappear as quickly as it appeared. I hope she learns this sooner rather than later because sports history is full of “Whatever happened to X” stories.
As far as the Left and the media (a redundancy, I know) are concerned, stop trying to make bad behavior justifiable because of race. A shitty person is a shitty person, no matter what their skin color is. Get your heads out of your own asses and call balls and strikes for once!
And now we return you to your regularly scheduled insane and somewhat humorous ranting already in progress.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Granted, I’m a week late on this, but under the circumstances (namely me deciding to write about something else), I hope you’ll forgive me. And if not, well…I’ll pout.
Anyway, California is usually at the forefront of a lot of things, namely really bad ideas. Recently, San Francisco proposed a lump sum payment of $5 million to eligible blacks for reparations, among other proposals. Additionally, the state’s Reparation Task Force submitted a report to the California Legislature that Governor Gavin Newsom is expected to implement if the legislature doesn’t act.
As a result, I am stating for the record I now self-identify as a black resident of San Francisco. Please respect my privacy during my transition.
Seriously, reparations is a controversial subject to say the least, which means it’s perfect for your favorite blogger who writes a weekly series by this specific title to cover. Take that, “Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week” written by Jerry Funklemeyer!
reparations
What the Left thinks it means – monetary compensation given to blacks due to America’s slave history
What it really means – another way for white Leftists to blow through more of our money so they can feel good about themselves
The Civil War/War Between the States/War of Northern Aggression/The War the Movie “Glory” Was Based On was one of the most difficult and bloody times of our nation’s relatively young history. From 1861 to 1865, this country was more fractured than Jackie Chan’s body after doing his own stunts. But once the Union prevailed, the question was what to do next. Back then, they didn’t have Leftists to provide their sage advice about misogyny and trans rights in the former Confederacy, so it came down to a meeting between William T. Sherman and black ministers to create an attempt at reparations: 40 acres. (Mule, sold separately.)
And that attempt got scuttled by President Andrew Johnson, leaving the matter unresolved until recently.
There have been calls for reparations in recent history, but the idea really took off in 2020 thanks to the Democratic Primaries where there were…four black candidates out of 27. Five if you count Elizabeth Warren. And of those black candidates, none got the nomination, and only one (Kamala Harris) got to the White House as Puddin’ Head Joe’s Vice-President. Not too shabby for someone who I almost tied in the Iowa Caucuses and I didn’t even run.
Out of that and the shootings of blacks that occurred in 2019-2020, the idea of reparations gained new steam, which prompted California to create the aforementioned Reparations Task Force.
So, now that we’re back in the present, let’s start shitting on the reparations idea, shall we?
As a concept, reparations aren’t that hard to understand. We wronged an entire race of people by enslaving them and treating them worse than Ike treated Tina, so we want to try to balance the scales somehow. Admirable goal, but the logistical equivalent of an M.C. Escher drawing.
The biggest hurdle to the idea of reparations is the fact none of the people who are demanding it today were ever slaves. And it’s not like we can fire up the TARDIS, go back to 1865, drop off $5 million, and tell the slaves to invest heavily in Apple in 100+ years. Although time can be a big ball of wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff, it’s still bound by fixed events that can be tracked. And with the passage of time comes the birth of generation after generation that are removed from slavery altogether, save by bloodline.
But does bloodline alone create a solid enough link to award $5 million? That creates another speed bump to payday: what about those who either didn’t own slaves or fought for the Union in the Civil War? If bloodline is enough to give away money, it should also be good enough to exempt people from being forced to contribute to this monetary transfer. I have two relatives who fought for the Union (who, by the way, fought at least in part to end slavery). Yet, I get the feeling I would be expected to open my wallet and give generously to the Give Non-Slaves $5 Million Because Fuck You That’s Why Foundation.
And don’t get me started on their telethons!
Then, there’s the question of mixed-race children. Back in the day, white slaveowners knocked boots with slaves, which resulted in the genes of both races coming together to form a new life. Would the families of such a sexual union have to pay up or receive reparations? Or maybe they would just get $2.5 million? Or would the white half have to pay the black half $5 million?
Regardless, the fact we can even ask some of these questions without the pro-reparations side coming up with answers is not a good sign. But wait, there’s more!
Dropping $5 million into anyone’s lap is going to be significant, and it opens up any number of opportunities. And if it’s bundled in hundred dollar bills, it’s going to make the males in the audience sing tenor for a few years. For most people, though, it’s life-changing money, but only if it’s used intelligently. This is where human nature comes into play. If we get any amount of money from $2 on a scratch-off ticket to millions of dollars, our first instinct is to spend it. If this sum comes with few strings attached, though, we can get pretty reckless with it because in our minds it’s “free money.”
But just as any breadwinner today can tell you, money can run out fast if you’re not careful. Or if you vote for Puddin’ Head Joe, which is pretty much the same thing as not being careful.
When we don’t know or care how we get the money, we have less of an incentive to be smart with it. And, no, this isn’t a racial thing, but rather a human thing. Economists have studied this phenomenon for decades and it always ends the same way: the further we are away from earning money, the easier it gets to spend. Hence, the reason so many big lottery winners end up blowing their winnings and winding up right back where they started.
Guess what I think will happen to the reparations money if it gets approved.
And it’s not like there isn’t precedent with this. Remember Hurricane Katrina (which, oddly or appropriately enough, was the last time Kanye West was relevant)? Well, some inventive (and ultimately dishonest) people found a way to turn tragedy into a windfall to the tune of an estimated $2 billion. Between recipients of the aid spending the money on non-essential items, including vacations and porn, and others getting relief funds for people who didn’t exist, Katrina proved to be a disaster of a natural disaster response.
But the Katrina failure was more federal, right? Nothing like that could happen on the state level, right? Wellllll…not really. Our good friends on the Left Coast racked up an estimated $20 billion in fraud related to the pandemic. Leftists bad with money? Why that’s…pretty normal, really.
Now, why would I bring up Katrina and COVID in a discussion about reparations? To underscore a point that will taint the idea: governments, especially large ones, don’t keep good tabs on who is getting the money. It’s more of a rubber-stamp process. Granted, the reparations initiative in San Francisco comes with some conditions, but I’m not sure the state government that racked up ten times the Katrina fraud is capable of making sure the conditions are met.
But then again, it’s not meant to be effective or efficient except in one area: easing the guilt white Leftists feel over slavery. And they’re willing to spend as much of your money as possible to make sure they feel better no matter how long it takes! When you consider the amount of guilt a Leftist could prevent brownouts in California if it could be converted into electricity, let’s just say you might as well give the government access to your bank accounts. I mean, if China doesn’t already have it, thanks to TikTok.
It’s at this point I need to remind the white Leftists…none of you fuckknuckles were alive during slavery. You can feel bad about what happened generations ago, but to make it a central part of your life is a bit extreme and at this point silly. Kinda like the Young Turks, but less comedic. You cannot change the past, nor can you expect any amount of money to ever make it right because there will always be people willing to prey on your guilt to get more money out of you. As long as the greedy and dishonest among us see Leftist largess as free money, the spigot will never turn completely off and there will be fraud aplenty.
The thing is the Left has made it amazingly easy to game the system, thanks to the rhetoric they’ve already presented as true. And eagle-eyed readers already know how. Remember, the Left maintains how you self-identify is as real as how you are. Rachel Dolezal and Shawn King both identify as black in spite of being whiter than a medical isolation room run by Mormon IBM executives. Yet, they were/are considered to be authentic voices on the black experience in America.
Well, shit. If they can do it, so can I. And I can think of 5 million reasons to do it!
And California can’t say shit about it. Well, they can, but they’ll look like hypocritical assholes doing it. So, win-win!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
This week was a big one for our friends at Fox News. Sure, the Left loves to talk about the Dominion defamation lawsuit against the network, but the Fox hate was cranked up to 12 (because 11 just won’t do) because of Tucker Carlson showing previously unreleased security footage from January 6th. You know, that insurrection that simultaneously could have destroyed the nation and was run by dumb Trump supporters?
Well, since both Leftists and, well, other Leftists are losing their collectivist shit over the footage, I figured it was time to take a look at the little cable network that could…bitch slap CNN and MSNBC into oblivion.
Fox News
What the Left thinks it means – a radical right wing network that lies to the country, thus becoming a national security threat
What it really means – a right-leaning network that represents everything the Left fears/hates
Fox News Channel began in 1996 from humble beginnings. Well, as humble as can be while being funded by a wealthy Australian. Anyway, Fox News was established as an alternative to the media, who lean so far left they walk at a 5 degree angle perpendicular to the ground, and it proved to be very successful. No longer did we have Leftist talking heads telling us what and how to think about the events of the day. Now, we had “fair and balanced” news.
Kinda.
It’s hard to overcome personal biases in the media, but Fox News at least tried to do it for a long time, and they still do. But try to convince a Leftist raised on Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann of that. They’ll continue to say Fox News isn’t really news because of all the lies they tell.
Seriously? Have you fucknuckles looked in the mirror lately?
Where the Left gets things twisted is a common blind spot for people: separating news from opinion. To the Left, the two are inseparable as they believe their opinions are facts. Granted, the Right does this as well, but in their defense people on the Right can be persuaded with facts most of the time. Their ego isn’t tied to being correct. The Left’s is.
But actual reporting has little to do with ego. The journalism of even the past 50 years has gone from hitting the pavement to hitting up a Leftist politician on Twitter to get a quote for a story that’s pretty much plug-and-play. Just add a quote or two, make Republicans look bad, and you’re done.
Fox News’ actual reporting isn’t anything like that from what I’ve seen. For one, they get blocked by Twitter Leftists. But more importantly the reporters on staff do amazing work. Even former Fox News contributors like Catherine Herridge found work after leaving it because of her reputation as a strong, driven reporter. And if you look at the body of her work, you’ll find a common theme: report the facts without emotional attachments. She’s like a female Data.
This blurring of lines between news and opinion actually makes the rest of the media look bad, mainly because they assume Fox News does what they do, only with more of a conservative bent. Of course, Leftists think…excuse me…AHAAAHAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAA!
So, where was I? Oh, yes, Leftist media.
Being anything to the right of the Socialist Socialite makes you incredible to Leftists, and not in a good way. Once you get branded as a conservative, Leftists no longer consider you to be human, let alone credible. Just ask Matt Taibbi, a reporter that used to work for Leftist rag Rolling Stone and is now reporter-non-grata for his role in the Twitter Files.
Yet, this is lazy thinking. Dismissing a source solely because of political leanings is silly. You need to take the time and really look at the body of work before you determine how badly they suck. Then, you can dismiss them.
In the case of Fox News, I can’t completely dismiss them for having no credibility. Their news side is consistently running circles around the competition by being good at their jobs. It’s the commentary side that ultimately hurts the network. Sure, they have solid contributors like Brit Hume, Greg Gutfeld, Tammy Bruce, and Tulsi Gabbard, people whose opinions aren’t hidden and even-handed.
Then, there’s the hard pro-Trump side like Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity, neither of one I can stand because they just find ways to say the same things over and over again night after night. If I wanted to hear Trump talking points, I would go right to the source, not filtered through people whose opinions I care less about than the insane homeless man I see on my way to work. Although the homeless guy did give me some great stock tips…
Regardless, Fox News is doing something right because they continue to dominate the cable news ratings. Granted, ratings doesn’t always mean quality. I’m looking right at you “Friends.” You owe me 3 years of my life back watching Ross and Rachel. And no number of times singing “Smelly Cat” will make up for it.
Yet, Fox News has enough crossover appeal that it gets people on the Left and the Right to watch. This link is from 2019, so the numbers may have changed, but the fact Fox News continues to dominate month after month, year after year, makes it harder to dismiss the network as niche. Even with the Dominion lawsuit looming over them, it just doesn’t matter.
And that’s what pisses off Leftists the most. No matter what they do, no matter how many boycotts or hashtags they come up with, Fox News keeps chugging along, making CNN and MSNBC fight for the scraps. Or scrap for the scraps, if you prefer (and I do).
Of course, the Left can’t let that happen, so they’re doing what they can to attack Fox News. Hence, the accusations they’re a threat to national security and lie all the time. And hence the reason they have to lie about what Fox News is.
A lot of the “Fox News is a national security threat” bullshit arose in the aftermath of January 6th, a dark day in our history where…let me check my notes…a bunch of people attended a rally in Washington, DC, to protest an election they felt was stolen and some asshats decided to be destructive dicks. Apparently, protesting the results of a contested election is a national security threat to the Left.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries? Please pick up the white courtesy phone. You may be a national security threat.
Where Fox News comes into the picture is related to the Dominion lawsuit in that the network is alleged to have lied to its viewers about the 2020 Presidential election being stolen, which prompted the January 6th “insurrection,” which as we’ve been told is worse than 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and another “Scary Movie” sequel…combined.
I won’t dispute Fox News had a hand in the “stolen election” narrative. What I do dispute is that they knowingly lied. I didn’t vote for Trump or Puddin’ Head Joe, so I don’t really have a dog in the hunt, but I can’t completely dismiss the idea there was some funky shit going down at the polls. Polling places running out of ballots, allegations of renewed counting after most of the vote counters had left, and other irregularities became the coin of the Trump realm. I can’t say every accusation of election irregularities could be substantiated with facts, but there were enough to make me question whether the results we got on Election Day 2020 were real or Memorex. And, me being the curious boy I am, I want to get to the bottom of it.
And apparently Fox News did, too. When the rest of the media dismissed the possibility of election fraud out of hand (while saying the 2016 election was fundamentally flawed because of Russia, Russia, Russia), Fox News became the contrarian and started to look at what happened with a critical eye.
You know, like reporters are supposed to do?
But is this questioning a threat to national security? In a word. In two words, fuck no. In three words, fuckity fuck no. In four words…well, let’s just say there’s a lot more variations of “fuck” used.
The First Amendment says Congress cannot pass laws prohibiting the redress of grievances against the government. If a rally about possible election fraud isn’t a redress of grievances, I don’t know what is. At the very least, the January 6 protestors had a Constitutional right to do what they did. Once they breached the rules of decorum to commit criminal acts, that protection goes the way of Kamala Harris’ Presidential hopes in 2024.
On top of that, the concept of January 6th being a “riot” or an “insurrection” is being undone by the security footage being shown. Most of the people at the rally stayed outside, and those who gained access to the Capitol mostly…took a tour, some with the help of the Capitol Police on duty that day.
But wait a minute! Wouldn’t that prove the Left’s narrative about January 6th is full of shit? Why, yes…yes it would! But they can’t just say “The real reason we lied about January 6th is because we got scared by a bunch of non-violent Americans who disagree with us” because it would go over as well as giving David Duke an NAACP Image Award.
And not to put too fine a point on this, but who was President on January 6, 2021? That would be Donald Trump, not Puddin’ Head Joe. There was no transfer of power, no transition (except maybe for some members of the Biden Administration), and no attempt to overthrow the government. For January 6th to be an actual insurrection, the protestors/”rioters” would have to be seeking to overthrow…the man they supported for President in 2020. Fox News broadcasting security footage doesn’t make the lack of logic behind the “insurrection” go away, nor is it nearly as horrible as the Left wants to make it out to be. The only real threat with releasing the security footage isn’t to national security, but to the security of the Leftist narrative.
Now, for the lying. Not on my part, but to the allegations Fox News misinforms its viewers. Let’s just say any major media outlet that pushed even one-tenth of the stories about Russiagate being real should take all the seats. Much of what passes for reporting these days revolves around lying, whether it be omitting context, fabricating stories to advance a narrative, or spinning events to make one side look better than the other. In fact, most of the “reporters” today should get an additional pay for being the DNC’s steno pool.
Fox News is no different, except for the DNC steno pool bit. They do exactly what the rest of the media do, only for the Right instead of the Left. That’s not meant as an excuse, but rather an observation built over 35 years of studying the media both formally and informally. It’s hypocritical for the Left to hold Fox News to a higher standard than they hold themselves, but it’s par for the Alinsky course. Not that you’d ever get an actual admission of dishonesty from the Left, mind you. They’re still clinging to the “very fine people on both sides” lie as though it were a security blanket.
So, is Fox News as bad as its critics say it is? Yes, and no. They are a product of the current media environment and are guilty of at least some of the sins attributed to it. Overall, they’re no better or worse than any other media outlet, and much of the criticism levied against it is the result of partisan hyperbole. Having said that, Fox News has a lot of room to improve. Don’t fall back on reciting RNC/Donald Trump talking points and go back to reporting that lives up to the “fair and balanced” standard.
Oh, and fire Geraldo Rivera. He’s as useful as tits on Michael Moore.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
After 3 years of COVID-19 coverage, we’re starting to come to a new understanding of what happened or could have happened. Of course, it was Russia, Russia, Russia!
One of the early hypotheses about COVID’s origins was it originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, and got out. Of course, the Left said it was bullshit and went about limiting even the illusion of a debate by getting social media companies to censor those who advanced the idea as plausible. Now, the FBI, Department of Energy, and other government entities are starting to say there might be something to the lab leak theory.
Which means we get to talk about it a bit more!
I know you’re out there. I can hear you groaning.
lab leak theory
What the Left thinks it means – a plausible, yet not seriously considered explanation for the spread of COVID-19
What it really means – a prime example of the Left controlling a narrative until it no longer benefits them
Just in case any Interwebs Po-Po are reading this, I must say I am not a doctor, nor should anything I say be considered medical advice. I’m just a guy who paid a little attention in high school science classes and occasionally makes humorous comments about the absurdity of life. Do not take my commentary seriously and don’t take any actions that goes against your legal and moral best interests without checking with your doctor, your religious leader, your family, some guy name Earl, or a tax professional. Hell, talk to them all just to be safe!
Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s fuck up a narrative!
As faithful readers know, I like to do mental exercises to see how plausible an idea is. When there are breaks in the logic that can’t be explained away with an equally plausible explanation or after a couple of drinks, I dismiss it.
The lab leak theory? Not as easily dismissed as the Left made it sound.
Before COVID-19 became a household word (mainly because we weren’t supposed to leave the house), lab leaks weren’t uncommon. In fact, it keeps happening over and over again. At this rate, security guards in California are more secure than some labs!
So, this raises the question of why the Left’s tune changed with COVID-19 if they knew lab leaks were fairly common in recent history. It’s simple: President Donald Trump. After seeing Trump beat Hillary Clinton in 2016, the Left had a Paul Bunyon-sized ax to grind and would resort to any means to get rid of Trump.
Even denying the science they claimed to be following from the jump.
And, yes, I’m just as shocked as you are that Leftists would lie so brazenly and expect us not to pay attention.
Yet, in spite of their best efforts to keep it quiet, the Left couldn’t completely drown out the lab leak theory because there was just enough there there to keep it alive. That’s the way all conspiracy theories work: find a kernel of truth (i.e. there is fluoride in our drinking water), expand it a little bit (i.e. the federal government is putting fluoride in our drinking water), and then add to it to absurd lengths (i.e. the federal government is putting fluoride in our drinking water for mind control).
Come to think of it, that sounds a lot like what global warming cultists do…naaaaaaah!
Even so, the lab leak theory never got to the last stage, but the Left made it look like it was there through the media coverage and their government lackeys. But, as so many matters originally dismissed as conspiracy theories these days, the truth started to make its way out and made the conspiracy a reality. Then, the media started to change their tune a bit to lessen the blow by admitting there was merit to the lab leak theory, but it was Trump’s fault it wasn’t taken seriously.
In other words, Leftist default position 1.
But this narrative falls apart because it’s an example of a logical fallacy called poisoning the well. In short, it’s when a party tries to discredit another party’s claims through character assassination rather than an actual argument. In other words, Leftist default position 2. Regardless of how you feel about a source, when he or she tells the truth, it’s the truth and should be recognized as such.
The fact Donald Trump was the most vocal and visible advocate of the lab leak theory made it easier for Leftists to dismiss it, but now the government they voted into office is saying he may be right after all makes it harder to dismiss now. And justifiably so. The possibility of COVID-19 escaping from a Chinese lab isn’t that far-fetched and seemed much more plausible than wet market bat-du-joir theory.
Now, the Left’s entire approach has been rendered more worthless than a Pauly Shore NFT, and they’re scrambling to memory-hole what they said before. The Left hates to be proven wrong on anything, so when it happens, they treat it like most children do: ignore it until it goes away and lie about it throughout. And as any parent will tell you, it doesn’t work.
And it won’t work here. Or it won’t work if we’re willing to stand firm on the side of the truth. Every time a Leftist comes around to accept the lab leak theory (rarer than how Dracula takes his steak tartare, but I’m trying to be optimistic), thank them for joining you on the right side of this issue and welcome them to the truth. And if they don’t run away screaming like they’ve been doused with holy water (or soap and water for that matter), show them the grace they didn’t show you. Not only is it the right thing to do, but it will piss them off to no end because it will be another Leftist idea that is proven wrong.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If the Left didn’t hate Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy before now (spoiler alert: they did), giving access to tens of thousands of hours of surveillance footage from January 6th to Tucker Carlson. With Leftists already believing Carlson is a Russian asset, this has given them the opportunity to talk about national security. After all, letting a Russian asset (in their opinion) gain access to security footage from January 6, the most horrifying day in American history up there with Pearl Harbor and 9/11 (again, in their opinion), has to be a national security risk, right?
Well, to paraphrase the Commander in Briefs Bill Clinton, that depends on what your definition of national security is.
national security
What the Left believes it means – ummm…they’re still working on it
What it really means – a concept that means less and less with each passing year
To put it mildly, national security is a pretty big fucking deal. It’s essential to all of our lives, even if we don’t give it a first thought, let alone a second thought. It allows us to live free, or at least as freely as the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration will allows us to live. It ensures we don’t have to worry about foreign countries invading us and destroying America.
By the way, I’ve got my eye on you, Canada! No trying to get us to adopt the metric system on my watch!
If you really think about it, and I do because I have to entertain myself somehow since prices are higher than Willie Nelson on any day ending in day, national security touches every aspect of our lives on some level. So, why do we take it for granted?
A huge part of it is how invulnerable we’ve felt as a country since the Cold War. After the Berlin Wall fell, there were no more superpowers to challenge us. The Soviet Union was no more, China was years away from firing up its economic power, and the Middle East was, well, the Middle East. For all intents and purposes, we were untouchable.
Then 9/11 happened. That woke us up, at least for a little while, to how vulnerable we could still be. Granted, the warning signs were there if we had bothered to put 2 and 2 together and come up with something other than potato (thanks to Simon Miller for that joke). After all the outpouring of sympathy, all the brave words that we’d find who was responsible and bring them to justice, all the patriotic bunting and good feelings, we promptly…forgot about it after a year or so. But in our defense “Friends” was on, so…
Since then, our approach to national security has been spottier than a freckled-faced Jackson Pollock impersonator using a cheetah for a canvas. (Not something I’d recommend, by the way, especially if your clothes are dry clean only.) It’s become a stock talking point for both sides that has a level of gravitas and a seemingly untouchable nature about it that prevents Joe Sixpack or Taemmi Soylatte from thinking any deeper about it than “It’s good.”
And that’s where both parties fuck us at the drive-thru.
For decades, our national security has been tied to how much we’re willing to spend on it. With Republicans, it tends to be neat new weapons, gadgets, and tech, and with Democrats it tends to be more “soft” spending on diversity, diplomacy, and making sure other country’s fee-fees don’t get hurt by us. Yet, with all of that spending, we aren’t that much safer. If anything, we’ve gotten more lax due to an unhealthy cocktail of political gaslighting and social media.
Let’s start with the gaslighting since it’s the most pervasive and, thus, more fun to talk about. Both sides use this tactic to bolster their own version of national security. If you don’t approve of spending $450 on a screwdriver you can get at Home Depot for $8, the Right thinks you support China, North Korea, or dare I say it Trinidad Tobago marching down our streets and making us their bitches. If you don’t agree to using military (i.e. taxpayer) dollars to combat global climate change, the Left thinks you want to pollute the Earth to the point only cockroaches and the Kardashians would survive.
Both sides are wrong in the same bipartisan way. It doesn’t matter how much you spend on a security system if you never turn it on. And guess what, kids? We have been forgetting to turn it on for decades, all the while keeping every door unlocked and all our valuables in one convenient and highly visible spot for anyone to come along and take them.
And, yes, I’m about to talk about the balloon incident.
On January 28th, a Chinese balloon was able to fly over Alaska, western Canada, and parts of the United States before it was shot down over the East Coast. On February 4th. Even if you buy the multiple excuses the Left gave for why the balloon wasn’t shot down over, well, Alaska, the fact remains it took 8 fucking days and an entire cross country trip for us to do anything. And then, as if to try to balance out the dumbfuckery, we got hyper-vigilant and started shooting down balloons that weren’t even Chinese.
It’s one thing to double down after making a mistake. But the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration decided to double, triple, and quadruple down on the mistake just to show how serious they were. Which is to say not serious at all. The very fact a single balloon made it into American airspace, was recognized, and was allowed to go coast to coast without so much as a dart thrown at it is a serious breach of national security.
After all, we don’t know what kind of equipment the balloon had, if it had any. We are just being told that it was either harmless due to spy satellites giving better information or that it was made harmless because we jammed any transmissions (neither of which, I might add, has been established with any factual information). In other words, Leftists want us to believe the same balloon was ineffective because shut up.
After the Chinese balloon debacle, it’s a good thing there wasn’t a train derailment or…oh, wait. Never mind.
Even with what people observed, we had to endure Leftists telling us it wasn’t a big deal and people who said we should have shot the balloon down sooner were “bedwetters” as Senator Chris Murphy put it so inelegantly. To try to get Puddin’ Head Joe as far away from the blame as possible, they even tried to pull Donald Trump into it, saying he also had Chinese balloons come into American airspace during his Presidency, a claim that was later debunked by former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, who said it didn’t happen. I mean, it was obvious, considering it was claimed those alleged balloon flights under Trump weren’t discovered allegedly until the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration…according to the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration.
I’m as shocked as you are the Administration would lie to cover up the Administration’s clusterfuck! And to try to make us feel bad or foolish for not buying the bullshit? That’s lower than an earthworm’s belt buckle.
Now, onto social media. Granted, I don’t have a high opinion of social media to begin with, but there’s one out there that is actually being used for surveillance against us. I’m speaking of TikTok, a popular app that has been linked to spying on journalists and has the potential to track information of American citizens and government workers.
Oh, and it should be pointed out the Trump Administration called this out in 2020, and people mocked them for it, saying it was a conspiracy spun for political advantage. Yeah…chalk up another “conspiracy theory” that wound up being a fact.
Before we take a victory lap at the Left being wrong again, consider the implications of what we know. China has access to information, which is in and of itself a matter of national security, not just because government employees might be doing a stupid dance for tens and tens of people to see. The thing that makes TikTok so dangerous is the fact so many Americans voluntarily give up this information.
In our society’s rush to be “Internet famous,” we have opened ourselves up to invasions of privacy and, yes, security. Say what you will about the Chinese, and believe me I have, but they have figured us out in 2023 America. Just give us a dopamine hit for meaningless videos and we’ll let them mine our data. Brilliant!
Although neither major party has it exactly right, I do have to say Republicans take national security more seriously. After all, the Left keeps saying domestic terrorism is the greatest threat to our national security right now. And by “domestic terrorism” they mean “anybody who disagrees with us and aren’t afraid to say anything about it.”
Look at how they painted parents who were concerned/outraged over pornographic books teaching children about homosexuality and blow jobs in elementary school. You would think these parents were one step below the Manson Family the way the Left talked. But when you get people of all stripes to come out against what you’re trying to push in elementary school, it’s no longer a matter of hatred, fear, or even national security. Maybe, just maybe, your ideas suck ass.
While the Left gets their collectivist panties in a bunch over people pretending to be badasses, we still have real issues with national security we need to address. And with China and Russia united over a) hating us, b) wanting to fuck our shit up as much as possible and c) having the means to do both electronically, we can’t afford to be asleep at the switch anymore.
But we need to be honest here. Neither major party is doing jack shit about protecting ourselves, mainly because we continue to confuse the definition to fit their ideological needs at the time. Is ANTIFA a national security threat? No, nor should they be considered such. Are Trump supporters national security threats? No, and they shouldn’t be considered such either. Once you start pulling away the layers of this fetid onion, you get closer and closer to the core of what national security actually looks like.
And what does it look like? A strong and vigilant population who strive for the same goal of protecting America regardless of their ideological differences. As we’ve seen since Kevin McCarthy’s actions involving January 6 footage, we’re a long ways off from that.
But, hey, at least we can still use TikTok, right?
Perot 2.0?
The year was 1992. Jay Leno became the host of “The Tonight Show” following Johnny Carson’s departure. We were still five years away from Hanson MMMBopping their way into our hearts. And a funny little man from Texas had the attention of a nation with some pretty radical ideas for the time.
I’m speaking of the late Ross Perot, two-time Presidential candidate under the Reform Party and favorite target for late night comedians. What has been lost to time has been just how impactful Perot was on politics in his relatively short time in it. Without his presence in the 1992, we might not have gotten a President Bill Clinton, a Vice President Al Gore, and a First Lady Hillary Clinton. Of course, we might not have had that if George H. W. Bush had campaigned like he wanted a second term as President, but that’s not important right now. What is important is how some people can impact an election merely by being in it.
What does that have to do with the upcoming 2024 Presidential election? Two words: bacon cheeseburger. And two more words: Donald Trump. Although Trump has already announced he is running as a Republican in 2024 (as his early attempts to attack Nikki Haley and Ron DeSantis show), there’s still a part of me that thinks he will go third party if he doesn’t get the nod.
Can you say “Ross Perot 2: Electoral Boogaloo”? I knew you could.
Right now Trump has a significant, but not total, amount of support within Republican circles, especially with the grassroots. Much like Perot before him, Trump has advanced some unique ideas that, shockingly, make a lot of sense. And also like Perot, Trump has a level of unpredictability that makes him damn near impossible to figure out. But there is one thing that isn’t that hard to figure out: Trump loved being President.
And apparently I’m addicted to using colons.
Anyway, being President was clearly Trump’s favorite position because it afforded him more power than he’s ever had, along with more attention than he’s ever had. From a brand standpoint, there is no real downside because even negative attention is attention. Just ask Kim Kardashian. Even now, people can’t stop talking about him, whether it be blaming him for train derailments and Chinese balloons flying over the country, praising him to no end, or screaming about how he’s getting away with everything and should be thrown in jail.
So, completely rational mentions.
What happens if the Trump Train goes off the rails and he doesn’t get the nomination? There are going to be a lot of pissed-off people, enough to…oh, I don’t know…convince Trump to run as a third party candidate. And guess who gets the biggest benefit, even though he’s been an inept fuckknuckle as President?
Puddin’ Head Joe.
If Trump goes third party, is weakens the Republican candidate, whoever it is. That adds a lot of pressure on him or her to sway Trump voters, which may be a fool’s errand. Most Trump voters are Ride or Die with him, no matter what. And anyone who isn’t living a Boo Radley type existence knows it, which means Leftists will pick up on it in a couple of weeks.
Although the conventional political wisdom says third parties hurt Republicans more than Democrats, it’s only been an issue in recent history because third parties have siphoned enough votes away from a candidate to weaken the primary party candidate. Whether it’s Ross Perot, Ralph Nader, or Jill Stein, third parties get the rap for a candidate underperforming. With Trump, though, it is all but a certainty he will be the cause of a Republican defeat.
There are two ways to avert this scenario: let Trump win, or nominate someone who can sway Trump voters to vote for him or her. The former sets up a rematch with Puddin’ Head Joe, while the latter opens the door for a Trump third party run, thus ensuring history repeated itself. And a Trump-Biden rematch isn’t a guaranteed victory for the former President, even with Biden having the Midas Touch in reverse. There’s still enough hatred of the former President out there to make it tougher for him to win.
So, fucked if you do, fucked if you don’t.
Good luck with that.