As a recovering Leftist, I have an insight on how the Left thinks (which is usually not at all). Even then, there are times when I shake my head in “what the absolute fuck are you thinking” mode.
This is one of those times.
I present to you a new Leftist group called Unpull the Trigger out of Portland, Oregon. Although they haven’t reached the sheer dumbfuckery of Everytown for Gun Safety or, well, being Hunter Biden, they are quickly rising up the charts with a bullet, or more accurately, with an AR-15. See, Unpull the Trigger has the brilliant idea of buying every black man an AR-15 as a means to make Republicans back gun control.
And it was at this point my head started shaking like a Jello mold on the San Andreas Fault during an 8.9 on the Richter Scale.
Unpull the Trigger
What the Left thinks it means – a Progressive group trying to get Republicans to finally get on board with sensible gun control
What it really means – another idiotic Leftist group based on an erroneous assumption about the Right
So far, not much is known about Unpull the Trigger, mainly because people are too busy laughing at them to do any actual digging. But, from what I’ve been able to find, they are a non-profit anti-gun grift…I mean group, and run by fucking idiots. Their big-brained idea I referenced above is called, and I swear I’m not making this up, “Scare the Racists Straight.”
See what I mean by “what the absolute fuck are you thinking”?
As you might expect, all Leftist anti-gun groups lack one essential piece of information: knowing any actual gun owners who aren’t one of them. Oh, sure, you’ll find a Leftist gun owner who thinks there needs to be stricter laws on the books because fee-fees, but that’s not the same thing as Bubba McMAGAHat, who is a proud gun owner and wouldn’t be caught dead voting for anyone to the left of Pat Buchanan.
Okay, bad example. Let’s go with Ronald Reagan.
This lack of actual knowledge leads to blind spots that lead to dumb decisions like assuming Republicans would be against arming blacks or naming an organization Unpull the Trigger. Once you start digging a bit, the blind spots become so obvious Stevie Wonder can see them.
Although whites make up a significant percentage of gun owners in America, there are still a number of blacks who are according to the Pew Research Center. I’m sure the NRA would appreciate the expected increased membership, but it doesn’t work if your goal is to prevent people from having guns in the first place. But only a complete dipshit would want…oh, the President of Unpull the Trigger wants that.
I have to give them credit, though, for thinking outside the box. Of course, their initiative will wind up the same way the other gun control efforts have: failing worse than Michael Bay doing a “Heidi” remake.
But here’s where shit gets really weird. If we look at the stats (and I do because my social life makes Boo Radley look like a TikTok “star”), there is a significant number of young black men who are in gangs, with a majority of them being over 18. Granted, these numbers are over a decade old, so the percentages may be different, but it’s immaterial to the larger point I’m going to make here. Unpull the Trigger wants to give these gang members AR-15s, which will undoubtedly change the dynamic of gang culture, i.e. allowing people with zero problems offing another person to have access to a weapon Leftists say are only made for killing people.
But not every black man belongs to a gang, so we can’t use that broad brush. However, we can look at how giving every black man a gun might affect Leftist groups like…oh, I don’t know…Black Lives Matter. Surely an organization that wants to defund the police wouldn’t use guns in a violent matter, right?
David Dorn could not be reached for comment.
What about ANTIFA? Although primarily dominated by whites, there are blacks who are either members or sympathetic to the cause. And ANTIFA isn’t above violent methods to achieve their goals or to make a statement.
And Unpull the Trigger wants to arm these assholes.
Oh, but it gets better! Notice Unpull the Trigger wants to arm black men…but not black women. Isn’t that sexist? Are these Leftists assuming black women a) don’t want to be armed, or b) are incapable of using a gun properly? And what about black trans people (as opposed to Shawn King and Rachel Dolezal, who claim to be trans-black)? If gender is a spectrum or a social construct, why are black men the only ones who get the guns? That’s patriarchy, motherfuckers! Not to mention, it’s trans erasure! And, I’m sorry kids, but that means Unpull the Trigger has to be shamed and run out of the public square.
Hey, I didn’t write the rules, but I can’t abide by your obvious hatred, so off you go!
Now, remember when I said earlier this whole concept was based on an erroneous assumption about the Right? Well, hold onto your hats because we’re finally getting to the good part.
The Left assumes the Right is full of racist bigots because the Right tends to oppose Leftist measures to “fight” racism and bigotry. And by extension, Leftists believe gun owners are racists. So, Unpull the Trigger wants to make more black men gun owners and, thus…make them racists?
Remember, kids, I am a trained professional. Do not try to make sense of Leftist logic at home.
And this is where the Leftist blind spot kicks them in the dick. There are racists who are gun owners if only due to the law of averages, but the Venn Diagram of racists and gun owners really doesn’t have a lot of overlap because gun owners care more about their guns than they do about the color of who owns them. I’ve been to a couple of gun shows and have known many gun owners in my 53 years of life. I even have had a gun owner or two in my family. You know what I found in interacting with actual gun owners?
They’re regular people. Well-armed people, I grant you, but regular people. Sure, they have differences as people often do, but when it comes to gun ownership, the only colors that matter to them are those of the guns themselves. Granted, this is anecdotal evidence, but it’s a damn sight better than the pulling ideas out of their asses that Unpull the Trigger is using.
Ultimately, Unpull the Trigger will become a laughingstock like David Hogg, and much for the same reason: they know jack shit about guns and gun owners. Assuming anyone on the Right would freak out about blacks getting AR-15s is not the sign of an intellectual giant, no matter how much the press writes glowing puff pieces about them. At some point, they will fade into the background like all the other gun control groups and struggle to remain relevant.
The only hope for their salvation would be if it came out they were trolling the Left just to see how much support they would get from them. If not, I have a much better solution for Unpull the Trigger. If you really want to stop gun violence, don’t ban guns; ban Leftists from having guns.
Category: Media
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I would never want to be a White House Press Secretary under any circumstances. First, you have to communicate with members of the press, which is like going to Chuck E Cheese during a big toddler birthday party on a good day (and working that same birthday on a bad day). Second, you might have to address a scandal that involves the President and his/her family.
And then, there’s the third reason: I’d have the same title as the current Press Secretary, Karine Jean-Pierre, who makes Jen Psaki look good by comparison. Recently, Jean-Pierre responded to a question about the ongoing legal troubles of Hunter Biden, who I’m lead to believe is related in some way to President Puddin’ Head Joe but I’m waiting until the mainstream media confirms because I’m thorough like that. Apparently, I’m still having to wait since Karine Jean-Pierre referred to Hunter Biden as a “private citizen” and the press hasn’t asked a follow-up question about it.
While we wait on reporters to, you know, do their fucking jobs, let’s talk about private citizens for a bit. Maybe by the time this piece is done, we will be able to confirm the First Crackhead is related to Puddin’ Head Joe.
private citizen
What the Left thinks it means – people who should be kept out of the public spotlight to avoid unnecessary attention
What it really means – how Leftists describe one of their own when he/she/it royally fucks up
The concept of what constitutes a private citizen has been the subject of a lot of good natured debate within First Amendment scholarly circles. And, as is the case with such scholarly debates, nothing’s really come of it except more debate. Fortunately, the law gives us a bit more clarity:
The term “private person” means— (A) any individual who is a citizen or national of the United States; and (B) any corporation, partnership, association, or other legal entity organized or existing under the law of any State, whether for profit or not for profit.
And by “a bit” I mean none at all.
Generally, the rule of thumb is a person who is not well-known would be a private citizen. In short, anybody who still uses Mastodon as a Twitter alternative. Once that person gets a bit of fame or infamy, the protections afforded a private citizen get worn away. Still, even someone well-known in Monkey’s Ass, Wyoming, would not be as well-known in New York City, so venue matters.
Or it used to. Thanks 24/7 news and social media.
Then, there are celebrities. In exchange for fame, fortune, and the occasional appearance on talk shows, they give up expectations of privacy for as long as they’re in the public consciousness. Some, like Dustin “Screech” Diamond, never quite escape. Others, like Dustin “Screech” Diamond’s stunt double, reclaim their privacy by giving up their celebrity.
The thing about celebrity, though, is it can be extended to members of their families. The children of politicians fall into this category, especially if they fuck up in such a way it makes the news. Ask the Bush Twins about that after their underage drinking fiasco. That means, Hunter Biden, if he truly is the offspring of Puddin’ Head Joe, would not qualify as a private citizen.
Wait…nope. Still no mainstream media confirmation of that yet. But hope springs eternal.
So, why would Karine Jean-Pierre lie to us about Hunter Biden being a private citizen? I mean, aside from it’s her job to unconvincingly lie to the White House Press Lapdogs…I mean Corps. The short answer is because she can get away with it. The politically obvious reasons are, well, Hunter Biden is a crackhead embarrassment that makes his dad look even worse than he already does, thus handing Republicans an easier win than any woman against a Leftist man in an arm wrestling contest. The more people connect Hunter to Joe, the harder it is for Hunter to be considered a private citizen.
At its face, the idea is absurd. But these are Leftists we’re dealing with here, so it’s not surprising. The Left wants you to believe Hunter Biden, who has a well-documented history of being a shitty person, somehow isn’t famous enough to be covered as a news story, hence he’s a private citizen. Yet, his art that sells for $500,000 a flop…I mean pop gets people all over the world to buy it, so he logically can’t be a private citizen because he’s known worldwide.
This is why I don’t recommend trying to make sense of Leftist logic without hard liquor.
Now, it’s nice to know Leftists care about protecting private citizens from undue attention. If only they weren’t fucking hypocrites on the subject when it suits their needs. If you’re a Colorado baker who happens to be Christian and refused to bend over (figuratively and literally) to a same-sex couple, you get put on blast so everyone knows how much of an evil no-good right wing homophobe bigot Hitler wannabe you are. If you’re a member of ANTIFA who gets caught on video attacking someone with a bike chain, the Left will go out of their way to hide that information.
Hmmm…if only there were indicators of when the Left will flip-flop on what constitutes a private citizen…oh, wait, there is! They always flip-flop like John Kerry cooking at a beachfront IHOP working straight commission.
As unsurprising as the Left’s duplicity regarding private citizens is, the scary thing is it may be too late to protect private citizens, actual and hypothetical, due to the advent of social media. Any dick with a cell phone can film you doing something horrible (or at least make it look like you did something horrible), post it online, and make you famous before you can say “YouTube Shorts.” Then, you are known as Fat Guy Yells At Burger King Employee While His Shorts Fall Down forever and you have to delete your online presence and start blogging under the name of Thomas…
I’ve said too much.
Anyway, with privacy going the way of anyone not fawning over the Barbie movie, we need to get on the stick to address how this impacts private citizens. Unfortunately, we’re lightyears behind and no one else is thinking about this issue because there’s a Barbie movie, you guys! That, and the fact more people want to be seen on social media like TikTok, so they’re willing to trade their status as private citizens for fame, no matter how temporary it is.
Yep. We’re fucked.
Until such time as society decides to give up on being famous, it’s up to us to keep the idea of a private citizen alive. That means keeping your head down, being aware of your surroundings and the people in it, and not drawing attention to yourselves. Live your life as much off the grid as possible, or if that’s not possible, be smart with what you share. Yes, this will make you massively unhip to the rest of the world, but when you consider what is considered cool these days, it’s no big loss.
On a larger scale, we have to recognize what a private citizen is and why Hunter Biden isn’t one. No matter how the Left tries to spin it, this situation is like a Lindsey Lohan drug story, only with shittier art. And considering Lohan’s acting career, that’s saying a lot!
This just in! Still no mainstream media confirmation Hunter and Puddin’ Head Joe are related. Like the number of licks it takes to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop, the world may never know.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
As a semi-kinda-sorta-famous blogger, people come up to me all the time and ask my opinions of the issues of the day. Most of the time, the questions are “Where are your pants, sir?” but lately another question has crept in there: What is your opinion of the Writers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild – American Federation of Television and Radio Artists strike going on right now?
I’m glad you asked, mainly because there are only so many times you can talk about trans issues, climate change, gun control, and other common Leftist squawking points before you get burnt out. This topic has some political elements to it, so we’re not completely out of my wheelhouse here.
So, by popular demand (and by “popular” I mean because 3 people asked me), here’s the hottest take I can give on the subject.
the WGA/SAG-AFTRA strike
What the Left thinks it means – writers and actors banding together to ensure writers get fair compensation for their work
What it really means – the result of a fucked up system that makes the powerless knuckle under to the powerful
Off the top, I have to say my opinion differs from most of my conservative compatriots, but I have reasons instead of disdain for the actors driving my opinion. But don’t worry, kids. I will show my disdain for the actors later!
I feel sympathy for the striking writers for the most part. As a writer myself, I understand the time and dedication it takes to produce even a remotely good story. Hell, anybody can churn out another Madea movie. Oh, and while we’re here…Tyler Perry, I’m thinking the only reasons you continue to put out the Madea movies is so you can dress in drag. It’s okay, buddy! Dressing in drag is some of the least creepy shit coming out of Hollywood these days!
Bob Iger aside, the writers’ enemies aren’t the studios themselves, but the Hollywood system itself. I’ve seen slasher movies less cutthroat than Hollywood, which is ironic on levels I can’t even begin to comprehend fully. Everybody involved in the entertainment industry there is competing for a spot in the big time, and that leads to a lot of backstabbing, undercutting, and fucking over. The big brains behind the big box office movies aren’t the directors, actors, producers, or even the studios.
It’s the writers. They’re the people with the ideas (albeit bad ideas sometimes), and they’re the ones who try to make sense of a story. And if you’re not high profile enough to print money for shit content, you’re not likely to see your project go from writer’s room to screen without a lot of interference from the Hollywood system. And the movers and shakers of the system know that, so they treat writers like most people treat used chewing gum.
And even if you get your vision on the screen, if it doesn’t make money or garner attention that can be translated into money, you’re not ever going to move up the food chain. You are stuck writing scripts for movies and TV shows that would get cancelled before the opening credits start. Meanwhile, those writers who find themselves within the Hollywood system are making bank for coming up with yet another “Scary Movie” sequel.
That’s where the Writers Guild of America comes in. Or, rather, should.
The WGA is a labor union with presence on both coasts who are supposed to represent the writers. And they do, but they’ve done a shitty job keeping up with the times when it comes to payment for new media. If you look at the Wikipedia link I provided (which, I grant you, is like trusting Hunter Biden to keep an eye on your cocaine while you go to the bathroom), you’ll noticed six strikes since 1960, and all six have dealt with residuals, i.e. getting paid for your work.
Maybe it’s me, but I would think a labor union that represents media writers would be able to, you know, keep up with the changing landscape of media and adjust accordingly.
Just because I’m a curious individual, I dug a bit deeper into who is running WGA West, the union that covers Hollywood. Guess what? The top three officers are part of the Hollywood machine. And if you look at the Board of Directors…same fucking thing! No wonder the rank and file of the WGA have to keep fighting and striking for their money in perpetuity; their union is helping the “enemy.”
This is where I have to part company with the writers out there. Yes, Hollywood is beholden to the labor union system because of their Leftist nature, but they aren’t the only game in Tinsel Town, just the easiest. And when you settle for easy, you don’t control the vertical nor the horizontal. You will get what the system will allow you.
Going off on your own is going to be tougher, but it can be done while retaining your artistic freedom. That’s why I respect people like Tommy Wiseau, Lloyd Kaufman, and Roger Corman. Sure, their work doesn’t match up to a big Hollywood production…with the exception of the “Transformers”… or later “The Fast and the Furious” movies…or recent Marvel movie and TV projects…or the bulk of the Disney “Star Wars” projects…
I take that back. Wiseau, Kaufman, and Corman are much better.
Anyway, the reason I respect these and other independent filmmakers as much as I can is because they prove it can be done outside of the Hollywood system. You might not get more than a credit at the end of the movie and maybe a hot dog out of the deal, but you’re still free of the system that makes it impossible for you to afford a hot dog in Hollyweird.
That brings us to the SAG-AFTRA members marching with the WGA. They’re doing their best to show their solidarity with the writers, as evidenced by their Twitter and Intagram posts. But, the operative word in that previous sentence is “show.” These people get paid to pretend, and right now they’re pretending to be strikers. They don’t go back to a one-room apartment so cramped the cockroaches have hunchbacks. They go back to the homes they purchased with money earned off the word processors of the writers. How many of them are opening their homes to writers? None that I’ve heard so far. Are any of them using their clout to force the machine pay writers better? Of course not! That would make them pariahs in the industry, and they need to keep up their lifestyles, so they’re ultimately on Team Machine.
Sucks to be a struggling WGA member, doesn’t it?
But, I have come with a solution, one I call the Sinatra Solution. Back in the 1950s, Las Vegas was segregated by race, including the talent. After Sammy Davis Jr. was denied a room at the Sands, the Chairman refused to perform there until Davis got a room. It was a huge risk at the time, considering how vital Frank Sinatra was to the elevation of the Las Vegas nightlife and image. But, it paid off because Sinatra was so vital to Las Vegas. He used the leverage he had to make things better for everyone.
If enough actors, producers, big-name writers, or studio heads had the balls to do it, they wouldn’t march on the picket lines and take selfies; they would pull a Sinatra and refuse to work until the writers got paid better. Hollywood would grind to a halt if the Avengers (the actors in the movie series, not the comic book characters) collectively told Disney to fuck themselves until every writer got paid well for their work.
And don’t think it would stop there. Hollywood right now is a house of cards (a house of playing cards, not the TV show of the same name), and one gust of wind from enough powerful people slamming the doors on the corrupt system would cause it to all fall down around them. And as long as the WGA/SAG-AFTRA folks are part of that system, they will be left to pick up what’s left.
Aside from the Sinatra Solution, let me also posit the idea that the WGA should be phased out in favor of a group that doesn’t suck Hollywood’s dick while pretending to be working for the writers. All it takes is enough people to tell the WGA to shove their efforts up their collective asses and there’s a chance they would get the hint.
You know, in a few years after it happened.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Before we begin, I feel obligated to warn you a lot of what I’ll be talking about this week isn’t pleasant and may stir strong emotions in people. If you feel you aren’t down for a serious (well, semi-serious because…me), this may not be the week to read the Lexicon, and I completely understand. I promise to return you to your regularly scheduled chucklefest next week.
This week, child sex trafficking came front and center from a couple of sectors, and the Left had an…interesting response to it. Not “gee that’s fascinating, tell me more” interesting. More of a “what in the Wide World of Fuck are you thinking” interesting.
It started with a new movie, “Sound of Freedom”, that came out on July 4th and has as of this writing a decent box office. The film is based on a true story about a man who went from government agent to warrior in the fight against child sex trafficking. Then, our good fiends…I mean friends in California had Democrat members of their Assembly Public Safety Committee block a proposal that would recriminalize child sex trafficking.
Oh, yeah. It’s about to get serious up in here.
child sex trafficking
What the Left thinks it means – a serious issue that must be dealt with
What it really means – an issue the Left won’t touch any time soon
To put it mildly, sex trafficking is a disturbing practice affecting millions of people worldwide, with a significant number being children. The fact it’s a global issue and yet one that doesn’t seem to get as much attention as climate change, starvation, or the latest Taylor Swift album makes the issue that much more painful to consider.
Yet, the Left are concerned about our children, right? I mean, they’re trying to create an inclusive environment where all races, gender identities, religions, etc. are respected, right? (Offer void with white straight Christian men.) They absolutely want the very best for future generations!
Not so much.
See, Leftists see children as tabula rasa in Garanimals, or if you’d prefer, toddlera rasa. For those of you playing along at home, a tabula rasa is a mental condition where no ideas have been formulated on a person’s mind based on his/her environment. Essentially, a brand new Etch A Sketch. Once this mind is exposed to incoming data from the senses, ideas and personalities form.
This is why Leftists have turned public education into indoctrination factories. As early as they can get them in the door, children’s minds and opinions form, even if they contradict what their parents believe. In other words, Leftists are attempting to create a child’s reality in their own twisted image.
“But Thomas, what does any of this have to do with child sex trafficking?” you might be asking. And if you are, I’m glad you are. If you aren’t, you might already know where I’m going with this, so don’t spoil the ending, okay?
At their cold black hearts, Leftists see children as a commodity, a purely transactional entity, an entry on a ledger. The value of a child is directly related to how closely he or she follows Leftist doctrine or can be used to advance it. Take Greta Thunberg (please). The Left gives zero fucks about her as a person, just as a figurehead they can use to advance their frequent (and even more frequently wrong) hysteria. Once Greta is no longer useful to the Left, she will get jettisoned out the closest air lock never to be catered to again.
By the way, Greta, check with Cindy Sheehan to get an idea of your future with the Left.
When you consider this angle, it makes the Left’s approach to child sex trafficking a little more understandable and a lot more creepy. And by approach, I mean either utter silence or claiming it’s a right wing fantasy.
And this brings us back to the Leftist Flow Chart of Dealing With An Issue.
1. Deny it’s happening.
2. Claim it’s made up by political opponents
3. Admit it’s happening, but it’s not as bad as it’s been made out to be
4. Admit it’s as bad as it’s been made out to be, but it’s not that bad
5. Admit it’s that bad, but it’s grossly misunderstood (i.e. anyone could make that mistake)
6. Paint those who were right all along as hateful bigots while painting the bad actors as victims
For a recent example to illustrate the point, the Hunter Biden cocaine story is heading into Stage 6. Right now, child sex trafficking is between Stage 1 or 2, depending on the outlet. Some outlets like CNN and Rolling Stone who are well into Stage 2, not taking issue with the subject matter “Sound of Freedom” so much as the people connected to it, namely Jim Caviezel. Now, if you haven’t been paying attention to his career, he’s one of those Hollywood actors who didn’t go woke and has been steadfastly conservative since making a name for himself.
Because a guy who played Jesus acting in a film trying to bring attention to child sex trafficking is clearly the bad guy.
Putting that biased and utterly stupid idea aside, we are left with an important question: why doesn’t the Left take child sex trafficking seriously? Granted, the “children as a commodity” perspective gives us a clue, but it’s not the whole answer. For being simple-minded, Leftists motivations to do or not do something tend to be more complex.
Enter our good friend Occam’s Razor. (I liked it so much, I bought the premise!) This idea boils down to simplifying an issue down to its simplest components to reach a conclusion. As faithful readers know, Leftists love money, power, and control, and if they take a position it’s because they think it’s going to work in their favor.
Now, I’m not saying Leftists have a child sex trafficking issue. I mean, it’s not like a big-name Hollywood producer or a famous financier had connections to high profile Leftists or anything, right?
By staying silent or attacking those trying to bring child sex trafficking to the forefront, Leftists keep the money flowing, which helps them maintain control and power. Even with former child stars like Corey Feldman, Elijah Wood, and others coming forward and exposing how Hollywood treats kids, you aren’t going to see too many Leftists coming forward to do anything about it.
Granted, many of the examples I’ve presented are tangentially-related to child sex trafficking, but I don’t think it’s too far of a leap to believe an industry that hides child sex allegations might also have an issue with how they get the children in the first place. Still, we must be fair and assume innocence until guilt can be established. Yet, we cannot rule it out as a possibility because, well, Hollywood is full of scumbags with enough power to make even the weirdest sexual deviancy go away.
Especially if they have friends in high places, like…oh I don’t know…Washington, DC?
Here’s the thing that confuses me, especially now. This issue is a slam dunk for Leftists if they really thought about it (Spoiler Alert: they didn’t). The electorate is hearing multiple news stories about children being groomed by Leftists, so they should be aware of the potential political bonanza they could see (as well as the ability to keep the “groomer” talk down for a while) by just coming out against it publicly. Plus, it would show the Left is willing to work with the Right on important issues regardless of political differences.
But they just can’t bring themselves to do it. After all, if they concede child sex trafficking is an issue, there’s a good chance it would open up further scrutiny and discussion about border security, sex trafficking in general, whether there is a culture of sex trafficking in Leftist strongholds and among Left-leaning groups, and a lot of other shitstorms the Left doesn’t need right now. After all, they’re too busy trying to cover up the daily shitstorms from the Biden Administration.
But, Leftists, staying silent, attacking a film about child sex trafficking, and blocking legislation that makes child sex trafficking illegal aren’t the way to win hearts and minds of the general population. The political losses you perceive pale in comparison to the sheer evil you’re allowing to young people who aren’t even old enough to vote for your shitty politics. You are politically shooting yourselves in the feet with a Gatling gun, all to protect people who might just be at the heart of the problem in the first place.
But look on the bright side. You got the sick pervert vote locked up!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In a move that surprised, well, no one, California Representative Adam Schiff was censured by the US House of Representatives for his role in perpetuating Russiagate. You remember Russiagate, don’t you kids? That investigation into whether Russia helped Donald Trump win the 2016 Presidential election based on evidence flimsier than a balsa wood kitchen table?
Of course, Leftists were furious at the censure, but then coped by saying the censure would guarantee he would win a Senate seat, as well as it made him more powerful now than he was before.
And I wish I were making that last part up.
While Leftists were turning him into Obi Wan Kenobi, Schiff turned this censure into a fundraising effort because reasons. With all of the talk around the Representative, it seems fitting he should be the latest Lexicon entry.
Adam Schiff
What the Left thinks it means – an honest patriot standing up to Donald Trump and his minions
What it really means – a guy so full of shit he could fertilize Death Valley and the Sahara Desert several times over
During the Trump Administration, Adam Schiff went from a barely-there Congressional figure to a major player within Leftist circles, mainly because he had the balls to stand up to Donald Trump. And by balls, I mean eyeballs. And here I thought Mantenna was just an action figure from the She-Ra toy line, but here we are.
To say Schiff had a hate boner for Trump is an understatement of Rosie O’Donnell at an all you can eat buffet proportions. (I used Rosie here in celebration of Pride Month. You’re welcome, LBGTQIDUDIYRSVPUFOABCBBDCCRKISSELO+ community.) If anybody could make up…I mean uncover dirt on Donald Trump’s dealings with Russia, Schiff would be like a bloodhound. A bloodhound with Marty Feldman-like eyes, but a bloodhound nonetheless.
There was one tiny problem, though: the allegations of collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia were bullshit. But Schiff couldn’t let a little thing like a lack of actual proof stop him! After all, if he couldn’t produce the goods, he would be a liar, wouldn’t he? So, he did what any self-respecting Leftist would do and lied some more!
This next part has become the millstone around Schiff’s pencil neck. He claimed there was “ample evidence” of the collusion that was “in plain sight.” Yet, when pressed to provide this evidence, Schiff acted like the dog ate his homework. Even as one of the dipshits running the first Trump impeachment based around stuff even law clerks could argue their way out of in a court of law, Schiff maintained he had the proof.
As of this writing, no such proof has ever been presented.
And this is the asshat the Left is calling an honest broker? Granted, it’s the same kind of defense they put up for Eric “I Slept With a Chinese Spy and All I Got Was Removed From House Committees” Swalwell.
Which brings us to an interesting problem for the Left: calling out liars. After years of demanding people call out Trump for lying (which is a 25/8 job because 24/7 just ain’t enough), the Left are suddenly okay with someone lying to Congress about the former President. Remember, kids, if Leftists didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have standards at all…not that you’d notice, mind you. As long as their team lies about the right people (i.e. anyone to the right of Ivan “I Have To Go” Trotsky), it’s for the right reasons. But lie about the wrong people (i.e. them) and Leftists will go at you like you abused their pet cat. They’ll throw the Library of Congress at you!
And most modern Republicans sit there and take it because they’re playing by a different set of rules, rules that neuter them politically to the point they’re so afraid of offending the electorate (who really aren’t paying that much attention to the details) that they will allow Leftists to lie about them constantly. How do you think Media Matters stays in business? I mean aside from generous donations from our buddy Uncle George.
It’s in this environment where Schiff is at his best. When he can lie with impunity because he’s on the winning side of Congressional elections, he goes full Super Sayan. But when he’s on the wrong end of the election cycle, he cries like a little boy who skinned his knee riding his bike. Seems he doesn’t like it when the shit he flings gets flung back at him.
It’s also in this environment where Leftists are the most vulnerable when it comes to Schiff. By going all in on his allegations, it becomes a “ride or die” situation. Either they keep pushing the narrative even after there are more holes in it than a Swiss cheese factory in the crossfire of a gang war, or they throw Schiff to the wolves (which are mostly toothless lapdogs in bed with the Left, but the point remains the same). Since Schiff has built up such a cult of personality around himself, Leftists fear the backlash from the latter, so they go all in on Schiffamania.
Here’s where the vulnerability lies. All it takes is for House Republicans to call Schiff’s bluff. (A pipe dream these days, but a man can dream.) Demand he produce the evidence he claims to have. If he’s telling the truth and didn’t disclose this information during the January 6th Commission, he knowingly withheld evidence from an active investigation. If he’s lying (a safer bet), then he lied to Congress and the nation. And not just on the floor of the House, mind you. He repeated the lie on social media, on TV shows, and in print. Even though a Representative can’t be arrested for lying while conducting official duties, I’m gonna go out on a limb and say being on CNN isn’t really a Congressional duty. If anything, it might be considered torture.
In either case, Schiff is fucked, and not in the good way.
Not that the Left cares, mind you. They want Donald Trump punished by any means necessary, even if it undermines the rule of law in the process. But it’s this single-mindedness that will eventually backfire. At some point, the Left will not be able to control the narrative nor the legislative might to enforce it, which opens them up to a universe of hurt. Adam Schiff’s censure sets the precedent for it, and can be used against other Leftists, like Swalwell, Ilhan Omar, the Socialist Socialite, and plenty of others.
And the best part? The Left made it all possible through their political circle jerk to take down Donald Trump. Good job, Leftists!
As for Adam Schiff, he’s basically a fourth string quarterback put in the game because the first three QBs are all injured, the cheerleaders don’t know how to run the offense, and the coach hates furries, so the mascot’s out of the running. But since he’s the guy, his team has to support him and cheer every inch gained as though it were a touchdown. Then, after he fumbles, throws interceptions, and gets sacked more often than Idaho potatoes, he becomes more of a liability than an asset. Democrats should distance themselves from Schiff sooner rather than later.
And Schiff? He’s 3/5 of an asset, and the -et don’t count.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
This week, we delve into the world of comedy, for which some readers are saying “Finally!” Fortunately for you, it’s not my jokes this time.
Instead, we can look to Twitter and Leftists for the humor. Seems our favorite Socialist Socialite got her collectivist panties in a wad over a Twitter account parodying her. And as one might expect of someone dumber than a bag of hammers, the Socialist Socialite tweeted out a warning advising fans of the account. Because as we all know the best way to make a problem go away is to draw as much attention to it as humanly possible.
Needless to say, this didn’t work well. Which prompted fans of the Socialist Socialite to call for Twitter to ban the parody account, AOCpress. This gives us the perfect opening to discuss the wonders of parody.
parody
What the Left thinks it means – a potentially dangerous threat to valid communication between politicians and their constituents
What it really means – a way to mock the Left protected by the First Amendment
Our good friends at Dictionary.com provide a great definition of “parody” that will serve us nicely:
1. a humorous or satirical imitation of a serious piece of literature or writing: his hilarious parody of Hamlet’s soliloquy.
2. the genre of literary composition represented by such imitations.
3. a burlesque imitation of a musical composition.
4. any humorous, satirical, or burlesque imitation, as of a person, event, etc.
If you’re an observant reader, and I know you are, you’ll notice a pattern. If you’re not or a Leftist (which means you’re not observant by definition), the pattern is humor. Leftists love to tell us they’re funnier than conservatives, but yet they’re redefining humor to take the funny out of comedy and turn it into more of a monologue where the pseudo-comedian throws out Leftist talking points in lieu of jokes. But don’t worry. There are plenty of set-ups, chief of which being the audience being set up that they’ll be entertained, but there are a decided lack of straight men. Or women.
And as a side note, Dave Chappelle was right about Hannah Gadsby.
Anyway, the Left doesn’t have a mirth monopoly by any stretch. Granted, much of the humor they provide is unintentional (i.e. Puddin’ Head Joe and Kamala Harris going off script), but it’s humor nonetheless. Where the Right has the edge in humor is online, especially in the area of satire. With The Onion being as funny as its namesake these days, sites like The Babylon Bee and any number of Twitter handles have picked up the slack by…actually being funny. What a concept!
And a good amount of the time, it’s the Left getting skewered with the Right’s humor. Guess how that goes over with the Left.
As with other things that bug them and that they can’t control, Leftists moan more than a porn actress being paid by the orgasm. And where do they moan the most? On Twitter! After all, if you complain on Twitter about something and tag Elon Musk it actually does something important!
Guess how that turned out. And I’m guessing you’re seeing a pattern here.
See, Leftists hate being mocked, especially when it’s in the form of parody because it’s not just mocking them, but it’s mocking them directly.
Remember the young girl who did a parody of the Socialist Socialite? Well, she got death threats from Leftists. You know, the tolerate, loving, and totes free speech defending Left? (Yeah, I laughed hard when I typed that, too.)
That should tell you two things. First, Leftists take themselves way too seriously. And second, the jokes about their lack of a sense of humor are based in fact. Oh, and Leftists are shitty people when they get butthurt at being the butt of jokes. (See what I did there?)
But here’s the thing. Parody is protected under the First Amendment as free speech. And what’s even more delicious? It’s because of Larry Flynt, a loud and proud Leftist. (On a side note, how do Leftist feminists reconcile Flynt’s treatment and attitudes towards women with feminist ideology? Oh, right, they fucking ignore it.)
Of course, that doesn’t stop Leftists from making the case the AOCpress account should be removed because they claim it’s imitating the Socialist Socialist. Hoo boy. So much to unpack here, but let’s start with the easy one.
Twitter rules are quite clear on parody accounts being allowed so long as they clearly proclaim they are parody accounts. And Leftists should remember this, especially after many of them did Elon Musk parodies on their Twitter accounts.
In other words, it’s perfectly fine when they do it, but no one else can do it, especially to them.
Now, there’s the whole imitation angle. What AOCpress posts may look and sound like what the Socialist Socialite says, but at no time does the account owner say he/she is AOC. Just because it’s indistinguishable from what the Socialist Socialite really says doesn’t mean it’s someone trying to impersonate her. Although, it might be evidence the Twitter account wants to date her…
Now, for the best part of all of this. There are people getting fooled by the AOCpress account, even with the parody tag on it. How fucking stupid do you have to be to get fooled by a parody account that labels itself as parody? I know social media is a “Tweet first, ask questions later” environment, but fuck! You have to be a special kind of window licker to get fooled.
Which says a lot about the people who stan for the Socialist Socialist, doesn’t it?
The proper response to parody isn’t to try to get it removed from the marketplace of ideas, but rather to take it for what it is: an attempt at humor. You don’t have to get it for it to be a joke, and you don’t have to laugh for it to be protected. That’s why Dane Cook has never been arrested for doing his stand-up (although an argument could be made for him being arrested for impersonating a stand-up comedian, but that’s a blog post for another time). That means Leftists are going to have to put up with a lot more mocking from people, myself included.
And that’s going to piss off Leftists.
The AOCpress account exposes how thin-skinned Leftists can be, while at the same time showing how gullible and stupid they can be when they put their minds to it. Like it or not, though, parody is as valid a Socialist Socialite speech, only parody is intentionally funny.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
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!
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.