Remember the War on Drugs started in the 1980s? I do. My brain still looks like a sunny-side up egg, but that’s not important right now. What is important is America has fought a halfhearted war against drugs and we’ve been worse for wear because of it.
That is until Donald Trump got reelected. Now, we’re putting firepower behind the War on Drugs with the Department of War taking the lead on turning alleged drug trafficking boats into the world’s most addictive flotsam. And, right on cue, the Left has a problem with it. But this week, their efforts went up a notch with several Leftists calling what the President and Secretary of War Pete “Let’s Tap That Keg” Hegseth authorized war crimes.
The accusation is pretty heavy, so let me try to make fun of it!
war crimes
What the Left thinks it means – serious and inexcusable crimes committed by the current Administration
What it really means – the next phase of the Left’s attempt to undermine the military under Trump
The concept of war crimes is rooted in the Geneva Convention (not nearly as fun as a Shriner’s convention, but I digress), and it outlines how enemy soldiers and prisoners of war are to be treated. Keep in mind this is in the aftermath of World War II, where POWs were treated worse than a British substitute teacher in Belfast, so the spirit of the document has a foundation in humane treatment.And should someone or some country decide not to play by these rules, they can get charged with war crimes by the International Criminal Court.
This is a great thing when we’re dealing with warring nations, but what about different types of wars where there aren’t warring countries? Welllll…that’s where things get a little murky, at least for me. When you consider the bulk of the military actions America has undertaken since the Geneva Convention have not been officially declared wars, it brings up the question of whether the concept of war crimes even applies here. That’s where the concept is subject to interpretation, or misinterpretation as the case may be.
Enter our good fiends…I mean friends on the Left. As I’ve noted before, the Left loves it when things are unclear because they can then inject their perceptions into the discussion, even if they’re batshit crazy. Then, by operating in the uncertainty, they can control the narrative, which is always their endgame.
This begs the question of whether blowing up suspected drug runner boats constitutes violations of the Geneva Convention. The simple answer as I see it is not really, and it’s predicated on the fact Congress hasn’t declared war yet. That gives me a chance to talk about Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution again because it’s there that we find who can declare war, and surprise surprise, it’s Congress!
If the Founding Fathers saw the absolute nozzleheads running Congress these days, they might have changed their minds, but that’s a post for another time.
Anyway, the point remains Congress didn’t declare war, as is often the case with Presidents who want to appear like a military leader against foes far weaker than we are. For everything else, there’s hookers and blow…or diplomacy. You know, whichever works.
Further complicating matters (because of-fucking-course) is the War Powers Resolution of 1973. This law requires the President to report to Congress whenever there’s the potential for hostilities to break out, but also allows the President to deploy troops for 60 days without a Congressional vote. So, I’m going to go out on a limb and say the President told Congress (and the rest of the country for that matter) that the Department of War was going to play Battleship: The Narco-Terrorist Edition well before any attacks began, so that requirement was met a looooooong time ago. And I’m gonna say blowing up shit constitutes hostilities.
And now for the best part? The President doesn’t have to have Congress do shit for 60 days, which oddly enough is roughly twice as many days as they’re in session. Granted, I’m guessing things might take a little longer than 60 days because we’re dealing with drug cartels here, but with the current makeup of Congress, a vote would most likely be a mere formality.
So, that’s why the Left went all in on the war crimes idea. If they can convince enough people what the President is doing violates the Geneva Convention, they can sway public opinion to…make drug dealers look like poor victims, I guess? (Hey, nobody said Leftists were smart.)
However, to fully understand the strategy, we need to look back at a recent video from six members of Congress who were either in the military or in the intelligence community. In that video (and in subsequent appeals in the media to take the heat off), they made sure to say the military didn’t have to obey illegal orders. Since then, not a one of the fucknuggets in the video or the Leftists who support the current thing could point to an illegal order the President issued, so that should be the end of it, right?
Yeahhhh, not so much.
The point of the video wasn’t to back up their claims so much as it was to instill doubt in the leadership from the President on down. Now, add in the war crimes element.
For those of you who need help connecting the dots, by suggesting Trump and Hegseth are guilty of war crimes, it reinforces the idea they’re issuing illegal orders, potentially eroding the confidence in the military and political leadership. And that leads to trouble up and down the ranks. If our military has to second-guess every order given, it prevents them from fulfilling their primary objectives: kill the enemy, break their shit, or a combination of the two.
Yeah. Pretty fucking dirty.
I’m sure there are going to be more legal arguments and laws bandied about on both sides of the war crimes question, but ultimately the heart of the matter is the Left is going to have a hard time explaining why blowing up drug boats and killing drug smugglers is a bad thing. And that’s not even getting into whether the actions constitute a war crime.
Not that it will stop Leftists from saying it or further suggesting the military should disobey the President. Even if the war crimes thing gains any traction, Leftists are still going to have to deal with being on the same side of an issue as drug cartels because…Orange Man Bad.
Again, no one ever said Leftists were smart.
Category: Social Issues
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I take a week off and the shit hits the fan. Guess that means I’d better keep churning these babies out weekly from here on out!
The news of the week centered around one man, Jeffrey Epstein. More to the point, it was centered around who he knew and what these people knew about the deceased piece of dog shit. (No offense to canine excrement.) President Donald Trump promised to release the Epstein Files, then took it back, then put it back on the table, and has now signed the Epstein Files Transparency Act ordering the Attorney General and Department of Justice to make as much of the documentation available to the public without jeopardizing the victims or any ongoing investigations.
After all the Left’s grandstanding about it, you would think they’d be happy about it. And you’d be wrong.
As much as I hate to delve into this toxic landfill of shitty people (and Jeffrey Epstein), I have to dip my toe into it. And I promise to make it not hurt that much.
Jeffrey Epstein
What the Left thinks it means – a notorious pedophile with ties to Republicans
What the Right thinks it means – a notorious pedophile with ties to Democrats
What it really means – a notorious pedophile being used as a political football to hide a much larger issue
If it wasn’t clear from my opening, I think Jeffrey Epstein was not even a passable human being, let alone good. What he was convicted of doing and suspected of doing to young girls and women is reprehensible, and anyone who even exchanged emails or text messages with him gets my side-eye.
So, why are so many Democrats and Republicans connected to him? Because he had leverage.
Politics and wealth go hand in hand more than anti-Tesla protesters making a human chain stuck together with Super Glue and industrial strength duct tape. The well-heeled and the well-dressed have walked the halls of power for as long as I’ve been alive, but it wasn’t always so blatant. Back in the old days, if you wanted to buy a politicians you had the common decency to do it under the table. Well, since that option isn’t available because of all the prostitutes doing their business under said table, it’s more overt.
That’s where Jeffrey Epstein comes into play. By being wealthy, he caught the eye of a lot of politicians on both sides of the aisle. As time went on, he amassed a lot of friends…and information that he could use as a bargaining chip to sway opinions in his favor. Money is a universal language, and Epstein was a master linguist.
But remember he played with both sides, if you’ll pardon the expression, which made him useful to both sides, if only to satisfy mutual carnal sins. This is why the Left and the Right are desperately trying to push him onto the other side. With that much infamy, Epstein becomes the proverbial millstone around the necks of the party faithful in Washington, DC.
Even with that Bizarro World tug-o-war going on, we’re starting to get a glimpse into just how deep the corruption goes in the world of the rich and powerful.
And Robin Leach didn’t prepare us for any of this shit!
It’s one thing to buy off politicians, which is done with the frequency of Jasmine Crockett saying something stupid. It’s another thing to ply them with the kind of sick shit Epstein did. And then to have people so connected in politics, tech, business, and media be involved? It’s enough to break the system, nuke it from orbit (it’s the only way to be sure), burn the remains, and shoot it into the heart of the Sun.
And you know what? I’m good with that.
It was Epstein’s death that started a domino effect where the curtain got thrown open and we got to see just what the powerful do when nobody outside of their sick clique is watching. And the fact many of these cretins get to act like they’re above the rest of us while they engage in shit Caligula would say, “Whoa! Throttle back on the perversion, kids!” You know, if he weren’t dead and all.
As sickening as what we know happened is, we’re still not sure of the extent of it, and I’m not sure anybody in government wants us to find out. After all, there are a lot of DC denizens who made their way to Epstein Island for fantasies Mr. Roarke and Tattoo could never provide. At least not without rezoning the entire island.
Of course, the lack of hard facts with regards to the Epstein files is exactly what those in power want if only to hide their sins a little longer until they can no longer hide. Then, we’ll see a whole lotta mea culpas feigning ignorance as well as contrition. They won’t be sorry for what they did; they’ll be sorry they got caught, and that’s not gonna work for me, kids. What these men and women did under the veil of secrecy should be exposed and all legal avenues to sue them into oblivion should be implemented.
That means the party’s over, scumbags.
And speaking of scumbags, let’s talk about the politicians for a minute. Those who committed crimes against young girls and women should be expelled from office, don’t care which party they represent. Kick them out, make them lawyer up, and watch them get taken to the cleaners.
Now, for the rest of Congress. You’re playing political games with the lives of people who were truly innocent victims here. It’s a little late to start caring about them now, especially after you’ve done everything you can to discredit or diminish what steps are being taken. Democrats, you can claim Trump is going to order the Epstein Files be redacted so much stock in black Sharpie pens is going to skyrocket, but we don’t know that yet. What we do know is you gave zero fucks about this situation until you could pin it on Trump. Your “Party of Women” card has been declined. Take all the fucking seats.
And as for Republicans, you gave zero fucks about this until it could be pinned on Bill Clinton. Granted, Bill being a horndog at any given time is a sure thing, but you don’t get a pass for not fighting for the Epstein Files to be released on Day 1 of Trump’s first Presidency. You didn’t help, either, so take all the fucking seats, too. And try not to sit next to the Democrats. They’re a little touchy about being on a known pedophile’s speed dial.
And having him at fundraisers.
And having ties to one of the most popular Democrat Presidents ever.
And, you know, just generally being bitchy most of the time.
Regardless, I will not speak ill of the dead any more than I have here. Jeffrey Epstein is gone and the world is better for it. Now, comes the healing and what I hope will be a course correction on the moral side.
His victims deserve it.
Thanks, But No Thanksgiving
One of the things that always got me in trouble in real life or online was noticing things. Patterns, dots that could be connected but weren’t, the mannerisms of different people of varying political ideologies, how my first serious online girlfriend was a 50 year old man named Frank with body hair that would make Bigfoot look like Vin Diesel.
I still wonder how Frank is doing…
Meanwhile back at the main point, I noticed something recently that I should have seen coming a couple of years ago. (Hey, I said I noticed things, not that I notice them in a timely fashion!) It seems Americans go right from Halloween to Christmas, skipping over Thanksgiving in the process. At first, it sneaked under my radar because I still recognize Thanksgiving as a holiday, but in recent years society has treated Thanksgiving like Pluto in that for a while it wasn’t recognized as legit. But Pluto was always real to me, dammit, and so is Thanksgiving.
This is where things get interesting if your into that kind of thing. I did some thinking about the why, mainly because there weren’t any good football games on yet. What I landed on was the nature of the three holidays in question: Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas.
Halloween used to be about the fun of dressing up in costumes, some with uncomfortable masks, roaming the streets looking for houses to go trick-or-treating. Within the past decade or so, Halloween has really changed into a consumer-driven affair (with a side trip into Slutty Costume Land) where everyone has to have the best candy or costume to participate.
Similarly, Christmas had a different tone in the past than it does now. What was once a time to celebrate with family and friends with killer egg nog made with rum so strong it could double as paint thinner turned into a holiday where you hear “buy buy buy” more than N’Sync on an infinite loop. This is when stores, malls, gallerias, and other sources of yuletide commerce make most of their money. And if you’re not getting the hottest gifts for the people you love, you’re just a horrible human being.
Then, there’s Thanksgiving. Aside from being a professional and college football mecca, people just don’t pay as much attention to it as they used to, mainly because there’s no real commercialization that can be done. We’re already invested in buying turkey, ham, side dishes, and pies, so there’s no real kickback, as it were. Nothing that would make us want to go out and spend a lot of money.
And therein lies the problem.
It’s not that Thanksgiving is a bad holiday by any means. It’s just not as sexy, literally and figuratively. Thanksgiving is a time for self-reflection, appreciation for what we have, and a joy that can’t be bought with a gift receipt. The only real consumption going on involves food.
Which brings me to another discovery: we’re no longer a capitalist society. That may come as a shock to the capitalists out there, but we’ve moved into a consumerist society. Leftists will tell us this is an outgrowth of capitalism, but these are the same nozzleheads who consider Robert Reich and Paul Krugman respected economists, so I wouldn’t put much stock in their economic knowledge.
Capitalism has some rules to it, some of them right out of social Darwinism, others out of Ayn Rand’s objectivism. But one rule that is central is not to fuck with your potential customers in such a way they are unable or unwilling to buy your stuff. That’s the moral core of capitalism. After all, if your products or services cause people to die, not only is it going to reduce your customer base, but it’s going to cause bad PR and lead to the ruin of your business.
Where consumerism deviates from that is the companies will continue to nickel and dime you wherever they can, and people don’t consider that to be a deal-breaker. We’ve seen this (and by “we’ve” I mean “I’ve” because I really don’t have a life) in video games through microtransactions. Basically, microtransactions are way games convince people to buy their way to a chance at success or a cooler look, which totally looks good on a resume.
Although it’s easy to dismiss microtransactions as something only gamer nerds have to deal with, it’s gotten into the automotive market, where car companies are now selling subscriptions for automatic start capability. And that’s in addition to such things like OnStar and SiriusXM that are nice to have, but not absolutely necessary to drive a vehicle. And I say that as a guy who likes to listen to music and comedy while driving and being able to call someone if I get into an accident. More so the former than the latter, mind you.
And you know what? There are dipshits willing to pay for it! As much of a capitalist as I am, I draw the line at making people pay for stuff that should be standard issue or that will give people advantages others wouldn’t have. But there are people who only see the ends justifying the means and leave it at that. As long as they get ahead, fuck everyone else, right?
Yeah, about that. With this shift in morality (if you can call it that anymore), there’s been a corresponding shift in egotism, which makes the consumerism side of this matter even more troubling. When your self image is tied up in material goods or even the perception of material wealth, you’re willing to do anything to do better than anyone else so you get that dopamine hit.
Which explains the push for the best Halloween candy and costumes and the biggest, brightest Christmas tree and outdoor decorations, and the hottest gifts for under the tree. But you know one holiday that has nothing to do with any of those ego-driven pursuits?
Arbor Day. But also Thanksgiving.
When it comes to egotists, anything that doesn’t directly serve the “me” in a wide enough scale is not worth pursuing. And Thanksgiving tends to be more of an intimate affair, one where people think of others in some fashion or another either when feeding family, friends, or even the less fortunate. Aside from food selfies, there’s not a lot of traction to be gained on social media. In short, there’s nothing in it for them to think of someone else’s needs during this time of year.
And that’s what’s driving the “War on Thanksgiving.” Hey…that could be the name of a movement, maybe one that could generate millions of dollars.
Nah. Nobody would buy into it.
Anyway, the point I’m getting at (finally!) is we shouldn’t skip Thanksgiving to get an early jump on Christmas. I mean, stores are already prepping for Christmas while Halloween items are just hitting the shelves, so they’ve got that covered. Not to mention, they’re just putting out swimwear and putting all their winter coats on the clearance racks.
Outside of the stores, we can do a bit more about not letting consumerism take over our lives. Yes, I know we want to get out loved ones the best we can afford, but it doesn’t mean we have to overlook a major American holiday to get a head start on, well, consuming something other than turkey and dressing. There’s a reason Thanksgiving exists, people! For one, it’s to start political discussions so you can weed out your Christmas card lists. But more importantly, it’s to take a moment to appreciate humanity as a whole. Even if you don’t buy the Americanized story of Thanksgiving, just enjoy the food, fellowship, and football. We can all act like civil human beings for one day, right?
Well, considering I’m still banned from Boston Market for an incident my attorney has advised me not to explain, most of us can.
A Shutdown Shakedown
Finally, our long national nightmare is over! With 8 Senate Democrats bravely crossing the aisle, the Senate approved the Continuing Resolution to end the longest government shutdown in history! Now, things can get back to normal.
Yeah…about that…
Although President Trump has been at the helm of the two longest government shutdowns in our history, this one feels a little different because of how people reacted to it and undercut the idea Leftists have been spinning for years about SNAP and the Affordable Care Act.
Let’s start with a shallow deep-dive into governance philosophy. Many people, including your humble correspondent, believe government is there to do the things we can’t do ourselves. You know, like having a standing army to fight off threats to the country or build/maintain roads. (Although, on that last one, I’m starting to think the people couldn’t do any worse of a job. My street has a pothole so big you would travel to the Land of the Lost if you fell in. #oldmanreference) The Left’s approach to governance is the government can and should do whatever you can handle yourself because you’re not as hip and enlightened as they are.
This coming from the people who said President Brick Tamland was fine and Queen Kamala the Appointed ran a flawless campaign, I might add.
To the Left, anything that prevents the wheels of bureaucracy from running is dangerous. And it is…to them. Leftists are so self-centered in the halls of power that they feel nothing can get done without them, and their drones who stagger through said walls like Hunter Biden looking for crack follow along. Even the non-essential workers feel a sense of entitlement.
You know what they call non-essential employees in the corporate world? Dead weight.
So, when Senate Republicans refused to budge, Leftists started creating horror stories about children and old people starving, people dying without healthcare, planes falling out of the sky, and just about anything else their PR department could come up with to scare us into submission.
But then something happened, something so ironically out of left field that Leftists couldn’t have seen it coming. Entities other than the federal government stepped up and helped with food donations. Restaurants, grocery stores, churches, local charities, and regular people saw a need and fulfilled it. Sure, to the more cynical among us, it makes for good press and temporary feel-good moments, but it tells me there is still a section of our population who are willing to help their neighbors when the opportunity arises.
And that was something the compassionate Left didn’t think about, mainly because of their approach to governance. They can’t conceive of anything good coming from a source outside of Big Brother…I mean government, let alone having those good deeds actually working. Even when states started offering SNAP funds (which is only one step down from Leftist governance), it made the federal government being shut down less of a major issue to most of the country. No rioting, no looting (save for the dumbasses who told the world their “secret life hack” of stealing from WalMart via TikTok), not a lot of civil unrest. Just people going about their days and helping out where they could.
If that isn’t a sign we may need to rethink SNAP, I don’t know what is.
As far as the ACA is concerned, I’ve already delved into it in greater detail, so I’ll give you the Readers Digest condensed version. The ACA didn’t make health care affordable in the least for most Americans, and lead to more money going to insurance companies than to actually helping Americans. To be fair, the ACA did help Americans, just the really wealthy ones who already had great healthcare. Anybody with an even cursory understanding of economics could tell you getting the government involved in anything will cause prices to skyrocket because the government will always be able to print more money to fund whatever it is they want.
Naturally, that’s why Leftists were shocked by the actual numbers.
Instead of putting up their hands and saying “we were wrong about the ACA,” they continued to throw money at it and laid a trap for Republicans by voting in a deadline to keep the ACA subsidies flowing. That is, of course, assuming they thought Republicans would take back the House and Senate at some point, but that’s a hard sell for me because Leftists suck at long-term strategy. Even a party picnic for Leftists requires at least 6 months of negotiations, planning, and cultural sensitivity training just to have 3 people show up just to say they’re vegan and they only eat free range cage free vegetables.
At this point, I honestly think Congressional Democrats planned on being in power when the ACA subsidies ran out, so they could force them into any budget they wanted. Yeah, how’d that work out for ya?
As far as all of the other disasters Leftists predicted would happen with a government shutdown, few if any of them came to pass. Planes didn’t fall out of the sky, TSA agents were still doing their jobs, the military was still at the ready, national park personnel weren’t as necessary as advertised, and generally not much changed. That’s the lesson we should all take here: the federal government isn’t as necessary as the Left makes it out to be. When you let yourself become a ward of the state by ideological means, you owe everything to the state, which means whenever the state wants to take something away from you for one reason or another, they can do it, and you won’t have a say in the matter.
In other words, when you get “free stuff,” you lose some of your freedom.
Just the way the Left likes it.
But not everyone who gets “free stuff” is as enamored with the idea of being a government drone. SNAP, for example, is used to help low income families, including members of our military and the elderly. It’s hard to be so completely cold-hearted to think they deserve to be without food or at the very least assistance.
Then, there are those who use SNAP so they don’t have to spend their own money to get food. I know that’s technically the idea behind it, but it’s not the way it’s being practiced by many people in this country. The way I know this is by watching people post TikTok videos complaining about having to spend their own money on food or complaining about the food they’re getting from non-governmental sources. I have a pretty good troll detector built in from being on the Internet almost since it became a thing, so I don’t think they’re making shit up; they’re legit upset at what they’re getting or not getting as the case may be.
The Left would have you believe the latter group is just as entitled to SNAP as the former. They’re not on the same level, in my opinion. Those who need SNAP the most are the ones who are making an effort to contribute to society in some way. I have no problem with them. It’s when you choose to get SNAP and you can work, but choose not to, that it crosses the line for me. SNAP isn’t meant to be a side hustle. It’s there to help you buy food so you can live, and given how well some of you SNAP scammers live, you can afford to shell out a little for your own sustenance.
That may be the best part of the government shutdown. People exposing how much they scam the government (i.e. us) so they can live better than us. You know, just like Congress. But unlike Congress, we might be able to do something about SNAP fraud, and we have you TikTokers to thank for it.
So, with the government starting back up again in the near future, they can finally get past partisan squabbling and get back to doing their real jobs: ignoring the will of the people and passing shitty legislation.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Well, the pre-midterm election results didn’t turn out so well for the Republicans, with Democrats making strides in several contests. One area of note is in the Big Apple, where voters overwhelmingly elected Zohran Mamdani to be the next Mayor. He ran as a democratic socialist, which is just a fancy term for a regular socialist who wants Democrat donations.
Anyway, this has sparked a discussion about socialism in general. The Left is crowing about how Mamdani represents a new way forward while simultaneously telling us we don’t know enough about socialism to appreciate it.
Challenge accepted.
socialism
What the Left thinks it means – a viable socioeconomic/political model that works time and time again
What it really means – an non-viable socioeconomic/political model that doesn’t work more often than it works
The most important place to start in this discussion is what socialism actually means. You know, aside from the definition I posed above. Our good friends at Dictionary.com define socialism thus:
1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
More on this third definition later.
What Leftists say is a key feature of socialism is fairness. Everything is fair, everyone contributes to the overall good, and everything is rainbows, unicorns, and unlimited trips to the salad bar with any meal purchase. Socialism’s PR has gotten so good these days, around two-thirds of Democrats see it in a positive light.
And I can understand the appeal, especially with younger voters. The current capitalist system doesn’t seem to work for anyone but the wealthy, leaving many people out in the cold. People having to take on multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water. Everything’s getting more expensive. Surely there has to be a better way forward.
There is, but socialism ain’t it, kids.
Let’s take a trip in the Wayback Machine to 1620 when the Pilgrims were making their way to what would be called America. Because there were squabbles among the Pilgrims, leaders created a little thing the kids like to call the Mayflower Compact. Although it sounded good on paper and advocated for such things as self-governance and no religious oppression, it was by and large a socialist approach.
And, surprise surprise, it didn’t work! Who could have seen this coming? (I mean aside from anyone who stayed awake in junior high American history from back in my day.)
If you think that was the only time we dabbled in socialism, there’s also Social Security. What started out with good intentions became a socialist nightmare that is running out of money, partially because of demographics, and partially because Congress has been taking money out of it for decades and not returning it.
Then, there’s public education, care through the VA, SNAP, public defenders, and other not-so-goods and service that fall under the socialist umbrella. Even when you have moderately successful concepts like public roads and fire departments, they still aren’t quite socialist because they serve a common good, while socialism just claims to serve. You can count on the remaining hand of the world’s worst shop teacher the number of socialist programs and ideas that have worked to everyone’s satisfaction.
That may be one of the underlying reasons younger voters are okay with socialism: they haven’t been taught shit about the failures of socialism, even on our shores. Sure, they learned all about how the Pilgrims were evil white colonizers who slaughtered Native Americans, but they just didn’t get to the part where they tried their hand at an early version of socialism and got their asses handed to them. But in the defense of public education, they just don’t have time to cover how fucked up socialism is because they have to make room for a deep dive into how Taylor Swift is such a cultural icon.
And I only wish I were half-kidding.
Educational standards going down like a starlet trying to get a movie deal from Harvey Weinstein aside, I don’t think capitalism has made a good enough argument to the past couple of generations, mainly because capitalists know it’s the best thing going today. Even so, it might not hurt to advertise a bit more. I mean, it’s easy to be a socialist when you have the latest iPhone, drink Starbucks on the regular, and make money posting TikTok videos. When the rubber meets the road, though, it’s a lot harder to live in a socialist society.
That’s because one of the dirty little secrets of socialism is it only works as long as they have OPM: Other People’s Money. It’s a pretty simple concept, really. If you’re spending your own money, you tend to be more frugal. If you’re spending someone else’s money, the sky’s the limit, baby!
Socialism works on the same principle. As long as they can take money from the wealthy, things can work. But then it runs into a brick wall called human nature. Even if you’re the most progressive guy or gal (gender count: still 2) out there, at some point you’re going to be confronted with the real possibility you’re putting in more than you’re getting back. Then, you have to make a value judgment: stay within the current system, or high-tail it out of there.
Then, socialism runs into the potential for income erosion. As the wealthier members of a socialist society die off or move on, that not only eliminates their protection money…I mean contributions, it puts more pressure on the next lowest wealth base. Then, if/when they’re off the books, it goes down to the next lowest wealth base.
Blather. Rinse. Repeat.
What most people who subscribe to socialism don’t understand is as long as their is wealth erosion, there will come a time when they’re the wealthiest because everyone else will be poorer than they are. Funny how that works out, isn’t it?
Even if you attempt to dress up socialism by giving it a cool name like Logan or democratic socialism, you’re still going to run into the same problems. And the reason is the same: socialism fucking sucks, man! Although if it were named Logan, it would be cool while it sucked.
Now, remember earlier when I mentioned the third definition of socialism? If not, read up a bit and you’ll see it.
Anyway, it’s interesting to note Marxists used socialism as a lead-in to communism. The way I describe it is this: socialism is communism on pot, and communism is socialism on PCP. By nature, I’ve found socialists by and large aren’t that into violence. You’ll get the occasional socialist with a bike lock and a bad attitude and tries to start something, but most of them are pretty calm. Their hearts are in the right place, as are their facial features because they’re not getting knocked the fuck out.
Communists, on the other hand…well, they’re not exactly the “live and let live” type. Violence is a part of their political brand. I can’t say for certain how many socialists would be okay with communism, but I have to think the number is higher than 1, especially when you consider the Left’s hunger for control. That’s pretty much right out of the communist playbook (or manifesto if you will). It’s almost as if communists knew socialism would fail and further steps would need to be taken.
You know, like cracking skulls and oppression?
I know I’ve shit on socialism worse than if I’d had a Triple Bean Burrito with a side order of salmonella from Taco Bell that’s been sitting in a van in the Mojave Desert since the last time Bon Jovi made a good album (which is never), but I don’t shit on socialists themselves very much. To me, they’re misguided, but have hearts of gold. Or at least would have hearts of gold until their socialist buddies found out and accused them of hoarding wealth.
Having said that, I can’t bring myself to join their ideology because I know too much. I’ve seen the fall of the Soviet Union, the crumbling of the Warsaw Pact countries, and the rise of a more egocentric approach to life in general, none of which bode well for socialism working in this country. Yet, I still wish Zohran Mamdani the best of luck in his attempt to create a socialistic utopia in a city weirder than I am. If he succeeds, I’ll admit freely. If he fails, I’ll mock him endlessly.
Let’s just say I’m betting the under on his success rate.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Remember the movie “Groundhog Day”? If not, it’s a great comedy worth a watch. The general idea is a TV weatherman repeats the same day over and over again until he figures out how to get things right.
Well, Bill Murray may have to take a back seat to…the Affordable Care Act, aka Obamacare. In the midst of the government shutdown (which I am blissfully enjoying for the most part for the sheer comedy of Leftists trying to blame Republicans for not funding ACA subsidies for millions of Americans. Leftists tell us unless these subsidies are funded as part of the Continuing Resolution in the Senate, prices will skyrocket, making healthcare unaffordable.
We’ll get back to that in a bit.
Anyway, with the ACA/Obamacare coming back into the news, I figured we’d be good to reminisce about the days when men were men and women were men and everybody was really confused.
Affordable Care Act/Obamacare
What the Left thinks it means – a vital piece of legislation that made healthcare affordable for millions
What it really means – an unsustainable piece of legislation that Leftists sabotaged from the jump
The year was 2010 and President Barack Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law. Although it was greeted by fanfare and the efforts of Democrats (since zero Republicans voted for it). In fact, Leftists were quick to point out how former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney had a similar, if not exact duplicate, of the ACA in his state. Given what we know now about Romneycare and the mush of a man behind it, that’s not exactly something to brag about.
Regardless, Leftists were aglow with pride at getting it passed. Finally, the federal government, the purveyor of all that is good and right in the world, would be able to ensure people got health insurance by…let me read my notes…taking away options they didn’t like. That’s right, kids, Big Brother was watching you make health insurance decisions and removed your ability to choose what you wanted in favor of policies they demanded…I mean recommended through their new portal.
On a side note, why didn’t the Mafia sue the Obama Administration for copyright infringement over the Obamacare shakedown? Not that I would impugn the good name of the members of our waste management communities across this great land of ours, mind you.
Meanwhile as I attempt to avoid having my legs broken, the results of Obamacare weren’t exactly that great. In fact, it lead to spikes in costs, worse deductibles, and overall worse care. They couldn’t even get the Obamacare website to work right at launch! They made the demands to get people to use the website to sign up for their mandatory health insurance plans, but the website couldn’t meet the demand.
If that’s not the perfect metaphor for how fucked up Obamacare is, I don’t know what would be…except for the current situation where Leftists are demanding the Affordable Care Act’s subsidies be funded…so the policies through the Affordable Care Act could be…affordable?
The thing about the Affordable Care Act is that it was never meant to be affordable, per se, but rather it was an attempt to fuck things up to the point people would start demanding single-payer healthcare. And as we’ve seen with VA hospitals, it tends to wind up with worse care. Oh, and the misappropriation of funds! Oh, and the sexual harassment and sexual assault allegations! Oh, and the absurd wait times on their suicide hotline.
You know, I seem to remember a lot of Democrats getting their collectivist panties in a bunch over this…but I’m sure these little issues won’t dissuade anyone from jumping on the single-payer bandwagon!
And, really, that was the point of the Affordable Care Act. Well, that, and forcing the federal government into a business it knew less about than the Car Czar did with automobiles. Not that insurance companies minded, mind you. Thanks to the ACA, they made out like bandits. Or would have if they raised their ethical standards by a factor of, oh, five gazillion.
And as we’ve seen with military spending, whenever the federal government subsidize anything, costs are no object because the government can just print more money. Or pretend to for the purposes of tricking people into thinking we’re operating under a budget. But that’s a blog post for another time…
Meanwhile back at the main point, we’ve dumped money into Obamacare for the better part of 15 years, and I’ll be the first to admit it’s helped some people. The larger issue is it didn’t help enough people to make it worthwhile. The very fact they had to keep funding it through the American Rescue Plan and the Inflation Reduction Act should make even Stevie Wonder see it wasn’t economically feasible to keep the printing presses rolling.
Guess who controlled both houses of Congress after these two pieces of dog shit legislation got to the Auto Pen of President Brick Tamland? The Democrats.
And they were the ones who put the impending deadline into play.
Yeah, but it’s the Republicans who are the assholes.
Much more concerning to your humble correspondent than the ever-expanding fiscal sinkhole that is Obamacare is the fact it was coerced capitalism. As a free market and libertarian kinda guy, I don’t want to be forced to buy a product or service from anyone. Car and house insurance I get, but it’s not like the federal government is going to penalize me for not having either. That comes with the next bill after Logan or Kayleigh runs into the back of a school bus at 20 miles per hour because they just had to post something on TikTok, or after they cause hundreds of thousands of dollars in property damage because they wanted to see if they could turn their last Taco Bell meal into an ass flamethrower.
The Affordable Care Act, on the other hand, forced you to have health insurance. On the surface, it’s not that bad an idea, until you realize you would get penalized for not carrying any health insurance. And that’s even on top of the fact you may not even be able to afford the policies the federal government offered you. For many Americans, the choice came down to either paying the fine or paying for insurance.
Yeah, that’s not gonna work for me, brother.
The beauty of the free market system is you get to choose your path. If you decide to insure your car with Uncle Swifty’s Fly-By-Night Insurance Company and Used Tire Lot, it was your choice. A fucking stupid choice, but a choice nonetheless. Through the Affordable Care Act, your choices were limited by what they allowed you to have and what they believed you should pay for the coverage offered. Sure, you might have to go without luxuries like food and shelter, but at least you have health insurance, right?
Yeah, about that. As much shit as insurance companies get for denying claims, there’s one entity that is the absolute worst at it. I’m talking definite double digit denials here, kids. That entity, the lowest of the low, the scummiest of the scummy, the heartlessest of the heartless?
The federal government.
The same group of assholes who brought you Obamacare.
But don’t worry! The insurance companies who worked with the ACA had a plan! The Obama Administration had these things called Risk Corridors built into the Affordable Care Act to cover losses incurred due to the Affordable Care Act. Thank God they were spared, right?
Perhaps the most lasting legacy of the ACA is how the Left managed to conflate healthcare with health insurance, like they’re doing right now. The two aren’t the same and shouldn’t be considered to be so under any rational conditions.
Let me explain the difference this way. You cut your finger making dinner. Healthcare involves putting a bandage on the cut. Health insurance involves who is paying for the bandage and the care. You can get the former without involving the latter, as last time I checked, doctors like money. In fact, if you can pay for your treatment directly, many doctors appreciate that because it saves them the headache of dealing with insurance providers and determining what is covered and what isn’t.
That’s not to say Obamacare isn’t complete dog shit. Mostly, yes, but not completely. I’m referring to the concept of preexisting conditions. Prior to the ACA, insurance providers could deny coverage for any reason if they could link it back to something you already head. Obamacare put the kibosh on that practice, but it’s still being done. If I could make one suggestion to anyone trying to build the better health insurance mousetrap, it would be to keep a tighter lid on preexisting conditions, or at least make it eligible for appeal from a non-governmental and non-insurance company entity.
Failing that, go on social media and tell your stories about how your health insurance provider fucked you over over preexisting condition bullshit unrelated to the malady in question. Their CEOs will pay attention to that shit because it affects their bottom lines. And by bottom lines, I mean their salaries. Enough bad press and they might not be able to afford to spend the holidays in Aruba.
As far as the subsidies are concerned, the very fact they exist to make the Affordable Care Act affordable is a sign of its utter failure. If I had my druthers (and people knew what druthers were in the first place), I would reset the board to the way things were prior to the ACA being signed into law. It may be too late for some health insurance providers who were able to provide low cost policies to people, but at the very least we could try to revitalize that market and make health insurance affordable again.
Say, that could be a slogan of some kind…nahhhhh. No one would ever take up the Make Anything Great Again idea with any degree of success.
I’m Not Wild About Harry
To my Leftist readers out there, we need to have a talk about one of your current figureheads in the media, Harry Sisson. Let me start with a question.
Why in the wide world of fuck are you letting him be a spokesperson?
I treated him like a joke up until this point, but after watching his bizarre performance on a recent episode of “Piers Morgan Uncensored,” I have some questions. But make no mistake, I will still treat him like a joke because, dammit, I care!
The most obvious question is who exactly is he influencing. It’s no secret the Left has more issues with men than a stripper convention, and after the 2024 election, they figured out saying “men suck” isn’t exactly the best way to attract potential male voters.
And Harry Sisson is the best you folks could come up with?
What’s more intriguing is Harry isn’t the only influencer in the Leftist hivemind. Let’s list off a few.
JoJoFromJerz – a woman whose claim to fame is using Instagram filters to make her look semi-attractive and swearing more than Andrew Dice Clay with Tourettes
Meidas Touch – a reliable Leftist outpost whose track record for telling the truth makes the Weekly World News look like a more accurate Nostradamus
BrooklynDadDefiant – a guy who looks like he could might be able to kick your ass, but would be more likely to play you an original folk rock song on his acoustic guitar
Hassan Piker – Cenk’s Nephew. ‘Nuff said.
Destiny – a guy whose takes are entertaining because of how manic and wrong they are
Occupy Democrats – Meidas Touch with a bigger budget
Olivia Julianna – a woman charged with attracting young men back to the Left, but may not be able to attract flies to shit
And many, many more.
So, back to the original question, who is Harry Sisson influencing? Judging from the 2024 election results, not too many. More realistically, though, he’s not influencing anyone; he’s preaching to the same choir everyone else in the Leftist influencer-sphere is. And it’s already pretty saturated as it is.
Let’s go over what Harry has going for him. He’s a young man, not all that unattractive, and looks like a little boy. That automatically makes him attractive to older women and some gay men, who would want to take him in and take care of him. Oh, and possibly fuck him.
His boyish looks would make him attractive to younger women and younger gay men, so they would fantasize about fucking him.
But if he’s the face of the movement to get men back to voting for Leftists, he sucks at his job. He’s the type of guy who dudebros would automatically know he doesn’t lift, bro. Working class men would ignore him because he comes from a wealthy family and looks like he would have trouble lifting a nail, let alone a hammer. He’s terminally online, but whines whenever anyone calls him out on anything or mocks him in any way. (By the way, hi, Harry!)
In short, he’s not helping, and he hasn’t helped since he came onto the scene during the Brick Tamland Administration where he ran interference for the President, saying he was prepared to be President for another four years. You know, right before they dumped the President for Queen Kamala the Appointed.
But he was totally fine, guys. We can trust Harry over what we saw.
A total lack of awareness notwithstanding, Harry is proving to be more of a liability than a help. His insane mugging for the camera after being proven wrong about high profile elected Democrats calling Donald Trump a Nazi showed he was either woefully ignorant of what the party he represents constantly does, tweaking out on some primo shit and not sharing, or both. At this point, it’s hard to tell. In fact, he might be a secret Trump/Vance plant designed to make the Left look stupider than it already does just to see how many fellow Leftists follow suit. And if the plant is the right answer, Trump/Vance is getting an amazing return on investment out of Harry.
For the people/party paying him? Not so much.
Personally, I would scrap whomever decided social media influencers could replace actually talking to people outside of their hivemind because it’s a damn stupid idea. That’s how you get out of touch with the people you claim to be looking out for, and that’s where the Left find themselves today due in large part to people like Harry Sisson.
Unless you’re into man-babies who look like they’re taking mushrooms for the very first time online, that is.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In case you missed it (and why wouldn’t you since you all have lives), there was another No Kings march recently. And I am happy to report the only kings left standing after this march are of the burger variety.
In the aftermath of the march, the Left announced a new initiative called Mass Blackout. First off, it should be Mass African-Americanout. Second, the idea behind it is to stick it to The Man, with The Man being megacorporations.
And now it’s my turn to stick it to the Mass Blackout.
Mass Blackout
What the Left thinks it means – not spending any money during the busiest shopping days of the year
What it really means – another example of Leftists not knowing shit about economics
Financial boycotts have been a thing for a while now, whether it be conservatives boycotting national department store chains for daring to put a same-sex couple in an advertisement or Leftists boycotting Chik-fil-A for allegedly being anti-gay. Their effectiveness varies. Sometimes the boycotts work, other times they drive more business towards the business being boycotted. But at the end of the day, the same force drives decisions one way or the other.
You guessed it. Frank Stallone.
Actually, that force is money. (Sorry, Frank.) Money is a powerful motivator and can make the difference between keeping the doors open and going the way of many government employees these days. With everything, there is a risk/reward argument to be had. Sure, it may feel good to tell the local HOA board member wine mom Karen to go fuck a duck when she’s making unreasonable demands, but that comes at a cost that other HOA board member wine mom Karens will rally around the Alpha Karen and counterattack.
It would be at this point I would use the taser, but that’s just me.
The same principle is at work with the Mass Blackout. (The power of money, not the taser thing. That last one’s just my go-to.) The goal is to make the big stores feel the pinch as the Left goes shopping at smaller local vendors. On the surface, it’s a great way to stick it to the big box chain stores that dominate the retail landscape. Brilliant plan, right?
Yeah, that’s where the Leftists don’t know shit about economics comes into play.
Whether you shop of Mom and Pop’s Cheese Store or Best Buy, the money is still going into the economy. You’re just directing where the money goes. Even if you follow the directives of Mass Blackout and not buying goods or services between November 25 and December 2 from any major retailers, you’re buying something before and after, which means…it’s not really a boycott, per se. That’s practicing capitalism, boys and girls!
Also, there’s the problem of scarcity to consider. For example, I’m sure your local coffee shop has some great blends that you love, but if you’re craving a Starbucks Pumpkin Spice Latte (known as the Money Maker by 4 out of 5 dentists), you won’t be able to get it at your local coffee shop. They may have something close, but it won’t be exactly the same.
What the Left doesn’t understand is local stores and services may not have the exact thing consumers are looking for, so they will either have to order online or stand in line for the big chain distributors to fulfill those special orders. It pains me to say it, but the local businesses can’t always keep up. The sentiment behind the Mass Blackout is there, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired.
Then, there’s the unintended consequences of the Mass Blackout, namely the impact it may have on seasonal workers. Granted, Target and WalMart aren’t going to go under if they lose a few dollars here and there, but what about the employees? These are the ones who always get hurt during boycotts because they’re not the megacorporations; they’re the cogs in the machine.
I remember Leftists going after BP after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. They decided they would stop buying BP gasoline to stick it to the big wigs. What they didn’t know or bother to find out is many BP stations are employee-owned, meaning the boycotts hurt them the most.
Way to stick it to The Man, Leftists. That time, you stuck it to the working man.
Just like you’re doing here.
The problem (among many) is the Left doesn’t seem to care that much about the people they claim to represent. Working class people have been suffering for a decade or two because the Left values self-worth over the common good. To them, it’s always about putting up a good front and feeling good about what they’re doing (or “doing” as the case may be because their actions tend to be more ethereal than practical). And if people they don’t like or know get hurt in the process, so be it! Their fee-fees must be protected at all costs!
And that’s the heart of the Mass Blackout. It’s not about fighting anything they list on their website, which includes a lot of Leftist bullshit that has nothing to do with economics, per se, but can be wedged into the protest with jackhammers, chicken wire, bubble gum, and a lot of duct tape because intersectionality. (For those of you playing along at home, intersectionality is the idea that everything is interconnected, even if it’s complete bullshit.)
Yet, when trying to fit everything into a movement, Leftists never seem to get the idea you can have too much of anything, which ultimately hurts the movement.
You know what else hurts a movement? Apathy. For all the good the movement intends to do, it means jack shit if they’re the only ones playing along. So far, I haven’t seen too many arguments to consider joining the Mass Blackout, just that we should totally do it, yanno. That’s how stupid this is: they can’t even make an argument to the normies out there to join in. Everything they’re doing is Leftist buzzwords and emotion. No real calls to action outside their hivemind, who are already a) invested, or b) too damn poor to spend any real money on anything more expensive than avocado toast, hold the avocado.
And even that might be pushing it.
What is bound to happen because Murka is the general public will ignore the Mass Blackout and go about their days without a first thought, let alone a second one. They’ll spend their money as they see fit and that will be the end of it. And the people behind the Mass Blackout will invariably claim victory or blame the evil Trump Administration/corporations/billionaires/stupid people for a lack of participation.
And the best part? The Left has done this shit more than a few times this year, and not even your perpetually online favorite blogger knew about it. And I didn’t know about it either!
So, if anyone who is supporting the Mass Blackout is reading this, take the L now and save yourself a lot of pain. You’re not going to change the system by doing the same shit you’ve done earlier this year. Switch it up a bit! Maybe, just maybe, participate in the capitalist system like you’re already doing and know your role.
Shutting your mouth would also be a big help.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
When you really think about it (and I do because there’s nothing good on Netflix these days), humans have a lot of awards they give out to each other. Everything from perfect attendance at school to making significant contributions to the arts or science is subject to getting a trophy, plaque, oversized check, or some other form of recognition.
Of course, there are problems with this, namely trying to cash an oversized check requires oversized identification. But more to the point not everyone who accomplishes something gets an award and others who get them aren’t worthy of them. Either way, feefees will be hurt worse than a submissive bottom at a BDSM club.
Not that I know anything about that, mind you…
Over the past couple of months, people on both sides have been arguing about one prize in particular, that being the Nobel Peace Prize. The MAGA Right think Donald Trump should get it because of the peace deals he’s been brokering as of late between Russia and Ukraine and more recently between Israel and Hamas. The Left, of course, says Trump doesn’t deserve it because he’s an evil fascist Nazi doodoo head.
So, let’s break of a peace of the action (see what I did there?) and talk about this award.
Nobel Peace Prize
What the Left thinks it means – a coveted international award to celebrate those who promote peace around the world
What it really means – an international award given out to people for more ideological than practical reasons
The history of the Nobel Prizes in general is kinda cool. The guy who came up with them in the first place, Albert Nobel, invented dynamite, which makes him an honorary American because we love explosions. If he had invented a way to deliver meat through explosives, he would be possibly the greatest American ever, next to Chuck Norris.
Alas, he reconsidered his role in finding out a way to blow shit up, so he decided to take a more reasoned approach by recognizing people who contributed to the global society in the arts, sciences, and humanitarian efforts. Hence, the Nobel Prizes came to be.
With some prizes, like the prizes for Literature and the sciences, you can point to an actual body of work. We can debate whether the work improves humanity, but it’s there to look at.
With the Peace Prize…well, that’s another story. Since can be more of a squishy term, it’s harder to quantify what constitutes a worthy recipient, so it could literally be any criteria the Nobel Committee wants to apply.
And that’s where politics comes into play.
When you have no hard and fast rules, there are no expectations, just the word of the Committee members saying “this person is worthy of recognition.” Let’s take a look at some of the recent winners.
Yasser Arafat (1994) – Awarded as part of an effort to broker a peace treaty in the Middle East. Also, the leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, a known supporter of global terrorism.
International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1997) – A group that wanted to, well, ban landmines. A noble pursuit (see what I did there), but among its members was noted Leftist organization Human Rights Watch because landmines hurt human rights or something.
Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontière (1999) – A group of medical professionals helping people globally and alerting people about humanitarian crises. Medical help is always appreciated, but I’m not clear on how the whole “raising awareness” part brings us closer to peace. I mean, doesn’t somebody have to actually do shit still?
Kofi Anan and the United Nations (2001) – I got nothing.
Jimmy Carter (2002) – I can make a case for him winning the Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to broker peace between Israel and Egypt in the last 1970s, but this time? He was awarded for setting up the Carter Center, which focused on human rights. Unless those rights involved Jews, of course.
Shirin Edbadi (2003) – She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her efforts to bring democracy to Iran and defend women’s, children’s, and refugee rights. Again, a good cause, but I’m not sure how it would help global peace. It would make Iran a little less hostile in the grand scheme of things, but that’s like Idi Amin telling Jeffrey Dahmer to cut back on the cannibalism.
Wangari Maathai (2004) – She won the Nobel Peace Prize for, as the Committee put it, “for her contribution to sustainable development, democracy, ecology, and peace.” It was almost like the Nobel Committee had to tack on “peace” at the end to justify giving her the award.
Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank (2006) – Collectively they…did something. Not sure what, but it was something about economic and social development…which is peaceful, I guess?
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore (2007) – It was at this point the Nobel Peace Prize became a joke. Not even Dane Cook level, either. They got the Peace Prize for the same reason: being wrong about the environment. And I think Al got it for losing to George W. Bush and being wrong about the environment.
And then we get to the coup disgrace (and, no, that’s not a typo)…
Barack Obama (2009) – He won it before he did anything. You know, like drone striking innocent people?
There are more, but you get the picture. When you look at the full list of Peace Prize winners, you see a definite shift from those who actually contributed to peace and those who are getting a wider berth than Rosie O’Donnell and Michael Moore at an all-you-can-devour buffet in order to shoehorn them into the award.
And the same dickheads who swooned over Obama and Gore winning it are the ones saying Donald Trump isn’t qualified to win it in spite of the fact he’s actually trying to broker peace.
Of course, I’m half-and-half on whether Trump should be in the running. Half of me thinks it would be funny to watch Leftist heads explode at him showing up in Oslo to accept the award before the world. The other half of me thinks he’s trying too hard to get an award that doesn’t have the gravitas it once did. It’s like getting an honorary Daytime Emmy; yes it’s an award, but it’s a shitty one.
And when you consider the political leanings of those who are getting the award over the past 20-30 years, you’re more of a loser for winning it.
I’m sure the Nobel Committee reads my weekly missives judging from the Scandinavian hate mail I’ve gotten over the years, so let me give you a piece of advice. Just because you agree with your politics doesn’t mean they’re advancing peace. By expanding what the original purpose of the award means, you’ve watered it down to the point of irrelevance. I mean, you gave a Peace Prize to a fucking terrorist! Why not give Antifa one?
Wait, scratch that. You’ll take me seriously.
Regardless, you have to be a lot more selective in your selection process. Pay attention to those who are actually trying to bring about peace in our time and not just have the “oh, and peace” at the end. And sometimes you might have to hold your nose and pick someone you hate who is actually bringing about a more peaceful world by, you know, actually promoting peace.
As for the MAGA Republicans who think Trump should get it, I wouldn’t push it. If he can figure out how to get Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas to get to the table and get results, then we can talk about him getting one. Until then, hold your applause until the Nobel Committee gets their heads out of their asses.
So, in 2548.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Although the Lexicon typically deals with concepts raised in the news or politics (which, quite frankly, can be interchangeable anymore), there are times when a new term has to be created to address something the Left is doing. And, boy (or girl as to not be sexist), do I have a term for you!
Since I’m a nerd, I attend different pop culture conventions in my fair city, and there are attendees who like to dress up as their favorite pop culture characters from superheroes to anime antagonists. Not my bag, but I’m not so much of a curmudgeon that I can’t appreciate the hard work put into their costumes.
Which brings us to the Left. Since before Donald Trump was elected in 2016, Leftists got it in their heads that they needed to identify with pop culture heroes from sources ranging from The Handmaid’s Tale to “Star Wars” to Harry Potter. The irony of that last one isn’t lost on your humble reporter, but I digress.
The term I’m about to introduce came from a discussion with a proud Leftist who viewed herself as a proud freedom fighter like the French Resistance in World War II. Of course, she was a white Midwesterner with a lot of history on her side, but not a lot of perspective.
That’s when it hit me. There are so many people on the Left who are LARPing as freedom fighters, but not really advancing freedom that much, so much so that they’re cosplaying.
Hence the Lexicon entry for this week.
cause-players
What the Left thinks it means – We have no fucking clue!
What it really means – people desperate to be seen as the last line of defense for our freedoms, but who are just pretending
Before I go any further, I need to clarify something. Cosplayers don’t typically believe they are the characters they dress up like because they’re not nuttier than elephant shit. Cause-players, on the other hand, are. They have worked themselves up into a fervor to the point they believe the country is either about to become an authoritarian/fascist dictatorship, is already an authoritarian/fascist dictatorship, or has been an authoritarian/fascist dictatorship for quite some time now.
Which begs the question of why we’re still able to hear from them on social media, TV shows, or online. I mean, call me crazy (because I certainly do), but isn’t one of the main aspects of authoritarian/fascist dictatorships silencing critics? If so, the authoritarian/fascist part of the Trump Administration is doing a shitty job because I keep hearing from these motherfuckers non-stop. And if not…well, maybe you’re not as oppressed as you think you are.
That’s really the key here. Cause-players want to be oppressed for their positions so they have a reason to take action. Even if it’s just in their minds, it’s enough to get them to take up arms (even ones they want to control through tougher laws) and fight against The Man. Or Trump. Or Elon Musk. Or whomever their bogeyman of the week is. And it truly is as random as that. Whatever trips their triggered…I mean trigger, that’s who they hate.
You know, someone should write a story where people get a certain amount of time every day to hate someone who would oppose their point of view. Something small, like…oh, I don’t know…five minutes.
On second thought, that wouldn’t work. Some asshole would think it was an instruction manual instead of a cautionary tale.
Anyway, the point is these cause-players have to pretend to be oppressed, on the verge of being oppressed, and/or are the only ones who can save the world from the madness to come. In other words, your usual Leftist savior complex where nothing is saved and only the justifications are complex. This, in turn, creates an entire world in their minds that isn’t exactly on speaking terms with reality. And, let’s just say it makes them more on edge than a coke and coffee fiend. You know, like Hunter Biden, but with more espresso.
When fanaticism meets delusion, you have really bad “American Idol” contestants, but you also get a lot of people who only need a slight push to get them to do something drastic. Like the media they consume constantly referring to the President and his supporters as fascists, Nazis, and the like. Or, more recently, having a late night talk show host get suspended for comments that could be legally actionable because he and his staff were too busy with their confirmation bias to do 3 seconds of research before accusing a MAGA member of shooting Charlie Kirk, which is…how can I put this delicately…fucking stupid on its face.
Then again, this is Jimmy Kimmel we’re talking about here. He’s about as sharp as a Nerf ball.
But to the cause-players, he’s funny, intelligent, and a supporter of free speech. It just so happens he echoes everything the cause-players believe. Funny how that works out, huh?
The problem is a) Kimmel is none of those things, b) the cause-players are dumber than a Queen Kamala the Appointed speech, and c) this creates a self-perpetuating echo chamber that runs on confirmation bias and cults of personality. They cling to every word Rachel Maddow or JoJoFromJerz or Harry Sisson says and treat it as gospel even after they’ve been proven wrong more times than the so-called “fact checkers” were on COVID.
And guess what each and every one of them say.
You guessed it! We’re living in an authoritarian/fascist regime! And since their favorite people are saying it, it must be true! And that turns into…you guessed it, cause-playing.
That’s not to say the Right lacks this kind of situation, but so far there’s only one side of the political spectrum that has taken their delusions and turned them into violent acts. (Spoiler Alert: it ain’t the one allegedly in the back pocket of the NRA.)
So, what do we do here? Talking to cause-players is like talking to a brick wall, only a lot less frustrating. And with a lot less mortar, as it turns out. Having dealt with more than a few of them, it’s not worth your time. They won’t listen to reason, facts, or even basic logic. They’re in a cult, and it will take a miracle to get them deprogrammed. Oh, and they’ll accuse you of being in a cult in an act of projection that would make IMAX look like 8 millimeter.
But there’s still a piece of me that holds out hope more people will walk away once they have a coming to Jesus moment. In the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s assassination, I’m seeing more and more people washing their hands of the Left because the cause-players are driving them away with their antics. And by antics I mean utter fucking depravity.
And when they do break free of the cult, they’re going to need love, support, and direction. That’s where you come in. Show them the human compassion they wouldn’t give you while under the influence of their cause-playing if for no other reason than to show them the Right isn’t full of complete assholes. Leave that part to me.
And if you’re a cause-player reading this, you need help, and I say that as someone who needs a lot of help. You are being sold a bill of goods that aren’t that good and only feed into a self-destructive delusion where you will always think of yourself as a hero even when you’re acting like a villain. Take it from your old buddy Tom. Or don’t. Just try to act surprised when you lose the next few elections for being on the wrong end of yet another 80-20 issue.