Ah, Minnesota, our neighbor to the north. (Please check local listings for the location of Minnesota in your area.) What was once the home of occasional professional sports titles (sorry, Vikings fans) is a hotbed of controversy due to a YouTuber named Nick “Don’t Call Me” Shirley. His 43 minute video exposing potential fraud with Somali-run daycares and medical facilities has put the Land of 10,000 Lakes under the microscope.
Which, of course has Leftists fuming. To be fair, though, when aren’t they fuming?
As we start seeing more fallout from this brewing scandal, I thought it would be a good time to take a look at Minnesota through my own perspective. That and the possibility of those sweet, sweet clicks.
Minnesota
What the Left thinks it means – a state unfairly targeted by the Trump Administraiton
What it really means – a state run by incompetents, fraudsters, or both
Minnesota was first inhabited by Native Americans, but eventually had Europeans show up, and they didn’t even bring a hot dish to pass! Those bastards! Eventually, it became a state in 1858 and became the home of many a Lutheran. Most of the time, Minnesota has been seen as quiet, unassuming, and above all else…normal.
That was until recently when Leftists took the state from the home of Spam and Garrison Keillor to a frosty heckscape. It’s like a hellscape, but more in line with Minnesotan phrasing. Granted, recent history has shown the state moving more to the left than a base runner leaning towards first base trying to avoid being tagged out, so the slide towards the heckscape has been slow, yet impactful.
This brings us to the current Governor, Tim “TIMMAH” Walz. You know, the guy Queen Kamala the Appointed thought would make a good Vice President for the same reason Hunter Biden would be a great accountability buddy: because you’re fucking insane. Governor TIMMAH is good at one thing, and that’s throwing shade.
Since Shirley’s video dropped, Governor TIMMAH has responded by… blaming Donald Trump, accusing white guys of fraud, and generally looking like a buffoon. You know, what Governor TIMMAH does every day.
But it’s not like he’s doing this alone, mind you. The Left is doing a lot of heavy lifting to try to protect the image of Governor TIMMAH as anything but a cartoonish crook with CNN playing the role of Atlas. They’ve tried going after Shirley and wound up looking like Governor TIMMAH as a result.
Not to be outdone, CBS (emphasis on the BS) did its own “investigation” and found nothing out of the ordinary. Because as we all know, potential billions of dollars in fraud is just ho-hum. (Note to Bari Weiss: this ain’t the journalism you’re looking for. And I hope you’ll forgive me for the Obi Wan Kenobi hand wave.)
Other outlets like NPR, MS NOW, The Intercept, and even the Minneapolis Star Tribune have helped with the heavy lifting in their own ways. Namely, by attempting to discredit Shirley’s video by discrediting the man himself. Because, as we all know, the real crime here isn’t the alleged fraud, but noticing the alleged fraud.
For you Leftists out there, that was sarcasm.
Now, if this were the only scandal plaguing the Land of Ten Thousand Fakes, we might be able to let Governor TIMMAH off with a warning. After all, he’s not the sharpest bowling ball on the Christmas tree, so he might just be dumber than two bags of hammers. Granted, he is, but that’s not important right now. What is important is this isn’t the first scandal that’s come under Governor TIMMAH’s tenure.
See, there’s a little thing the kids like to call Feeding Our Future, a non-profit organization in Minnesota designed to help feed children in need. What it became was a massive fraud case where millions of dollars were taken in, but few, if any, children got fed. But don’t worry! Governor TIMMAH is on the case! He announced a new fraud prevention program designed to address the Feeding Our Future scandal. And only 3 years after the federal government caught wind of the fraud! Way to go TIMMAH!
But, wait! There’s more! Behind the Shirley video there is another layer of corruption, that being possible fraud through the state’s Child Care Assistance Program. The state gave out money to daycare centers where there was no evidence of children actually on site with hours of operation well outside the norm. Apparently, this situation has been a thing since at least 2018 with a number of whistleblowers coming forward to advise of the potential fraud.
And Governor TIMMAH took that information…and promptly ignored it.
Along with potential Medicaid fraud.
And possible money laundering.
Oh, and maybe funneling money to Al-Shabaab, a known terrorist group operating out of…Somalia.
Hmmm…it seems there are a lot of ties to Somalia in these scandals, including to a member of the Squad, Rep. Ilhan Omar. Although there haven’t been solid links between Omar and the fraud, President Donald Trump wasted no time in making the connection. Granted, this is Trump’s standard operating procedure, so I’m not going to start demanding she address her ties or lack thereof to the Somalian scammers. Besides, she has enough on her plate dealing with allegations she married her brother to commit immigration fraud.
Or so I’ve heard.
Regardless, the Somalian connection is hard to ignore (not that the Left isn’t willing to try, mind you), and people on different sides of the political spectrum have offered thoughts as to why. Conservatives are split between whether it’s the Somali culture or the Muslim faith that drives the fraud. And the Left? Racism, sexism, and Islamophobia, of course.
Now, I can’t speak to the Somali culture part of the argument. I’ve never been to Somalia, and if I did I’m not sure I would talk about it. However, I can speak to the Islamic side of the argument because the Quran is pretty clear about how it’s totes cool to grift non-believers through a concept called taqiyya. Although modern scholars have tried to muddy the waters a bit to suggest Islam doesn’t allow deception towards non-Muslims, even the scholars admit it’s allowed if Muslims are under duress in a foreign country.
You know, like when they’re caught scamming tax dollars from Americans?
Even if you don’t buy the Muslim angle, human nature tells us people will lie to hide their deception, especially if that deception makes them money. Considering the size of the fraud and those who enabled/were enriched by it, they might have a few billion reasons to lie.
So, how do we fix Minnesota? Good question, and one where I don’t have an easy answer. Sure, we could trade the state to Canada for a first round draft pick, but it will only cause US/Canadian relations to get more sour. Rooting out the fraud would be a positive first step, but we’d be fighting the Left (who has a vested interest in maintaining/hiding the fraud) at every turn. Mass deportations? Another non-starter, unfortunately, because the money is still gone and I’m not sure the fraudsters have the cash on hand to start making payments.
Given the extent of the fraud, it may be impossible to save Minnesota without a full-blown political shift. Not that it can’t happen, but I’m more likely to trust 3 day old convenience store sushi than I am Minnesota going red in the near future.
In the meantime, we have to stay on these frauds, and not just the people stealing money from us, either. Every Leftist who says any damn thing even remotely defending or diverting attention away from the fraud needs to be challenged, not on the emotions or the attempts to divert attention away from it, but purely on the facts. Leftists hate that. Deny their bullshit reality and insert your own, and watch them screech in horror.
Of course, I have another suggestion. Leftist millionaires and billionaires talk about how little they pay in taxes, right? Send them the bill for the fraud and demand payment, like, three years ago.
Category: Media
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Remember the War on Drugs started in the 1980s? I do. My brain still looks like a sunny-side up egg, but that’s not important right now. What is important is America has fought a halfhearted war against drugs and we’ve been worse for wear because of it.
That is until Donald Trump got reelected. Now, we’re putting firepower behind the War on Drugs with the Department of War taking the lead on turning alleged drug trafficking boats into the world’s most addictive flotsam. And, right on cue, the Left has a problem with it. But this week, their efforts went up a notch with several Leftists calling what the President and Secretary of War Pete “Let’s Tap That Keg” Hegseth authorized war crimes.
The accusation is pretty heavy, so let me try to make fun of it!
war crimes
What the Left thinks it means – serious and inexcusable crimes committed by the current Administration
What it really means – the next phase of the Left’s attempt to undermine the military under Trump
The concept of war crimes is rooted in the Geneva Convention (not nearly as fun as a Shriner’s convention, but I digress), and it outlines how enemy soldiers and prisoners of war are to be treated. Keep in mind this is in the aftermath of World War II, where POWs were treated worse than a British substitute teacher in Belfast, so the spirit of the document has a foundation in humane treatment.And should someone or some country decide not to play by these rules, they can get charged with war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
This is a great thing when we’re dealing with warring nations, but what about different types of wars where there aren’t warring countries? Welllll…that’s where things get a little murky, at least for me. When you consider the bulk of the military actions America has undertaken since the Geneva Convention have not been officially declared wars, it brings up the question of whether the concept of war crimes even applies here. That’s where the concept is subject to interpretation, or misinterpretation as the case may be.
Enter our good fiends…I mean friends on the Left. As I’ve noted before, the Left loves it when things are unclear because they can then inject their perceptions into the discussion, even if they’re batshit crazy. Then, by operating in the uncertainty, they can control the narrative, which is always their endgame.
This begs the question of whether blowing up suspected drug runner boats constitutes violations of the Geneva Convention. The simple answer as I see it is not really, and it’s predicated on the fact Congress hasn’t declared war yet. That gives me a chance to talk about Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution again because it’s there that we find who can declare war, and surprise surprise, it’s Congress!
If the Founding Fathers saw the absolute nozzleheads running Congress these days, they might have changed their minds, but that’s a post for another time.
Anyway, the point remains Congress didn’t declare war, as is often the case with Presidents who want to appear like a military leader against foes far weaker than we are. For everything else, there’s hookers and blow…or diplomacy. You know, whichever works.
Further complicating matters (because of-fucking-course) is the War Powers Resolution of 1973. This law requires the President to report to Congress whenever there’s the potential for hostilities to break out, but also allows the President to deploy troops for 60 days without a Congressional vote. So, I’m going to go out on a limb and say the President told Congress (and the rest of the country for that matter) that the Department of War was going to play Battleship: The Narco-Terrorist Edition well before any attacks began, so that requirement was met a looooooong time ago. And I’m gonna say blowing up shit constitutes hostilities.
And now for the best part? The President doesn’t have to have Congress do shit for 60 days, which oddly enough is roughly twice as many days as they’re in session. Granted, I’m guessing things might take a little longer than 60 days because we’re dealing with drug cartels here, but with the current makeup of Congress, a vote would most likely be a mere formality.
So, that’s why the Left went all in on the war crimes idea. If they can convince enough people what the President is doing violates the Geneva Convention, they can sway public opinion to…make drug dealers look like poor victims, I guess? (Hey, nobody said Leftists were smart.)
However, to fully understand the strategy, we need to look back at a recent video from six members of Congress who were either in the military or in the intelligence community. In that video (and in subsequent appeals in the media to take the heat off), they made sure to say the military didn’t have to obey illegal orders. Since then, not a one of the fucknuggets in the video or the Leftists who support the current thing could point to an illegal order the President issued, so that should be the end of it, right?
Yeahhhh, not so much.
The point of the video wasn’t to back up their claims so much as it was to instill doubt in the leadership from the President on down. Now, add in the war crimes element.
For those of you who need help connecting the dots, by suggesting Trump and Hegseth are guilty of war crimes, it reinforces the idea they’re issuing illegal orders, potentially eroding the confidence in the military and political leadership. And that leads to trouble up and down the ranks. If our military has to second-guess every order given, it prevents them from fulfilling their primary objectives: kill the enemy, break their shit, or a combination of the two.
Yeah. Pretty fucking dirty.
I’m sure there are going to be more legal arguments and laws bandied about on both sides of the war crimes question, but ultimately the heart of the matter is the Left is going to have a hard time explaining why blowing up drug boats and killing drug smugglers is a bad thing. And that’s not even getting into whether the actions constitute a war crime.
Not that it will stop Leftists from saying it or further suggesting the military should disobey the President. Even if the war crimes thing gains any traction, Leftists are still going to have to deal with being on the same side of an issue as drug cartels because…Orange Man Bad.
Again, no one ever said Leftists were smart.
I’m Not Wild About Harry
To my Leftist readers out there, we need to have a talk about one of your current figureheads in the media, Harry Sisson. Let me start with a question.
Why in the wide world of fuck are you letting him be a spokesperson?
I treated him like a joke up until this point, but after watching his bizarre performance on a recent episode of “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” I have some questions. But make no mistake, I will still treat him like a joke because, dammit, I care!
The most obvious question is who exactly is he influencing. It’s no secret the Left has more issues with men than a stripper convention, and after the 2024 election, they figured out saying “men suck” isn’t exactly the best way to attract potential male voters.
And Harry Sisson is the best you folks could come up with?
What’s more intriguing is Harry isn’t the only influencer in the Leftist hivemind. Let’s list off a few.
JoJoFromJerz – a woman whose claim to fame is using Instagram filters to make her look semi-attractive and swearing more than Andrew Dice Clay with Tourettes
Meidas Touch – a reliable Leftist outpost whose track record for telling the truth makes the Weekly World News look like a more accurate Nostradamus
BrooklynDadDefiant – a guy who looks like he could might be able to kick your ass, but would be more likely to play you an original folk rock song on his acoustic guitar
Hassan Piker – Cenk’s Nephew. ‘Nuff said.
Destiny – a guy whose takes are entertaining because of how manic and wrong they are
Occupy Democrats – Meidas Touch with a bigger budget
Olivia Julianna – a woman charged with attracting young men back to the Left, but may not be able to attract flies to shit
And many, many more.
So, back to the original question, who is Harry Sisson influencing? Judging from the 2024 election results, not too many. More realistically, though, he’s not influencing anyone; he’s preaching to the same choir everyone else in the Leftist influencer-sphere is. And it’s already pretty saturated as it is.
Let’s go over what Harry has going for him. He’s a young man, not all that unattractive, and looks like a little boy. That automatically makes him attractive to older women and some gay men, who would want to take him in and take care of him. Oh, and possibly fuck him.
His boyish looks would make him attractive to younger women and younger gay men, so they would fantasize about fucking him.
But if he’s the face of the movement to get men back to voting for Leftists, he sucks at his job. He’s the type of guy who dudebros would automatically know he doesn’t lift, bro. Working class men would ignore him because he comes from a wealthy family and looks like he would have trouble lifting a nail, let alone a hammer. He’s terminally online, but whines whenever anyone calls him out on anything or mocks him in any way. (By the way, hi, Harry!)
In short, he’s not helping, and he hasn’t helped since he came onto the scene during the Brick Tamland Administration where he ran interference for the President, saying he was prepared to be President for another four years. You know, right before they dumped the President for Queen Kamala the Appointed.
But he was totally fine, guys. We can trust Harry over what we saw.
A total lack of awareness notwithstanding, Harry is proving to be more of a liability than a help. His insane mugging for the camera after being proven wrong about high profile elected Democrats calling Donald Trump a Nazi showed he was either woefully ignorant of what the party he represents constantly does, tweaking out on some primo shit and not sharing, or both. At this point, it’s hard to tell. In fact, he might be a secret Trump/Vance plant designed to make the Left look stupider than it already does just to see how many fellow Leftists follow suit. And if the plant is the right answer, Trump/Vance is getting an amazing return on investment out of Harry.
For the people/party paying him? Not so much.
Personally, I would scrap whomever decided social media influencers could replace actually talking to people outside of their hivemind because it’s a damn stupid idea. That’s how you get out of touch with the people you claim to be looking out for, and that’s where the Left find themselves today due in large part to people like Harry Sisson.
Unless you’re into man-babies who look like they’re taking mushrooms for the very first time online, that is.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
For as much time as I spend mocking the Left for their rampant stupidity, there is one thing I give them credit for, and that is mass distribution of their squawking points. Back in the heady days of, well, last year, Leftists were all squawking in lockstep saying “Joe Biden is mentally capable of being President.” This year, they’re singing a similar tune, but for a different President.
Yes, fellow campers, the Left is now saying President Donald Trump has, as they call it, “diminished capability.”
Wait. Too easy of a joke to make. (At least for now…)
With that being said, let’s take a closer look at what the Left is talking about, Willis.
diminished capacity
What the Left thinks it means – clear cognitive decline which negatively affects the President
What it really means – Leftists trying to avoid responsibility for propping up President Brick Tamland for so long while accusing President Trump of the same shit
The term “diminished capacity” is pretty nebulous when you think about it (and I do because I canceled Netflix before it was cool). It can refer to any number of maladies, ranging from possible dementia to not being able to go out in public without diapers. But enough about President Brick Tamland. There was bountiful evidence that the former President was doing a bobsled run down the cognitive course for a looooooong time. My proof?
All the Leftists who said he was fine.
And surprise, surprise, it’s the same Leftists who are all over Trump’s alleged cognitive decline like an social justice warrior on anything that hurts their fee-fees. And if you don’t know what a social justice warrior is, be glad you’re ignorant of the term and walk on by. It is not a safe space for anyone.
And with how nebulous the term is, it gives the Left plenty of ways to hold Trump to a standard they refused to hold the last President to, even though there were clearer examples of there being an issue with the latter. Not that that’s going to stop the fearless defenders of democracy, mind you! They have a country to destroy…I mean save!
This is where Trump gives them easy wins at times. Semi-coherent rants about inconsequential matters, stopping in the middle of a valid question to talk about something else, spending a significant chunk of his time on social media.
Yes, my friends. Our President is a teenage boy. Only his Call of Duty lobby involves actual military.
But that in and of itself isn’t evidence of diminished capacity. Erratic behavior? Yeah. Cognitive decline? Not so much.
Not that the Left is going to let a little thing like reality get in the way of trying to make President Trump look like Forrest Gump…or would that be Forrest Trump? Anyway, the point is the Left is grasping at straws here mainly because they can’t admit one simple truth: Trump was right all along about President Tamland. In the last year or so of his Presidency, President Tamland was definitely not firing on all trapezoids, let alone cylinders. (Geometry joke FTW!)
But this wasn’t the first time the Left wanted to point out a President’s mental decline. Waaaaaay back in the late 80s, reports came out that President Ronald Reagan was losing his memory and was suffering from dementia. Back then, though, the Left wasn’t so gung-ho to make a President serving his second term into an afterthought. They mentioned it, yes, but they weren’t mean about it for the most part.
Yeah, that ain’t happening now.
The Left needs more people to agree with them that Trump is incompetent, mostly because they were incompetent enough to lose to the guy under the banner of Queen Kamala the Appointed. What was her campaign slogan again? Oh, yeah, insane cackling.
The Left hated it when Trump beat Hillary Clinton because they thought she was the most qualified candidate in history, or at least the history of the time. Of course, when former President Barack Obama says that about it, that’s saying something because it’s a reaaaaaallly low bar to beat his qualifications. My dog is more qualified, and she doesn’t even eat Obamas!
For you Leftists out there, that was a joke.
And speaking of jokes, that brings us to Queen Kamala the Appointed’s campaign. Yes, she’s saying people tell her she was the most qualified candidate to ever run for President, but they’re either a) lying, b) lying to keep themselves in her good graces if/when she runs again, and c) have never met my dog. But the result was the same. The Left couldn’t handle losing to Trump, so they went back to the “Trump is unwell” well.
Here’s the problem. Trump hustles a lot more than most people think. His stamina and work hours make nymphomaniac hookers look lazy. The man works all hours and sleeps only 4. Doesn’t drink alcohol (which, given the state of things in Washington, DC, on a normal day is a Herculean feat). Doesn’t have any drug habits that we know of. In fact, the strongest substance he takes into his body seems to be…Diet Fucking Coke.
Yeah, tell me again he has diminished capacity.
The only case the Left can make is Trump has more than a few gaffes, misstatements, and genuine “What In the Wide World of Fuck Is He Saying?” moments. I know about these because the Left can’t stop talking about them or turning them into bigger stories than they might otherwise be.
Oh, and did I forget to mention these same assholes were oblivious to President Brick Tamland’s clear downward slide?
Let’s lay our cards on the table. This sudden concern with Trump’s mental acuity from the Left is politically driven. I know. I was as shocked as you are when I found out.
Seriously, though, what we’re seeing is IMAX level projection, and it tells me a lot about what the Left knew about President Tamland and when they knew it. If the former President hadn’t been seen at his cognitive worst, the Left wouldn’t be going in as hard as they are on Trump’s alleged decline. Sure, they’d still have the Nazi/fascist/homophobic/transphobic/racist/sexist/insult of the week shit to fall back on, but not the “Trump is in steep mental decline” shit.
Then again, these are the same people who turned Dr. Anthony Fauci into a religious icon, so maybe it wouldn’t stop them.
Regardless, we definitely should take the Left’s claims of the President’s “diminished capacity” with a Great Salt Lake sized grain of salt. Besides, the Left have their own issues with diminished capacity within their own ranks, namely the Socialist Socialite and Jasmine “I Say Stupid Shit and I Get Paid For It” Crockett. The two of them collectively wouldn’t even make a half-wit.
Let me close with a word of advice from Jesus: “Physician, heal thyself.”
It was much classier a closing than my “Get that weak shit out of here!”
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, there were a lot of emotions flowing out from across the political spectrum. A lot of sadness, a lot of anger, and, as odd as it is for me to say, a lot of joy. Yes, our good friends on the Left had a field day dunking on a dead man, posting some out-of-context statements Kirk made and generally acting like assholes.
But then came the backlash.
Within a matter of hours, Leftists came online to cry about losing their jobs because of what they said and did online, which lead to other Leftists (i.e. the media) to lament how these Leftists were losing their jobs for “just stating an opinion.”
Oh, how ironic it is for Leftists to be feeling the consequences of their own actions. And that’s something the Left typically hasn’t experienced lately, which makes it a nice way to add it to the Lexicon.
consequences
What the Left thinks it means – when a conservative gets his or her just desserts for acting badly
What it really means – the “Find Out” part of FAFO
Sir Isaac Newton’s third law of motion is for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. The same can be applied to online discussions/rants/joygasms/debates/and so on, but with a slightly different twist. Everything we say or do online has an equal opportunity to piss off somebody on the opposite side. Most of the time it results in flame wars between two equally immature individuals, but with the Charlie Kirk situation, things got stepped up a notch or, oh, 5 billion because there are some extremely fucked up individuals out there on the Interwebs.
And, yes, I count myself as one of them.
The tide of online social discourse changed in the late 2000s or early 2010s when the terminally online realized they could find personal information on a lot of people simply by looking it up online. That’s a little trick the kids like to call doxxing, and it was prevalent with some corners of the Interwebs and still is.
Then, the Left got heavily involved in it. Under the auspices of keeping people (i.e. anyone to the right of Karl Marx) accountable, they started finding out more and more information on the Right and using that as leverage to get them to either change their ways, a la David Brock without all the cocaine, or shut up, a la what I wish David Brock would do without all the cocaine. And since they were the rulers of online platforms like Facebook and the Social Media Site Formerly Known As X, they got away with it and advance their agenda.
As Morgan Freeman (or a semi-reasonable facsimile) might say, “It was at that point they fucked up,” and you can thank Leftist ego and shortsightedness for it. When Leftists get power, they never think it will ever be taken away from them. The problem with that idea is…it can be taken away from them. Political and social power are always temporary and subject to the whims of people who might not agree with them. This is why it’s always prudent to note what you allow when you’re in the seat of power because it can and most likely will be allowed against you.
In other words, fuck around and find out.
Now that the Left is finding itself on the short end of the power stick in politics, society, and the Interwebs, they’re finding out what consequences feels like.
Spoiler Alert: they don’t like it.
And they have themselves to blame. You know, unless they decide to blame Donald Trump, the MAGA movement, Charlie Kirk, the Denver Broncos, etc.
One aspect of Leftist ideology is never having to take responsibility for what they do. There’s always “nuance” or some other weasel-shit word to try to put their misdeeds into a “context” where, yes, they did mow down three nuns and a classroom of preschoolers crossing the street while driving drunk and high during a bender with Keith Richards, but it’s not really their fault because reasons. Of course, that kind of “nuance” and “context” is never afforded to the Right. When someone like Charlie Kirk is the victim, it’s not the shooter’s fault. It’s the lack of gun control laws (which work about as well as most Congresscritters), or the lack of a social safety net, or in the Charlie Kirk case, heated rhetoric from the Right.
That’s right, kids. Some members of the Left think…err feel, it’s Donald Trump’s fault Charlie Kirk got shot.
Oddly enough, these are the same people who think Trump is behind Stephen Colbert getting fired and Jimmy Kimmel getting suspended. And now free speech is under attack because…let me read my notes here…Colbert was a money-losing hack and Kimmel lied on national television about who shot Charlie Kirk on top of being an unfunny hack.
While the Left screams “cancel culture” (obliviously ironically, I might add), what’s happening to them is the consequences of their own words and actions. And they should be familiar with the concept, mainly because it’s the very idea they push when it’s the Right being held responsible. The Left has a love/hate relationship with consequences. They love it when someone else gets hoisted by their own petards, but hate it when it’s them getting their petards hoisted.
Granted, this isn’t just a Leftist point of view. Everyone loves themselves a bit of schadenfreude (which is German for “ha ha you got fucked over and I get to feel good about it”), so no one is completely exempt. Having said that, over the past decade or so, the Left has used consequences as a means of punishing non-believers. Whether it was a baker in Colorado or anyone who defied the COVID-19 mandates, the Left has no problem setting traps for others and then calling them out for not being willing to accept the consequences for their actions.
Which brings us back to Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals. This time, its rule number 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” The Right has a tendency to expect there to be consequences for every bad deed, so the Left has turned that into a trap. If they don’t get what they want, they’ll drag you through the courts, smear you in the public arena, and essentially try to ruin your life.
So, how does it feel to have to bake the cake, bigots?
The thing about consequences is they can be unequal to the offense committed. Not using someone’s preferred pronouns in a professional setting shouldn’t get you a one way trip to Siberia (although I’m sure the Left would get on board with that idea), but it shouldn’t be given a slap on the wrist either. What the Left did to COVID-19 defiers or the January 6th protestors were beyond the pale and they were punished more severely than they should have been…or at least punished as much as Leftists who defied lockdown mandates and protested via rioting and looting got. When the punishment doesn’t fit the crime, it builds resentment in and distrust of the process itself.
And guess what we’re experiencing now, kids.
And this is where it gets complicated for me. My logical side says the consequences for bad actions and words should be just and fair, even though the Left doesn’t walk the walk in this area. My emotional side says the Left should be made to feel just how they made others feel, i.e. bake the cake, bigot. Is the latter fair and just? Not particularly. But the purpose of consequences is to teach you a lesson about what happens when you fuck around. As long as everyone gets to feel the sting of retribution, it’s fair, just not quite so nice.
Now, the Left is bringing this up in terms of free speech, expecting to get a “gotcha” on the Right who have been championing free speech for their side for the better part of a decade. However, the Left’s gotcha runs into a problem, that being the Left’s dismissal of free speech concerns when they were in charge of social media platforms where conservatives got banned for saying things far less inflammatory as the Left did. They used the “private businesses don’t have to platform your views” defense then, only to have it thrown back in their faces now.
Not much of a gotcha unless you’re a flaming hypocrite…oh, wait…
And make no mistake, the Left are flaming hypocrites here. Their defense of free speech is as conditional as an Elon Musk prenup. But who are the first ones to cry about the end of free speech as we know when it’s their speech getting silenced?
The Left.
Yet, when it’s free speech they don’t like, they’re fully on board with silencing them, and apparently one of theirs has taken it to the bonus round and started killing people because…reasons, I guess? And hopefully that asshole gets the punishment he deserves because that’s what consequences are all about.
That includes you folks cheering on Charlie Kirk’s murder on social media.
With the advent of the Interwebs and social media, let’s just say Karma has a target-rich area. For a long time, the Left has called out bad faith actors on the Right (which is good), but then took to trying to ruin their lives through bringing attention to the wider society (which is not so good). Getting fired, cancelled, forced to watch every “Transformers” movie with Michael Bay doing live commentary, those are the consequences of bad actions. Now, that kind of shit is being thrown at the people who did it before the Right got involved, and it’s going to keep coming because those are the consequences of being shitheads online.
Your rules, not mine.
So, spare me the tearful “I got fired for expressing an opinion on Charlie Kirk” bullshit. You got fired because you became a liability to whatever company or institution you were a part of, and when that happens, there are consequences. You know the best way to avoid the consequences of being a shitty person on social media? Don’t be a shitty person! That seems to work a lot better than crying on TikTok.
Yes, there are consequences to acting like a civilized adult, but one of them is not getting fired for being one. And, you know, those are the kind of consequences I can handle.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week – Special Edition
That’s right. You’re getting two Lexicon entries in one week!
And you can stop throwing rotten tomatoes at me. Thank you.
And once again, we have to delve into the world of the Charlie Kirk assassination because, well, everything else seems to be absorbed by it. But this time it’s going to be different! This time you’ll have to deal with my take on the situation.
Please see the above sentence regarding rotten tomatoes.
One of the oddest situations coming out of the Kirk assassination (outside of the suspect’s personal life) was how the Left has this idea that it’s the Right that needs to “turn down the temperature” with their rhetoric. This has been a squawking point every time something happens to anyone to the right of Josef Stalin, so I figured I’d take the idea out for a spin.
turn down the temperature
What the Left thinks it means – actions the Right can do to reduce the tensions in this country
What it really means – Leftists telling the Right to shut up and take the abuse they’re getting
To put it mildly, America is fractured, possibly beyond repair. Not that I’m going to stop using duct tape, Super Clue, chicken wire, and bubble gum to keep it together, mind you. And believe it or not, Charlie Kirk had a similar mindset. He had discussions with people from all ideological walks of life. He wasn’t mean or insulting (although Leftists still paint him that way). All he was asking for was a civil dialogue on what is, not what we want it to be.
And for that, he got shot.
I’m no anti-terrorist expert, but I’m thinking the temperature is pretty high as it is.
In between attempts to portray Kirk’s shooter as anything but potentially gay furry with a trans roommate, possible mate-mate, the Left has been putting the onus on the Right to tone things down. To which I have a three word response.
Dude got shot.
And based on what I’ve seen from online Leftists, they have no intention of lowering the temperature. Some have asked why there aren’t more assassinations against the Right, including President Donald Trump…a man who has also been shot for being on the Right. I’ve even seen the terminally online go so far as to suggest any such shooter would get amnesty or even sexual favors for doing it.
Yeah, not really seeing where this is a MAGA problem, dickweeds.
Add to this the number of high profile people in politics and media calling Trump and MAGA supporters fascist, including Charlie Kirk.
Then, dude got shot.
And Leftists cheered (although they claim they didn’t). As a result, Leftists lost their jobs and one, Jimmy Kimmel, found himself indefinitely suspended for lying about who was responsible for Kirk’s shooting. Here’s what he said in whole, and the offensive part quoted below:
We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang trying to characterize this kid who killed Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.
Yep. Temperature’s not coming down any time soon, but it’s MAGA’s fault.
Yeah, but dude got shot.
After Kimmel’s monologue, his fellow late night “comedians” rallied to his side, decrying the lack of free speech. After all, the Trump Administration silenced Stephen Colbert (who lately is as funny as VD on prom night) and now Jimmy Kimmel (who lately is as funny as reruns of “Keeping Up With the Kardashians”), so is the federal government going to silence all late night comedians unless they kiss the ring? Everyone should be out in the streets demanding Kimmel be able to exercise his freedom of speech by telling one-sided and unfunny jokes.
And…dude got shot.
As expected, the Left is doing its best not to appear like total shitheads by…checking my notes…acting like total shitheads. Even after his death, Leftists were trying to condemn him as dangerous (although I have to admit I laughed when the Socialist Socialite called Kirk ignorant because irony/lack of self awareness).
Yet, these are the same assholes telling the Right to tone things down?
Say it with me now…dude got shot.
In order to drop the temperature in any situation, there has to be efforts to, well, drop the temperature. You can’t keep calling the Right fascists and demand they tone it down because you’re stoking the fires. And while you keep doing what you’re doing, you’re going to keep radicalizing people who will do what the shooter did to Charlie Kirk.
You know. Dude got shot.
But that’s not really what you want, is it? You want to have the Right censor itself while you say what you want and not reap any consequences. Here’s the problem, dipshits: you’re going to get to a point where your victims get motivated to hit back. And believe me, as the old Interwebs saying goes, you have started shit and somewhere down the line you will get hit.
So, let me put this as bluntly as I can: shut the fuck up with the heated rhetoric. You’re making things worse and looking like hypocritical assholes for demanding everyone but you be nice. In other words, you’re acting like normal. Now, we need you to not act like normal, and I know you can do that because that’s what I see you do everyday.
As for the Right, there are steps you can take to not give the Left any more legitimate reasons to call you fascists. For one, call out the bad actors on the Right and tell them to shut their pieholes. The very fact Nick Fuentes and America First isn’t relegated to being more of a laughingstock than Tim Walz should trouble the Right. The further these assholes are to the grassroots, the better.
And that’s the same advice I can give to the Left right now. You should not even remotely associate with the people in your midst who cheered Charlie Kirk’s death. They may be reliable voters, but they’re hindering your movement. You want to keep being on the losing end of 80-20 issues, keep listening to these jackoffs. If you want to have any chance of holding elected office higher than Assistant Dog Catcher, tell them to shut up and let the adults work. Otherwise, all your calls for more civil discourse is going to be met with three words.
Dude got shot.
Uncivil Discourse
With the assassination of Charlie Kirk still looming in my headspace, I figured I’d better put some thoughts down about it to make room for other things, like lyrics from obscure 80s songs.
Being a commentator on the Interwebs opens people up to a lot of stuff. Lucrative offers from deep pocketed donors, YouTube shows, podcasts, the occasional hello from a fan, that sort of thing. The downside, though, is it opens you up to a lot of criticism, too. And sometimes that criticism turns from “hey, I have a legitimate issue with something you said” to “fuck you, asshole, I’m gonna kill you.” Most of the time, the latter can be brushed off as keyboard warrior talk, but lately it’s this kind of talk that permeates the online space.
And as online culture became current culture, the level of hatred has risen to the point I fear we’re on the road to civil war and we don’t have many offramps left before we get there. A lot of this has to do with the notion of revenge. These days, whenever we think someone slights us, we don’t seek to make amends or to address the matter in a civil, mindful way. We’re out to take whatever we can get and fuck your feelings.
We can see a microcosm of this in a seemingly unrelated story. Remember “Phillies Karen”? If you’re not familiar with the story, here’s the breakdown. A Phillies player hit a home run into the stands, and there was a scramble for the ball. Phillies Karen went for it, but was bested by a young boy’s father, who gave the ball to his son because a) the home run was hit by the boy’s favorite player, and b) the father wanted his son to have a great memory of the day.
Well, Phillies Karen didn’t care. All she knew was she wanted the ball and didn’t care about who got hurt by her getting it. She went over to the father and started berating him, allegedly saying “You took my ball,” After a brief discussion, the father made the boy give Phillies Karen “her” ball.
Not exactly the way you want to become famous.
I won’t go into the aftermath because it’s irrelevant to the larger point, but let’s just say Karma never misses.
I brought up Phillies Karen because it encapsulates the very attitude so prevalent in our society right now, and it feeds directly into the larger issue about our road to civil war. Society has become so egocentric and petty that even a minor slight like what Phillies Karen felt turned into a major issue that people feel they have to take into their own hands. And sometimes that leads to threats of violence and violence.
This is where I usually step in and try reason. For Phillies Karen, it’s just a fucking baseball. It’s not going to be the end of the world if you don’t get it, and there was a much better way to handle it than to demand to get “your” ball back. In storytelling, this attitude is called “Main Character Syndrome” and it’s becoming more and more prevalent in society. We are the main characters in our lives and by God the rest of the world better acknowledge it or else!
But that’s just it. If everyone has that attitude, then everyone is a main character, which means no one is a main character. Congratulations, you’ve played yourselves.
Bringing that forward into the political sphere, many commenters on the Left have Main Character Syndrome and do their best to make their problems into everyone else’s. That takes a level of malice I’m not ready to explore personally because even when I’m at my most petty, I try to take a step back and see what the endgame is. What do I want to accomplish if I take umbrage at a comment? A civil discussion? A shit-flinging contest? A dick-measuring contest? More often than not, I lead with the civil discussion and keep things above board. Not only does that show my true intentions, but it pisses off the people looking to get me to react in an uncivil way.
Even when I was young and stupid, as opposed to being old and stupid now, there were lines I didn’t cross, especially over online bullshit. You want to mock me, be my guest and we’ll see who runs out of material first. If you attempt to hurt my life or my family, I will take offense, but I won’t reveal it nor whatever machinations I have up my sleeve. And 99% of the time, I stewed over it, left it alone, and eventually let it go permanently.
That doesn’t happen much today, unfortunately. With every little annoyance or difference of opinion being seen as a threat, people are more on edge than ever. And when something is seen as a threat, people will do anything to protect themselves, including choosing violence to settle a battle of words. And once you make that choice, it gets really easy to justify anything against anyone.
Such as the number of videos from Leftists cheering Charlie Kirk’s death.
That’s where FAFO comes into play. Once you cross that line into Fuck Around territory, the Find Out comes at you pretty fast. With the number of anti-Kirk videos out there, the pro-Kirk side decided to be the agents of Karma and expose the hateful assholes. Of course, the Left has been doing this for years, so I’m surprised yet not that surprised they didn’t figure on the Right playing by the rules the Left set. Now, there are videos from anti-Kirk folks where they tearfully talking about how they lost their jobs for merely expressing an opinion, and the Leftists in the media (but I repeat myself) are amplifying their sad stories in a sympathetic tone.
I wonder what a certain Colorado baker might have to say about these Leftists losing their livelihoods for expressing an opinion. Something tells me it might rhyme with “bake the cake, bigot.”
Yet, on a much larger level, what good will come from fighting back and forth in the modern social and online culture? An eye for an eye may feel good in the short term, but it only escalates matters back and forth until optometry is not a growth industry because everybody winds up partially blind. And, yes, I recognize I’ve had a role in that. I am not blameless in any way, especially when it comes to the quality of my jokes.
Having said that, I have found a way to get out of the death spiral by understanding a key concept: disagreeing doesn’t mean you have to be disagreeable. You can disagree with friends and family without letting it ruin those relationships, no matter what the Left says. There are people in my circle of friends who hate Donald Trump and MAGA with their whole hearts while I’m a sometimes-Trumper, but we’ve found a way not to let that negatively affect our friendships because we’ve learned to see each other as people, not as party affiliations.
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. once said “Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.” Do I think Leftists want people outside of their ideological hivemind dead? Some do, but I hold onto the idea there are some who don’t, and these people still have some ability to reason. Do I think Rightists want the same as the extreme Left? Some do, but I know there are enough out there who don’t. And to everyone else caught in the crossfire, I know there are plenty of people who feel the same way as I do: political violence and retaliation is not the answer.
I just hope there’s enough of us left standing after the eyes get poked out to rebuild our country.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
As the Left goes further Left (i.e. insane), their grasp on reality gets looser than the slots at the world’s least profitable casino. And also the sluts at the aforementioned casinos. Not that I know anything about either, mind you…
This week, the Left found themselves having to explain away crime rates in Washington, DC, after President Donald “the J Stands for Jenius” Trump authorized the federal takeover of Washington, DC’s police department. Whether this was a good idea or a letting-Adam-Kinzinger-teach-you-about-how-to-be-a-man-level bad idea is subject to debate. But it allows us to take a closer look at our nation’s capital and crack a few jokes in the process, so it’s all good on my side!
Washington, DC
What the Left thinks it means – the seat of our government and a well-run and safe city
What it really means – a wretched hive of scum and villainy that makes Mos Eisley look like Amish Country
Washington, DC’s history begins in part with the history of our nation. With the reading, writing, and ratification of the US Constitution, we finally had a seat of government, thanks to Article I, Section 8, Clause 17:
To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;–And
And things went downhill from there.
Wait, that’s not exactly fair. There were a few good years in there, and then things went downhill. Today, the capital city is a mixture of Beverly Hills and Belfast after an IRA bender. Depending on who you ask, crime is either the biggest problem there or not a problem at all.
The latter position is the one the Left is going with, by the way.
So, what is the truth? Let’s just say Belfast after an IRA bender is looking a lot like Club Med at times. According to the Department of Justice under President Brick Tamland, crime in DC is at a 30 year low. Others outside of the Leftist hivemind say DC is a dangerous city. But the ones who are often closest to the problem (i.e. the citizens) give a less-than-rosy picture.
From fatal beatings of cancer patients to violent crime victims not being tended to by the police department to a handful of unsolved homicide cases just this year, it’s clear there is a crime problem in Washington, DC. Even those who think DC is safe admit there are shootings.
Wait. Didn’t Washington, DC, have some of the strictest gun laws in the country? Why, yes, yes they did. So surely the people who are concerned about shootings in DC are wrong, right?
Not according to one of the Left’s favorite gun confiscation…I mean control organizations, Everytown for Gun Safety. Their statistics show DC had the 6th highest rate of gun deaths in the entire country.
But surely, those have to be the worst of the criminal activity there, right? Well, unless you count carjacking, which spiked in DC in 2023 and is still an ongoing problem to this day.
The Left is correct to a point about crime declining since 2023. Where they’re not quite telling the truth is omitting a longer time frame for us to study. If we look at numbers beyond 2023, many crimes skyrocketed while few declined. And when you consider the multitude of victim services organizations designed to help people affected by criminal behavior, the logic that Washington, DC, is safe isn’t logicing.
Most of this can be chalked up to political bullshit. Democrats like Chuck Schumer say the crime situation isn’t that bad. Of course, when you’re behind armed security, it’s easy to feel safe or even think you’re a badass. Then again, Leftists think Eric “Fang Fang’s Bitch” Swalwell is a badass, so take that for what you will.
As bad at all of this is, there’s no way it could get any worse, right? I mean, the only way it could get worse would be if a DC Police commander got accused of fudging the numbers to make them appear better.
Oh, wait…
Even if the allegations prove to be more of a nothingburger than having “Kamala Harris speech writer” on your resume, the fact remains DC citizens aren’t buying the spin because it doesn’t match their lived experience. You know, that thing Leftists like to drag out to justify their bullshit social/racial/gender/sexual orientation/whatever justice ideas they want to turn into a scam…I mean a money laundering…I mean a project.
Anyway, the point is the “lowest crime rate since 2023” is this year’s “the flaming dumpster fire of an economy really isn’t that bad” that worked out so well for Queen Kamala the Appointed and her sidekick Tim “No Balls to the” Walz last year.
And for you Leftists reading this right now, it didn’t work. Sorry you had to hear it from me, but better it from me than out on the streets. Or BlueSky, for that matter.
What the Left has to contend with right now is convincing people living in Washington, DC, that what they’re experiencing isn’t what’s really going on. This is some Matrix-level shit right here. The problem isn’t going to be solved by taking a red or blue pill, but it may have something to do with changing from blue politicians to red politicians. Since 1975, the city has had 7 Democrat Mayors and…no Republican Mayors. And if you want to find the last Republican in any meaningful leadership role in the city, you have to go back to 1961, over 60 years ago.
Now, what conclusions can we draw about the safety of Washington, DC, and who has been running the city constantly since the early 60s? I mean, it’s not like someone has compiled crime statistics from the 60s onward, right?
Oh, wait…
Even if you’re not big on making a direct correlation between the aforementioned factors, you don’t have to do that to see what one-party rule of a city has done as it pertains to quality of life. Every major city has crime, but not every major city is in the top ten of violent crime rates, and our nation’s capital came in at number 7 with a bullet. Or a lot of them as the case may be.
You don’t have to be Stevie Wonder to see it may be time for a change of leadership in Washington, DC. Where that gets complicated is in the nature of the District of Columbia itself. Since it’s not a state (not that the Left hasn’t tried to make it one), there is no state-level government to step in. It goes from city leadership to federal leadership, and right now that federal leadership is under the purview of one…Donald J. Trump.
And hilarity ensues.
And by hilarity, I mean Leftists losing their shit, which can be hilarious, so…samesies, I guess?
To be fair, I’m not that keen on any military or National Guard presence on the streets of any community to uphold order because it can lead to a police state very easily. Or at the very least, cries of a police state from Leftists, which is pretty much a given anytime Trump applies even a little pressure on the Leftist hivemind.
This is why I urge caution to anyone who supports Trump’s actions in Washington, DC. You own what happens, good and bad. If you take out a street gang, do it by the book, not by what you wish would happen to them. If you find and detain illegal immigrants, always assume the world is watching and leave zero wiggle room for the critics to complain
And if people could act like they should all the time, DC wouldn’t have a crime problem that the Left could deny.
Regardless, watch your six because you never know who will be there to catch you in a momentary lapse of reason (or some other Pink Floyd album for that matter).
To the Leftists out there who say Washington, DC, is safe, show us by going into some of the rougher neighborhoods with a camera crew and documenting everything you see via live video. Then, we can see for ourselves.
Of course, that’s as likely as Hunter Biden learning how to paint a still life, so I guess we’re fucked there.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
The previous week or two has been filled with the shrieking of Leftist harpies. Granted this isn’t an unusual occurrence in the Age of Trump 2.0, but this time it had nothing to do with the President.
This week it was all about blue jeans.
Or, more specifically who was wearing them. I’m talking about the current it-girl, Sydney Sweeney, and her ads for American Eagle jeans. The tagline is “Sydney Sweeney has good jeans,” which is a clever play on words. Well, apparently if you think that way, you’ve heard a dog whistle about racism, Nazis, another Nickelback album…you know, all the horrible things wrapped into one denim-covered box.
Since I’ve heard the phrase “dog whistle” more times than Michael Moore goes back for more food at an All-You-Can-Eat Buffet paid for by Bernie Sanders, I figured it might be a good time to update the Lexicon with a new entry.
dog whistle
What the Left thinks it means – subtle coding for extremist views
What it really means – a well-worn phrase that doesn’t mean what the Left thinks it means
When there’s a new term I need to get the details on, I go to where all the hip kids go for definitions, Urban Dictionary. Although there are numerous definitions of the term, they tend to have a common theme: it’s secret code. You know, like the secret codes you would find on the back of the fun cereal boxes, only edgier? I mean, that is unless you were eating Sugar Frosted Fascists cereal.
Anyway, the suggestion is once a certain segment of the population hears these secret messages it encourages the ones in the know to take certain actions to further whatever cause the dog whistle is geared towards. A racist dog whistle might cause some people to burn a cross, scrawl graffiti in certain neighborhoods, or, horror of horrors, vote Republican. A fascist dog whistle might cause some people to hate Jewish people, scrawl graffiti on synagogues, or…
No, wait. That last one tends to lean more Left these days. Never mind.
The key here is the message only gets to certain people. Others won’t be affected by it because they’re not in the target group, not unlike an actual dog whistle. Time to put on my lab coat and pretend to be more of a scientist than Bill Nye.
When you blow into a dog whistle, it emits a high-pitched sound that humans can’t hear, but your pupper Spot can. Or whatever your dog’s name is. Dog whistles don’t discriminate, which is more than I can say for the Democratic National Committee, who seems to discriminate against competent and sane people.
In other words, in order for your dog to respond to a dog whistle, he or she has to hear it in the first place. Which means if Leftists keep calling out all of these dog whistles they hear but no one else can…
The Party of Science, kids!
Seriously, though, the use of metaphorical dog whistles is a tactic of the Left to get you to think of something in certain terms. With the American Eagle jeans ads, the Left wants you to conflate jeans with genes since they sound the same. From there, the Left extrapolates having good jeans is akin to wanting good genes, which leads right into white supremacy and Nazis because, well, those seem to be the only words Leftists know these days.
Meanwhile in the not-bat-shit-insane portion of the world, it’s neither. As with many things Leftists get upset about, you have to read a lot of context and sub-context and sub-sub-context and Voyage-To-the-Bottom-of-the-Sea- context to get anywhere close to what the Left wants us to think/feel about a matter.
And it’s never a positive thing. No matter what, the dog whistles only go in a negative direction. Leftists never talk about a dog whistle that inspires people to buy ice cream when it’s hot. That’s because a) they can’t frame ice cream in racial terms (no, not even vanilla), b) they are joyless fucks, and c) they’re too busy bitching about climate change to enjoy ice cream.
When you look at the world through the Leftist perspective, you’re going to be sad and/or pissed. That means even the most innocuous thing will have evil intent in the Leftist hivemind, even if it’s more imaginary than actual. That’s how George W. Bush and Mitt Romney became Nazis in spite of exhibiting zero fascist tendencies, only to have them become the elder statesmen of the anti-Trump right that even Leftists can stomach. Which makes them Nazi sympathizers when you really think about it.
Sorry, Leftists. You made the rules. I’m just here to apply them evenly.
There’s an old saying: “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” Not only does that make shop class a lot more interesting, but it definitely applies to the Left calling everything from Tesla to American Eagle jeans “Nazi.” And that goes double for the “dog whistles” the Left keeps hearing. The more you have to explain how something is racist, sexist, homophobic, Nazi, etc., the less likely it is to be that.
The audience at my last stand up show can tell you that. That’s the last time I do a gig in a coma ward.
Even if you allow the current sociopolitical climate is ripe for Nazi rhetoric (which I do to an extent), you’d still have a pretty rough task ahead of you trying to explain how the tagline and Sydney Sweeney herself is even close to being literal Nazis. Mainly because they’re not. It’s a clever slogan, and as the advertising and prostitution industries know all too well, sex sells. Sure, I’m sure there is a jean market for pansexual paraplegic albino Alaskan amputees, but if that’s your entire focus, you’re going to lose money faster than Hunter Biden loses his crack. You have to appeal to the larger market, and for now Sydney Sweeney is what brings boys (or at least their mothers and sisters) to the yard.
So, if you’re a Leftist reading this, just drop the dog whistle rhetoric on this one. You’re making yourselves look like fucking idiots, and I say that as one. All this complaining is drawing more attention to the ads and the product and has already caused American Eagle’s stock prices to rise. In other words, the same thing that happened to albums and CDs with the content warning labels from the 1980s. You could have just learned the lesson Tipper Gore did, but nooooooo. You just had to turn an innocuous tagline into a giant rake you keep stepping on and getting smacked in the head. Brilliant fucking work, kids.
I paraphrase Sigmund Freud: sometimes a hot woman in jeans is just a hot woman in jeans.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
This week, I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. Turns out it was just the Taco Bell I had for lunch, but there was still a great disturbance this past week.
“The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” will be ending its run at the end of Colbert’s contract in May 2026, and there will be no more “Late Show.”
If you listened to the Left (and, really, I’d rather have my toenails pulled out by Justin Bieber than do that), you would think democracy itself was being overturned by the Evil Orange Man. And Colbert, to his credit, isn’t telling people otherwise. With the man who would be Late Knight King being on everyone’s lips, what better subject for this week’s Lexicon?
Stephen Colbert
What the Left thinks it means – a comedian and proud champion of the First Amendment being unfairly sacrificed to appease Donald Trump
What it really means – a semi-funny man who rode an anti-Trump shtick into the ground
I first ran across Stephen Colbert during his time on “The Daily Show,” back when it (and he) were funny instead of more depressing than episodes of the current “Saturday Night Live.” But it was when he did “The Colbert Report” that he really shined, at least to me. His dead-on and deadpan imitation of a stereotypical right wing talk show host modeled at least in part on Bill “Papa Bear” O’Reilly entertained a wide audience. Leftists loved it because it poked fun at the Right, and Rightists loved it because they have an actual sense of humor. Everybody was happy.
Then came President Donald Trump.
With the rise of Orange Julius Caesar. the comedy-pretending-to-be-real-journalist crowd had a problem. Their left-leaning audience demanded the hosts skewer Trump at every turn, but the rest of their audience expected to be entertained. So, they decided to lean hard Left and alienate a huge chunk of the audience in the process.
And Leftist say they’re smart?
I had high hopes for “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” when it first aired. My wife and I stayed up to watch his monologue to gauge our interest in the show. Ten minutes in, we looked at each other and said, “Nope.” And we’ve never watched another show. Why? Because it wasn’t fucking funny. It was the entertainment version of whisky dick: it was fun getting to the moment, but it was a no-go when it really mattered.
But the Leftist portion of the audience ate it up. To them, Colbert was the funniest man on late night television, and they barked like trained seals at every anti-Trump barb. There’s only one problem with that: there are only so many times you can tell a joke before it gets tired.
I call it the “Urkel Principle.” When Steve Urkel first appeared on “Family Matters,” it was a smash hit. Then, Urkel was everywhere. Eventually, it stopped being entertaining and became irritating. Before you could say “Did I do that?” people began wondering what they saw in Urkel.
Stephen, buddy…you reached that point years ago.
And I need to point out you were funnier when you pretended to be other people. The faux-conservative talking head, Phil Ken Sebben of “Harvey Birdman, Attorney At Law,” even your appearances on the first American iteration of “Whose Line Is It Anyway?” were leagues funnier than the drizzling shits you were putting out nightly for years. And don’t get me started on the Chernobyl-level radioactive cringefest that is “The Vax-Scene.” If you haven’t seen it, thank God. I have and now I’m in intense therapy, and I’m a trained professional.
A professional what, I’m trying to figure out, but still…
But this latest incarnation of “Stephen Colbert, First Amendment Champion” is a lie built on a lot of omission. First off, late night television is all but dead, save for “Gutfeld!” on Fox News, and that’s a cable show on a half hour before the usual late night fare, kids. Ouch! It’s believed “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert” lost CBS at least $40 million a year. Now, I’m no TV exec, but if a high-rated show drops that kind of dough and strippers and blow aren’t involved, it’s not a good thing.
Then, there’s the $16 million settlement between CBS (the parent company of “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert”) and Donald Trump (the man who is the Leftists’ daddy). This stemmed from “60 Minutes” editing an interview with Queen Kamala the Appointed to make her sound less drunk…err smarter. Trump sued CBS over it, and they decided to settle out of court.
Of course, this pissed off Colbert because…fuck Trump? Which lead him to go off on Paramount and CBS…his employers.
I think most of you see where this is going, but for Colbert and his fans, this made him a liability. And some companies out there still don’t tolerate insubordination, which this was. You could have left well enough alone and not criticized the settlement, but nooooooo. You had to use your big brain to open your big mouth and now you find yourself big fired.
Fucking brilliant.
But instead of admitting his mistake, Colbert and his fans went right to the Blame Trump card. Now, the cancellation of “The Late Show” is a First Amendment crisis and has a chilling and dark tone to it. Many have speculated Trump had Colbert fired in order for the FCC to approve Skydance buying Paramount. On the surface, this makes sense, but in the larger context of Colbert openly criticizing his employers on live TV, it doesn’t.
Not that it’s stopped the Left from lamenting the cancellation. Literally tens and tens of people protested outside the Ed Sullivan Theater to try to save “The Late Show.” And then there’s the thousands of signatures on a petition. Thousands, I tell you!
And not a one of them gets this isn’t a free speech issue.
The First Amendment (the one that allows me to mock Leftists without having the government shut me down) applies to government actions, not the actions of a network who sees a late night host as a financial and internal liability. Paramount may have thought firing Colbert would curry favor with the Trump Administration, but we can’t assume the latter forced the former to fire Colbert. After all, when you make an assumption, you make an ass out of u and mption.
Furthermore, New York State is an at-will employment state, which means any private sector employee can be fired for any reason. Doesn’t even have to be a good or valid reason. You can get shit-canned for whatever reason your employer deems good and/or valid.
You know, like…oh, I don’t know…calling out your parent company on live TV.
As Leftists are so quick to point out when it comes to conservative speech, freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence as a result of that speech. What Colbert did was bad speech (not to mention the worst fucking idea since hiring him to host “The Late Show”), and his firing is a consequence of that speech. And in the marketplace of ideas, alleged jokes where the punchline is always “Trump sucks” get pretty stale.
But if I had to point to one thing that could be the silver bullet in this case, it’s ego. For a long time, late night hosts like Colbert were untouchable. The more they poked Trump, the more people loved them. And under the tenure of President Brick Tamland, they didn’t have to fear retribution. That kind of seeming invulnerability makes you feel untouchable.
But that’s when you’re the most vulnerable.
Stephen Colbert got to ride the “Trump Sucks” gravy train for years and was paid handsomely for it, but the ride’s over. When your contract ends, you will have to find something to do with your time, and I think your time as First Amendment martyr will be more of a temp job. However, in the interest of being gracious in times of distress, I have the perfect job for you.
Go back to pretending to be other people! That’s when you’re funniest!