As a recovering Leftist, I could go on for days about everything I see wrong with the current Left, mainly because they tend to be the same problems I saw when I was among their ranks. They’re not even original enough to recycle their problems!
The one common aspect that flows through all of these issues is arrogance. Regardless of the circumstances, Leftists always think they’re the smartest people in the room and aren’t afraid to let you know it. And they’re obviously better than you because they’re Leftists.
If that logic were any more circular it would give me motion sickness.
And that’s on top of the nausea I get when listening to Leftists expound upon their brilliance with takes worse than letting Lindsey Lohan be your AA sponsor. Just look back at any of the Leftists livestreaming the 2024 election. Down to the one, they all had the same take: Queen Kamala the Appointed was not only going to win, but ran a flawless campaign. Only the worst possible people could possibly vote for Donald Trump!
Yeah, about that.
Not only did Leftists double down on the “everyone else is stupid” rhetoric (which always brings people to the polls…to vote against them), but they also did what they did with climate change “research”: start with the answer and work backwards, ignoring anything that contradicts the desired results. In doing so, the Left has become the personification of the Principal Skinner “No, it’s the children who are wrong” meme.
To this day (see local listings for Leftist insanity in your area) the Left will do anything they can to avoid the one thing they need to do to move forward: admit they were wrong. And to their credit, some Leftists are starting to do just that, whether it be out of a crisis of conscience or a crisis of potential irrelevancy. Most of them, however, are confident it’s everyone else who is to blame for their own fuck-ups.
That’s the thing about egotists. They can never fail; they can only be failed. When they make a mistake, it’s always someone else’s or something else’s fault. And guess who is using this very tactic to explain away the 2024 election debacle and prepare for the 2028 election debacle?
You got it. The same people who gave us Queen Kamala the Appointed.
And it’s not just in politics where the Left claim to be smarter than everyone else. The Leftist smug reaches in to academia, especially science. Climate change predictions that never come true, COVID-19 guidelines based on utter bullshit, people who make Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson the de facto experts on all things science (even when the science is not in their respective backgrounds), the adoption of 72 genders (Spoiler Alert: still just 2), the acceptance that trans women are no different than biological women, and many more anti-science takes from the self-professed “Party of Science.” And if you dare speak out and present data that proves them wrong, you’re a heretic and must be dismissed, censored, maligned, called a conspiracy nut, and so on.
And if these Leftist science fans are proven wrong, that information gets memory-holed faster than Eric Roberts accepts a role. An example of this is evolution. Growing up, all the Leftists (myself included) said man evolved from apes. It was repeated so much that it became the common truth, in spite of the fact there wasn’t much science to back it up. Years later, I was in an AOL chat room (ah, those were the days) and mentioned this. A Leftist then told me no scientist actually believed that and that I was making it up. No matter what sources I used or firsthand direct experience I had to the contrary, it was never enough to satisfy the Leftist. Their orthodoxy had changed, or should I say…evolved.
I’ll see myself out.
But before I go, there is one more thing I have to point out. A lot of the Leftist bravado comes with little-to-no justification. They think they’re smart because they all believe the same things, but if what they believe is utterly stupid, it’s not a sign of brilliance. When you press them on any significant issue, most of the time they wind up looking like an idiot. Or worse yet, Cenk Uygur.
And yet they think this attitude is a real winner. Keep thinking that, kids. Just try to act surprised when this shit blows up in your face. Again.
Category: Science
Party of Science, My Ass!
It wasn’t that long ago that politics and science were kept apart like men’s and women’s prisons. That was until Leftists decided to mix the two for the purposes of ideological advancement.
It started with global warming…ummm climate change…uhhhh climate catastrophes…or whatever the fuck they want to call it this minute. The point is climate science met someone who was willing to bring it into the limelight, but only after it became politics’ bitch. Enter Al “More Boring Than the Color Beige” Gore, a know-nothing know-it-all whose academic accomplishments were more underwhelming than my dating life. Prior to meeting my wife, of course!
Well, looks like I’m spending another night on the couch.
Anyway, Gore brought climate change into the forefront of American consciousness due in part to his book Earth in the Balance. Since I care about you and don’t want to bore you with a lengthy analysis, let me give you a summary.
Global Warming bad. Government good.
Here’s how bad it was. I had essentially a high school level knowledge of science and I was poking holes in ManBearPig’s arguments. But since he sounded like he knew what he was talking about, people believed him. And they still do even though he’s neck-and-neck with Paul Krugman on the idiot who can be the most wrong in modern American history.
But since the advent of the Internet, which Gore took credit for taking the initiative in creating it, surely we’ve become more scientifically literate, right? Not so much. And it’s usually the Left who is advancing the most unscientific bullshit. Here’s a sampling of “the Party of Science” and their greatest shits…I mean hits.
– Trans women can get periods.
– Trans women can get pregnant.
– The COVID-19 vaccine stops the virus.
– Climate change caused the recent eclipse.
– Climate change affects earthquakes.
– Guam could capsize.
– The moon is mostly made of gases.
– There are more than two genders.
– Math is racist.
– Science is racist.
– Physics is racist.
– Trans women athletes have no advantage over biological women.
– Gender-affirming care is health care.
– Abortion is health care.
– Children can choose their gender.
– Gun violence is a health care issue.
– Conservatives are dumber than liberals/Leftists.
I could go on, but you get the idea. Leftists are quick to believe science is on their side…except when it isn’t. When the science proves Leftists are full of shit, Leftists pull out all sorts of excuses. The findings weren’t peer-reviewed. The study was founded by [insert name of Big Something-Or-Other]. Nobody should take these scientists seriously because they defy the established science.
And when the Left can’t use those excuses, they blackball the scientists and memory-hole their findings so no one else can know the truth.
As a fan of science, I’m disgusted by how Leftists have abused science to advance political ends. It’s gotten to the point Leftists have turned what should be an apolitical advancement of knowledge into a cult. And, really, that’s what the Left has done. Just look at this Anthony Fauci devotional candle. That kind of shit doesn’t come from a place of science. It only comes from a place of religious fervor.
And it’s not like Leftists raised incompetent or dishonest people to god-like status in recent history. I mean, aside from Robert Mueller. And Jack Smith. And Fani Willis. And Letitia James. And Adam Schiff. And Nancy Pelosi. And Barack Obama. And Michelle Obama.
On second thought, maybe they do.
By deifying science, Leftists have hindered real science by making it harder for people to accept what they’ve been told from the people Leftists say we need to trust without question. Science works best when that doubt is undercut by the actual process, a little thing the kids like to call the scientific method. As we’ve seen with climate “science” since ManBearPig’s time, the Left has flipped the script. Instead of letting the process confirm or reject the hypothesis, they’ve made it fine to start with the conclusion and work backwards so the science seems to support the conclusion.
But the thing about pseudoscience is it always gets exposed by the sunlight of actual science. All the shit the “Party of Science” told us about COVID-19 has all but been discredited to the point they’re asking for amnesty from their lies. After all, science changes over time, so we should forgive and forget, right?
Nope. Not when you’ve made science your bitch (and not in a good way).
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
When Alabama comes up in the news, it’s usually in relation to a citizen doing something insanely stupid. This week, however, the state made the news for something at least somewhat smart.
Which, of course, made Leftists freak out.
Recently, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled frozen embryos are considered children and subject to the same legal protections as other children under the state’s abortion laws. Of course, Leftists started raising all sorts of objections, ranging from the chilling effect (their words, not mine) on In Vitro Fertilization to the ruling being the result of Donald Trump (surprise surprise) to there not being enough oat milk for the Left’s free range Cheerios. And you know how serious they are when they start putting up stupid memes comparing chicken eggs to embryos to show how “stupid” the ruling was.
The concept of when life begins is subject of a lot of debate and all of it surrounds the embryo. Which means we get to talk about it, and by talk I mean you get to read my semi-informed opinions on the subject!
embryo
What the Left thinks it means – a prospective human
What it really means – the formation of a human baby
So, when does life begin? That depends on who you ask. The people who know a thing or two about human physiology will tell you it begins when there is cellular division, which can’t happen without a spark of life. The people who flunked out of human physiology class and became Leftists say life begins once the fetus exits the birth canal. Up until that point, it’s just a clump of cells.
That’s going to come as a surprise to any test tube babies out there.
Regardless of where you fall on the spectrum of when life begins, there is something perverse about how the Left treats embryos and fetuses for that matter. Instead of seeing them as humans, the Left sees them as objects without agency and, thus, useless to their political agenda except as an accessory to abortion rights. After all, a woman can continue to vote for Leftists, but an embryo can’t.
And as long as the Left continues to support abortion on demand (and contrary to what they say, some of them do), they will have a vested interest in dehumanizing a human life. Make no mistake, kids, an embryo is a human life. I’ve often wanted to ask pro-baby-death…I mean pro-choice advocates what comes out of the womb if it’s not a baby. Is it a basketball? A Shetland Pony? The transmission for a 1956 Buick? I’ve never had the chance, but a man can dream…
Meanwhile back at the main point, the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision makes sense in the context of protecting life. Once you dig past the sensationalist headlines and Leftist mischaracterizations, there is a real issue at stake. One of the lawsuits that lead to the decision involved a hospital patient who tried to take out some of the frozen embryos, got freeze burned, and dropped the embryos, causing them to die. Now, for the pro-baby-death…I mean pro-choice crowd, this is literally the kind of thing they claim to be against: letting women choose what they want to do with their bodies. The couple in this case chose to freeze an embryo, and the patient stripped that away from them.
Not that you would hear that from the Left, mind you. To them, the decision is backwards because…feefees. And to make sure the gay community got a shoutout, Leftists said the decision strips same sex couples of the ability to start a family.
Okay, time out here. Extending the legal protections of life to embryos prevents gay couples from having families? Well…let’s see if I can put this tactfully…how in the Wide World of Fuck does that make any sense? If these same sex couples want IVF to have a child, there’s nothing in the ruling that would prevent that. The same goes for couples looking to do IVF. All the ruling does is make it illegal to kill embryos and set up punishment for those who kill them. That’s it.
It was at this point we realized the Left was full of shit.
But, wait, it gets better! Leftists are now saying they will be freezing embryos and claim them as exemptions on their taxes. The thing is such an action would not only support the pro-life argument, but also the argument people are overtaxed as it is. To put it another way, and I’m speaking for myself here, your terms are acceptable.
In their attempts to look and sound smart on this decision, Leftists have exposed their true nature. They don’t care about embryos at all. They care more about the votes they get from the mothers of those embryos and any self-reflection on whether there’s a human life at stake is strictly optional, but highly discouraged. It’s this lack of consideration that drives me to be more on the pro-life side personally, even though I’m much more libertarian towards others. My personal opinion applies to me, myself, and some guy named Earl.
In the meantime, I think I’ve found a way to get more Leftists on board with protecting embryos. Tell them the embryos self-identify as trans. They’ll fall all over themselves to prevent any of them from dying or look like hypocrites in the process. Either way, the embryos get to live!
And that’s a win for everyone. Especially Earl.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With all of the chaos of world events and the holiday season, it’s easy to miss pretty important things, especially if the federal government gets involved. And especially if Puddin’ Head Joe is involved.
After not wanting to take on rising drug prices because we had other things to spend money on, like a war an ocean away where we don’t have a direct interest in either side winning (but only a complete moron would do tha…nevermind), Puddin’ Head Joe is finally addressing it. By trying to exert federal power to address it. More specifically, Puddin’ Head Joe’s clown car…I mean Administration has put together a plan to use something called “march-in rights.”
Well, that doesn’t sound ominous!
Needless to say, I have questions. And statements. Oh, and jokes!
march-in rights
What the Left thinks it means – a measure that will allow the government to control drug prices if federal funds were used to develop the drugs
What it really means – a way for the Left to screw up worse than they already do
The origin of march-in rights was the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. The TL:DR version: this law set up conditions where some entities outside of the public sector could develop inventions they could patent and monetize while receiving federal funds. But there’s a catch, one Leftists have been pushing to use. Under certain circumstances, the government can “march in” and take over, making changes the outside entities may or may not agree with, but have to abide by because…they took federal funding.
Yep. Completely innocuous. Nothing unsavory could happen.
Hell, even someone from Harvard Medical School says there’s nothing to worry about because it’s just the federal government exercising its rights in an agreement. And since it came from Harvard, we know it’s…probably bullshit.
For those of a small government mindset like your humble correspondent, this is the ultimate nose in the tent situation. If you take federal funds to develop a product, that shouldn’t automatically give the government the authority to come in after the fact and screw shit up on a whim. Or as the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration puts it, “extreme, unjustified, and exploitative of a health or safety need.”
Once a government official who may be confused about the number of genders (spoiler alert: still 2) determines this threshold is met, the federal government can swoop in and allow third parties to make the products, in this case drugs, cheaper. On the surface, this doesn’t sound like a bad idea. We all like to save money, especially if we have multiple high-cost prescriptions. So, why do I get the feeling this isn’t going to wind up being as much of a benefit as we’re being told?
Let’s see…Obamacare, the PATRIOT Act, the EPA, the FDA, the USPS, Amtrak, student loans…
For the Leftists out there, these are all things the government has told us would help us, but wind up being really fucking expensive without much actual benefit. But as long as we print the money to keep them rolling, the Left don’t care!
To the Left, money means power, and the most powerful currency in the country is government money. It’s the carrot, the stick, and the whip. It can entice people to act a certain way, as well as to punish wrongthink. And once you take the federal government’s money, you are its bitch until you can find a way out from under its thumb. And, trust me, they won’t make it easy.
Even if the Puddin’ Head Joe Administration figured out how to get its head out of its ass and make march-in rights work with drug costs, there’s going to be a major shift in contract law, especially with federal contracts. If the government decides what you’ve worked on for years runs afoul of what it thinks the fruits of your labor are worth, march-in rights give them the authority to alter whatever agreement you had. And with the criteria as presented being so vague, it could be for any reason it wants, as long as the government can justify it. I don’t know about you, but that’s fucking scary to me.
And it gets worse! Since the government can print money, it doesn’t have to play by the same laws of economics the rest of us do. Government isn’t in the money-making business. If they experience a loss because one of their ideas go tits up, they’ll print more money to cover the loss. And since they’re the only game in town for a lot of things they do, they don’t have an incentive to keep costs low to attract customers. We need what they provide, so they set the prices and the service level and if you don’t like it, fuck you!
There is another aspect to march-in rights that concerns me greatly. If Puddin’ Head Joe is successful here and the courts don’t uphold any challenges to the application, this opens the door for other government-funded projects to be subject to the whims of bureaucrats. You know, like…oh, let me just pull something out of my ass quick…the Internet? A pretty good case could be made that the Internet as we know it came from the Department of Defense, thus it was funded by the government and anyone else who distributes it can expect a knocking at their chamber doors and told what to do going forward or else.
The Corleone family would have killed for this kind of power. Oh, wait…
The point is we can’t let the possibility of lower drug costs blind us to the reality. If you give the government an inch, they’ll take a few thousand miles and then tax you up the ass for it. March-in rights are the governmental equivalent of a Faustian deal: you’ll almost get what you want but not ever get it completely, and you will pay dearly for it.
Like eating Chipotle, only without botulism.
In the Meme Time
Yet again the Left gives itself another opportunity to be ridiculed. And this is one of the dumbest memes I’ve seen in a while. And like most Leftist memes. There is always that hint of truth to make you question your believes and to fool the mass of useful idiot.
First up is the Truth. Alchemy is not taught alongside of chemistry. Well no shit. This gives the meme that initial credibility to make the rest of it sound correct but it doesn’t when you actually read it with a bit of knowledge and logical thought.
Alchemy isn’t taught alongside of chemistry because alchemy is the precursor to chemistry and other areas of modern science. We generally don’t teach the precursors to something that has a modern version. And certainly not alongside it’s modern version.
Astrology isn’t taught alongside of physics. Well of course not. Astrology has very little to do with physics as a whole. Maybe alongside of astrophysics would be acceptable when there is talk of planetary motion. But nothing else within astrology is related to physics at all. Unless you count metaphysics. It a bad comparison.
But unlike alchemy, astrology itself is still taught in the schools of metaphysics. To make the point more sound it would have been better to state that astrology is not taught alongside of astronomy. That would be accurate but the Left doesn’t like doing things that are logical, accurate, or true.
Also, unlike alchemy, astrology is still used today by millions of people. From the lowest poor and enslaved to the highest leaders of many nations and the wealthiest of people. And they use astrology to make decisions that impact not only themselves but others as well.
Most of our modern sciences had their roots in the 18th or 19th centuries. That’s the 1700s or 1800s for those not paying attention. A good number of these early scientists were priests or monks. Exploring the natural world and the heavens to glorify God and His creation.
So the atheist who states that creationism shouldn’t be taught alongside of biology is half right. Creationism is part of every scientific area of study. It is an integrated and inseparable part of biology and every other science.
I’m sure the author quoted in the meme, if they are indeed even a real person, truly meant to beat down on Creationism vs Evolution. Where Evolution is just a theory. It is not fact or even proven at this point. But Creationism is absolute.
God created the heavens and the earth. God created the vegetation that grows upon it. God created the fish of the seas, the birds of the air, and the beasts of fields and wildlife. And God created man in His own image.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
After 3 years of COVID-19 coverage, we’re starting to come to a new understanding of what happened or could have happened. Of course, it was Russia, Russia, Russia!
One of the early hypotheses about COVID’s origins was it originated in a lab in Wuhan, China, and got out. Of course, the Left said it was bullshit and went about limiting even the illusion of a debate by getting social media companies to censor those who advanced the idea as plausible. Now, the FBI, Department of Energy, and other government entities are starting to say there might be something to the lab leak theory.
Which means we get to talk about it a bit more!
I know you’re out there. I can hear you groaning.
lab leak theory
What the Left thinks it means – a plausible, yet not seriously considered explanation for the spread of COVID-19
What it really means – a prime example of the Left controlling a narrative until it no longer benefits them
Just in case any Interwebs Po-Po are reading this, I must say I am not a doctor, nor should anything I say be considered medical advice. I’m just a guy who paid a little attention in high school science classes and occasionally makes humorous comments about the absurdity of life. Do not take my commentary seriously and don’t take any actions that goes against your legal and moral best interests without checking with your doctor, your religious leader, your family, some guy name Earl, or a tax professional. Hell, talk to them all just to be safe!
Now that we’ve got that out of the way, let’s fuck up a narrative!
As faithful readers know, I like to do mental exercises to see how plausible an idea is. When there are breaks in the logic that can’t be explained away with an equally plausible explanation or after a couple of drinks, I dismiss it.
The lab leak theory? Not as easily dismissed as the Left made it sound.
Before COVID-19 became a household word (mainly because we weren’t supposed to leave the house), lab leaks weren’t uncommon. In fact, it keeps happening over and over again. At this rate, security guards in California are more secure than some labs!
So, this raises the question of why the Left’s tune changed with COVID-19 if they knew lab leaks were fairly common in recent history. It’s simple: President Donald Trump. After seeing Trump beat Hillary Clinton in 2016, the Left had a Paul Bunyon-sized ax to grind and would resort to any means to get rid of Trump.
Even denying the science they claimed to be following from the jump.
And, yes, I’m just as shocked as you are that Leftists would lie so brazenly and expect us not to pay attention.
Yet, in spite of their best efforts to keep it quiet, the Left couldn’t completely drown out the lab leak theory because there was just enough there there to keep it alive. That’s the way all conspiracy theories work: find a kernel of truth (i.e. there is fluoride in our drinking water), expand it a little bit (i.e. the federal government is putting fluoride in our drinking water), and then add to it to absurd lengths (i.e. the federal government is putting fluoride in our drinking water for mind control).
Come to think of it, that sounds a lot like what global warming cultists do…naaaaaaah!
Even so, the lab leak theory never got to the last stage, but the Left made it look like it was there through the media coverage and their government lackeys. But, as so many matters originally dismissed as conspiracy theories these days, the truth started to make its way out and made the conspiracy a reality. Then, the media started to change their tune a bit to lessen the blow by admitting there was merit to the lab leak theory, but it was Trump’s fault it wasn’t taken seriously.
In other words, Leftist default position 1.
But this narrative falls apart because it’s an example of a logical fallacy called poisoning the well. In short, it’s when a party tries to discredit another party’s claims through character assassination rather than an actual argument. In other words, Leftist default position 2. Regardless of how you feel about a source, when he or she tells the truth, it’s the truth and should be recognized as such.
The fact Donald Trump was the most vocal and visible advocate of the lab leak theory made it easier for Leftists to dismiss it, but now the government they voted into office is saying he may be right after all makes it harder to dismiss now. And justifiably so. The possibility of COVID-19 escaping from a Chinese lab isn’t that far-fetched and seemed much more plausible than wet market bat-du-joir theory.
Now, the Left’s entire approach has been rendered more worthless than a Pauly Shore NFT, and they’re scrambling to memory-hole what they said before. The Left hates to be proven wrong on anything, so when it happens, they treat it like most children do: ignore it until it goes away and lie about it throughout. And as any parent will tell you, it doesn’t work.
And it won’t work here. Or it won’t work if we’re willing to stand firm on the side of the truth. Every time a Leftist comes around to accept the lab leak theory (rarer than how Dracula takes his steak tartare, but I’m trying to be optimistic), thank them for joining you on the right side of this issue and welcome them to the truth. And if they don’t run away screaming like they’ve been doused with holy water (or soap and water for that matter), show them the grace they didn’t show you. Not only is it the right thing to do, but it will piss them off to no end because it will be another Leftist idea that is proven wrong.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
To put it mildly, this past week on Capitol Hill was more explosive than a Chipotle restaurant on the Hindenburg. Our favorite member of the Squad, the Socialist Socialite, went on the warpath attacking popular online figure LibsofTikTok for…sharing videos that Leftists upload themselves that ultimately make them look like amoral fuckknuckles. Well, the Socialist Socialite accused LibsofTikTok of inspiring bomb threats at the Boston Children’s Hospital for performing gender affirming surgery on teenagers as young as 15.
The concept of gender affirming surgery is a relatively new one, but it’s one the Left has been trying to protect under any and all circumstances. And since we don’t have a Chinese balloon to hold our attention this week, we might as well discuss it.
gender affirming surgery
What the Left thinks it means – necessary surgery for trans people to feel more like the gender they feel they are
What it really means – Leftists preying on young people being stupid
Being a teenager is rough. Not only are you dealing with hormonal changes with the frequency of a bad news day for Hunter Biden, but you’re caught between being a child and an adult. You’re still very impressionable, but you’re also gaining new responsibilities and expectations that come with maturity. Even under the best of circumstances, being a teenager is Ground Zero for fuck-ups.
Now, imagine being confused about your gender on top of all that. All you want to do is fit in, and being trans is still seen as alternative. As a society, we’re still getting used to the idea of the transgender community, so Mom and Dad may not be able to help you like they might be able to help you with your homework (provided it’s not “New Math”).
It is in this wasteland of physical and emotional distress that the Left operates. And by “operates” I mean “referring impressionable young people to doctors to get operations.” The Left offers not only the environment, but also the simple cure: if you don’t feel like you’re in the right body, it’s okay! Just change clothes and we will support you every step of the way! And if that doesn’t work, there’s surgery so you can look like you feel! It’s perfect!
Except…it’s not.
Gender affirming surgery is a nicer way of saying gender reassignment surgery. Instead of giving potential patients the feeling this surgery is serious and requires a lot of thoughts about the pros and cons, gender affirming surgery sounds lighter, breezier, a lot less taxing on the patient. In other words, the change of one word has taken all the gravitas out of the decision and makes it seem like trying out a new hairdo.
But unlike the hairdo, when the professional starts cutting, your genitals don’t grow back. That shit is permanent. If you regret your decision a few years later, there is no addadictomy that will get your penis back. Ditto with the labia. Once the doctor turns your love canal into a dick, you’re stuck with that decision for the rest of your life.
And remember, kids, Leftists are okay with letting teenagers make this kind of decision. The same teenagers who are going through one of the roughest stretches of life any person has to endure while feeling like they’re alone. How do I know this?
No, I’m not trans, but I was a teenager once. Granted, it was back in the days when we would look at cave drawings to get our local news, but I do remember how I was back then. And I was a fuck-up. It took me several years to “grow” into my body from a mental and emotional perspective, and throwing on a very adult decision on me at that time would have crushed me.
That’s the main issue I have with the Left’s push for gender affirming surgery: it’s not being taken as seriously as it needs to be. But the Left doesn’t care. They see the issue as a way to gain money and power over vulnerable people by offering solutions that have more strings attached than a tampon factory.
Or as Leftists call it, Tuesday.
But here’s where shit really goes sideways. Leftists have a…well, confusing approach to gender. As it turns out, they have as many positions on gender as they have genders, which is to say a metric fuckton. Here are a few of them.
– Gender is a social construct.
– Sex is a biological designation, while gender is more psychological/emotional,
– Gender is assigned at birth.
– Gender is developed over time.
– Sex and gender are different.
– Gender is a spectrum.
Granted, these positions have evolved over time, but I would be remiss if I didn’t point out the contradictions and Marquis de Sade-level of tortured thinking involved here. For now, let’s focus on that last one because it has a direct relationship to gender affirmation.
Some members of the medical community laid out 16 genders in 2022. Others have gone as high as 72, while still others put the number at 81. Go to some online forums (the source of all great thought), and you’re liable to find multiple variations on the same theme, only a lot less grounded in science or, well, reality.
Meanwhile, most of us believe there are…let me check my notes here…two fucking genders. No more, no less. Two. And before the Leftists try to confuse the issue, let me ask a simple question.
If gender is a spectrum, how come the gender affirmation surgery is currently either male-to-female or female-to-male?
This is because God, nature, science, William Shatner, or whatever authority you believe/worship/tolerate have already figured that shit out. Even if you believe sex and gender are different, there are only two choices on the menu, chocolate or vanilla, chicken or fish, Godzilla or Mothra. Leftists can’t bullshit their way out of the simple fact there are only two genders being affirmed with the surgery they say is necessary for trans people to feel like they belong.
But they can bullshit people into thinking they actually care about trans people. What they actually care about is creating more trans people who the Left can use to their ends without improving the trans community one iota. And why is that? Because it’s a lot easier to stoke fear than it is to fix stuff.
Look, I don’t care if an adult gets gender affirming surgery because it’s none of my business. Just don’t be an asshole about it. Now, the operative word in that first sentence is “adult.” If you’re not old enough to vote in an election, you’re too young to elect to get this surgery. In fact, research suggests the human brain doesn’t fully mature until age 25 (please check local listings for brain maturity ages in your area). By then, you have a better idea of who you are as a person, usually because you’ve graduated school or served in the military and have had to make a living.
So, why should we permit gender affirming surgery for someone well below the age when we get our shit together? The short answer is we shouldn’t. The longer answer is we shouldn’t because it’s a recipe for disaster. Leftists are willing to create more victims to advance their own agenda. Even if the patient is emotionally mature at 15, it doesn’t mean he or she has the wherewithal to know whether they’re actually trans or just trying to fit in by dressing up with clothes from a Boy George or Tilda Swinton garage sale.
The Left has one thing right about trans people, though. Trans people, and teenagers in general, need to feel loved and accepted for who they are. Even if you think it odd, there is still a human being underneath, someone who could use a shoulder to cry on or a supportive word. Don’t shut them out because their vision of the world doesn’t match yours. This is how we can make real positive change in this country.
And you don’t have to lop off a dick or pair of tits to do it!
What a Bunch of Gasholes!
As jaded as I’ve become in my later years, there are still some things that make me shake my head in a “Are you fucking kidding me” way. Usually, this comes from the federal government, online culture warriors, or media types, but recently, we had the perfect storm of fuckery, thanks to a federal agency.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission announced it was considering banning natural gas stoves, citing health concerns because of course. Recent peer-reviewed research published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health found an alleged link between the use of gas stoves and childhood asthma, a danger further underscored by co-author Brady Seals of the Rocky Mountain Institute. More on this later.
Once this news became public knowledge, online culture warriors went to work to amplify the CPSC suggestion, which promptly made the media go into “Republicans Pounce” mode. At first, the CPSC tried to deny what the commissioner, Richard Trumka Jr., clearly said, which as we all know makes everything instantly better! Then, Trumka, who made the initial statement “Products that can’t be made safe can be banned,” issued a tweet “clarifying” his statement, saying they weren’t coming after gas stoves after all, and any new regulations would only apply to new products.
It got so bad that CPSC chair Alexander Hoehn-Saric had to issue further clarification, and stated the organization was evaluating the health risks in light of the aforementioned research. Furthermore, Hoehn-Saric said no new regulations were on the table right now.
Meaning, they’re still on the table, but they’re being hidden behind the boiled radishes that nobody wants to eat until they can be reintroduced as though nothing had happened.
And believe me they will.
This is because the Left and its government stooges (but I repeat myself) love to have as much power over us as possible. Controlling how we cook our food, as meaningless as it is in the grand scheme of things, is exactly the kind of shit they’d do if given the chance…or if they take the chance.
But then they fucked up by not only giving away the plot, but by assuming the opponents wouldn’t have receipts. Oh, but they did. Lots of receipts. They even got the Socialist Socialite to defend her use of gas stoves while simultaneously doubling down on the science.
And just what was the science, you ask? Remember the peer-reviewed study I referenced earlier co-authored by Brady Seals? Well, turns out she might have a vested interest in the outcome, given her association with the Rocky Mountain Institute. If you look at the Board of Trustees, you’ll notice a few different themes and some familiar names in Leftist circles. Of course, none of this is ever discussed in the news pieces citing the paper Seals co-authored. After all, why let a little thing like complete transparency get in the way of a good scare piece?
But before you damn me for guilt by association, let me also point out one other tiny problem with the paper: it’s fundamentally flawed. What’s more, the problems raised in Seals’ paper and in the subsequent media stories can be addressed somewhat by using a range hood. So, banning or even adding new regulations for the use of gas stoves isn’t even necessary.
But it is necessary if you’re trying to persuade people to adopt an alternative to what we currently used.
Surely, electric stoves are better for the environment, right? Oooooh, sor-ray. Turns out it takes more energy for an electric stove to do what a gas stove does. And since most of our energy production comes from fossil fuels, that means to use the allegedly safer technology, we have to create more pollution. Brilliant!
Oh, and the best part? Natural gas is cleaner than fossil fuels. Even Leftist eco-nuts (again, I repeat myself) admit that, but they always love to throw in the “but X” to explain why natural gas isn’t the good deal it’s made out to be.
“But the study was peer-reviewed!” some might say. My response is that peer review is only as good as the intellectual rigor used by the peer reviewing it. As we’ve seen, peer review has its flaws and scandals that have tarnished its reputation for being, well, reputable. And the fact it keeps happening year after year after year doesn’t help make the case why a peer reviewed paper is more valid and truthful than a paper a puppy pees on.
But the Left needs people to ignore the problems and “trust the science” because it plays into one of their favorite logical fallacies, appeal to authority. If you are impressed by the credentials and don’t look into the facts, you can be persuaded to adopt an idea as true basely solely on who says it. But titles in and of themselves don’t necessarily mean the person with them should be listened to on a given subject. Remember, Neil deGrasse Tyson says some stupid shit.
But the Left count on people being ignorant enough to listen and believe and not listen and mock mercilessly. However, the online culture warriors unwittingly give the Left ammunition (which is ironic given how the Left hates guns) to dismiss all criticism. Although the critics were mostly right factually, the way they presented the facts made it sound like a crazy conspiracy theory. And remember the media love to do the “Republicans Pounce” thing to cover the Republicans’ response to a Leftist scandal instead of the scandal itself. This rhetorical slight-of-hand takes attention away from the actual story to get people to pay attention to the distraction.
Even so, the culture warriors don’t seem to get this. Oh, they’ll mock/complain about the “Republicans Pounce” tactic, but their passion turns into the distraction the Left needs to escape responsibility for being utter fuck-ups.
Almost.
Once you see the bait and switch the media pull (see the recent scandal related to Puddin’ Head Joe and classified documents for evidence), you can’t unsee it. Like a Micheal Moore porn video. But unlike “Fahrenheit 9-11 Inches” or “Balling for Columbine” you don’t need brain bleach, therapy, and a Men In Black memory wipe to function after witnessing it.
The moral of this story is to be skeptical of a gut reaction given amplification by people with a Paul Bunyon-sized axe to grind, even if you agree with them. A little information can go a long way towards finding the truth, often found in between the extremes. But there are still some pretty good rules of thumb that are easy to follow.
Whenever the Socialist Socialite talks about anything other than, well, herself, believe the exact opposite because she’s a fucking idiot.
Hmmmm…maybe there’s something to the science saying gas stoves affect cognitive ability after all…
We’re At a Tipping Point…Again
It seems like we’re seeing old favorites (The Little Mermaid, The Lord of the Rings, a music scene without Nickelback) being revised for a new generation with little twists to make them seem different (a black Little Mermaid, The Rings of Power, Nickelback putting out another new album). The same can be said for political and social issues.
Former Vice President and Internet creator Al Gore resurfaced, which typically means 6 more years of global climate change talk. And, true to form, he was talking about…global climate change. But instead of pushing a doomsday scenario, he talked about the world reaching “a positive tipping point” thanks in part to the Inflation Reduction Act. I’m not sure what fighting inflation has to do with climate change, but hey, I’m not a biologist.
But I’m also not a dumbass with the memory of a goldfish with ADHD. It wasn’t that long ago that Gore pushed less-optimistic predictions concerning climate change.
It was waaaaaaaay back in 2006 when Gore’s film “An Inconvenient Truth” warned us we had 10 years to avoid “a point of no return” unless we took serious action to combat climate change. Sixteen years later, we’ve blown past that point and are now at a positive tipping point? What changed?
Absolutely nothing.
No new government programs. No societal commitment to green energy. Not even a Prius in every solar-powered garage. Just more of the same that’s been going on since 2006 and before.
In fact, you could count on Captain Hook’s, well, hook the number of times Gore’s predictions have been correct and still have the ability to hail a cab. But that hasn’t stopped the former Vice President from claiming his predictions have come to pass. Which brings us back to the original logical problem: if Gore was right all along, where is the ecological disaster we were promised?
That’s the beauty of Gore’s scam…I mean activism: it doesn’t have an expiration date because science keeps evolving. Back in the 1970s, we were told the world would freeze. Then, in the 1980s and 1990s, the planet was burning up because “the science is better now than it was then.” And in another 10-20 years when this year’s climate change fear porn doesn’t happen, the same asshats who told us the world would be experiencing climate disasters out of Irwin Allen’s fever dreams will tell us the predictions they made today were wrong, but the ones they’re making later are the right ones. Just trust the science!
Provided the science isn’t full of bullshit, that is.
Since I’ve been following the climate change debate in the early 1990s, I’ve noticed the Left has been bastardizing and lionizing science simultaneously. Since science when done properly follows a logical and consistent set of events, Leftists can’t feel their way to a correct answer. So, when the facts don’t fit the narrative, change the facts so they do! The Scientific Method be damned if it doesn’t come up with the results we need to force more government down our throats!
Meanwhile, the Left also makes it impossible to disagree with the science (that they’re rewriting on the fly) by appealing to the human need for community and acceptance within it. How many times have we heard “the science is settled” and just so happens to coincide with what the Left claims is happening? Well, I don’t know how to put this, but…that’s not how science works. Every hypothesis and theory is subject to testing and revision to see if the established conclusion is still valid. In other words, science is rarely, if ever, settled, and anyone who says differently is a fucking idiot.
Or they’re trying to sell you something, namely the “fact” of climate change.
Of course, they have a bit of a problem with their sales pitch: they’ve been wrong. Consistently. I’m talking make-your-local-weather-forecaster-look-like-Nostra-fucking-damas wrong.
With a track record of failure that long and spectacular, even the most ardent climate change worrier would pause to reconsider. Or they would if they were being honest, which the global climate change cult cannot allow for fear of being exposed as the frauds they are. To keep the gravy train of sweet fear porn cash coming, the narrative must be protected, even at the expense of the credibility of those pushing it.
Then again, it can be argued Al Gore has no credibility to lose…
The only tipping point we’re at right now is whether we will continue to believe the climate change bullshit we’ve been fed since the first Earth Day. I’ve long advocated for an honest discussion on the science behind climate change and to call out the bad actors on both sides so we get a clear picture of what we face, if anything at all. That won’t happen in today’s climate (see what I did there?) because there are too many people with a vested interest in maintaining the facade.
Such as a former Vice President whose two movies on the subject have made him a lot of money in spite of the fact he’s not a scientist, nor did he stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Take it from me. Someone truly concerned about rising tides due to climate change doesn’t buy up beachfront property.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If you’ve been to the grocery store or gas station, you’ve noticed things costs a bit more than they used to. And by a bit, I mean you might need a second mortgage to fill up your tank, and that’s if you’re driving a sub-compact hybrid. Good thing there’s not a war involving a major oil producer going on riiiiii…oh wait.
As you might expect, the Left is using the current clusterfuck to promote clean energy alternatives to oil and coal. (At least they believe in recycling, even if it’s limited to talking points.) They make it sound so simple. All we need to do is switch to solar, wind, and other green energy sources and everything will be great! The skies will be cleaner! Global warming will go the way of New Coke! Nickelback will break up!
But is it really as simple as the Left wants us to believe it is? Let’s just say the self-designated “Party of Science” doesn’t quite understand science well enough to give us an accurate picture.
clean energy
What the Left thinks it means – alternate green energy sources that will protect the environment and be a viable replacement for oil and coal
What it really means – all talk, no power
Before we get into the political aspects of clean energy, we need to take a short trip into Science World. The idea of clean energy is based a bit of deception. No matter what fuel source we use, we will have to deal with the byproducts of the inefficiency our technology has built into it, and at no additional cost! With the internal combustion engine, we have exhaust. With coal-burning factories, we have smoke. With hybrid vehicles, we have smug assholes who think they’re better than everyone else. So, not a pretty picture all the way around.
Where the deception comes into play is in describing the byproducts of clean energy sources. Leftists will have us believe there are none, but that’s not strictly true. Solar, wind, and other allegedly clean energy sources have their own issues, namely the environmental impacts required to make them somewhat viable. Wind power requires building giant blades that, surprise surprise, aren’t biodegradable. Manufacturing solar panels require mining for certain minerals that damages the environment. And even before you can generate one Watt of electricity, you may need to figure out how to store it once it’s generated.
Guess what storage batteries are made of, kids.
At best, the clean energy sources are cleaner, but not clean per se. Leftists will argue this is merely semantics, but it’s really not. When you use such a definitive term without modifiers, it makes a concrete impression, complete with all the implications of said impression. When you use a different variation of the same word by adding -er or -est, it changes the impression and, thus, the implication. This works both ways, depending on the context and what is being compared.
Now, we’re getting into English grammar. A few more rabbit trails and we might just be able to recreate your elementary school course load!
With clean energy, the comparison being made is to energy from more traditional sources (i.e. oil and coal) which are considered dirty. The Left wants us to think there is no middle ground, which there is. Even “dirty” energy is getting cleaner. Whether it’s as clean as “clean” energy is a matter of opinion, but the fact the Left wants to leave out this context in favor of the clean/dirty dichotomy should give even the most ardent Greenpeace member with an understanding of grammar reason to second-guess the Left’s honesty.
It won’t, of course.
But it wouldn’t be a Leftist narrative without there being another level of dishonesty. Seems the clean energy advocates don’t like all clean energy sources. I’m referring to nuclear energy. Granted, disposing of nuclear waste is a concern as well as the source of a lot of bad 80s sci-fi/horror films, but it’s still a part of the clean energy family. Then, there are geothermal and hydroelectric which are just as clean, but surprisingly don’t get the love wind and solar do. Ditto with bio-diesel, which brings recycling and environmentalism to whole new levels. So, why are Leftists being so picky when it comes to clean energy?
Money.
Over the past few years, Leftists have put our money where their mouths are in the form of federal subsidies, which translates into…political contributions for Leftists. And that doesn’t even take into consideration any private investments into clean energy companies, which can turn into…more money for Leftists so they can continue to live high on the clean energy hog. After all, it takes a lot of money to buy private jets and stretch limos to attend climate change conferences. Just ask Al Gore. And if you do, bring a lot of energy drinks because he tends to drone on.
If you don’t, and I can’t say as I blame you for not wanting to hang out with ManBearPig, keep in mind the Left’s commitment to clean energy is so full of holes the Swiss Cheese Federation is suing for copyright infringement. And as Vladimir Putin found out recently, when you get the Swiss to eschew neutrality, you done fucked up.