Last weekend (check local listings for the date and time in your area), Leftists from around the world gathered for the No Kings Day protest to take a stand against…kings, apparently. The Elvis Presley estate, LeBron James, and two California professional sports teams were hardest hit.
I considered covering this in last week’s Lexicon, but I a) wanted to see how it turned out, and b) had more interesting shit to do. Now that it’s been a week or so (check local listings for the date and time in your area), I think I can definitively talk at length about the No Kings Day protests.
Or at least make fun of it.
No Kings Day
What the Left thinks it means – a day of mass protests against Donald Trump and his authoritarian regime
What it really means – a protest that’s more Astro Turf than grassroots
When you really think about it (and I have because my social calendar is blanker than Jasmine Crockett’s face while she works on a one piece jigsaw puzzle), it takes quite a bit of logistical planning to pull off any mass gathering short of a riot. Almost everything from a political rally to an office picnic requires a coordinated effort to take care of the details and potential snags that go into putting on the best event possible. It takes a level of competence and planning sometimes bordering on the Herculean.
Well, that excludes Leftists.
Actually, that’s not entirely true. In spite of their intellectual limitations, they’ve managed to put together a network of organizations whose job it is to promote and fund Leftist causes. And the list of partners for the event is a laundry list of known Leftist groups, which isn’t surprising given how the No Kings Day protests are connected to another series of “grassroots” protests put on by the 50501 Movement. From what I’ve been able to gather in my research, the movement’s main goal is to fight back against Executive Branch overreach.
Of course, they had to wait until President Brick Tamland and Queen Kamala the Appointed were out of power to worry about it because…Orange Man Bad, I guess?
As much as I’d like to say, “Welcome to the pro-small government team,” the fact is they’re still big government types. They just don’t want someone else to have the power big government possesses. After all, some of the big brains behind the 50501 Movement are connected to…Bernie Sanders, a man who never met a socialist idea he couldn’t make money off of.
And thanks to the mild success of the earlier protests, we had No Kings Day, which told the world Leftists were firmly against…something we don’t have in America.
Yes. It’s that fucking stupid.
Listen, I appreciate people gathering peacefully and expressing themselves because the same First Amendment that covers my weekly blog full of bad jokes and obscure references that would make Dennis Miller say, “Hey, buddy, that’s way too far out there” (See?) also covers people with whom I vehemently disagree. Having said that, it doesn’t speak well of the movement or the message when it makes no sense outside of your ideological bubble. For a movement to really get traction, you have to attract more than your rabid fan base.
And that’s where No Kings Day falls apart. Yes, it was well-attended and the media did their part to make it look and sound successful, with attendance estimated between 4 and 6 million people. Not too shabby. Now, consider Queen Kamala the Appointed got a shade over 75 million votes in the 2024 election. If each vote represented one person (which might be a stretch given Chicago’s voting history), a vast majority of the people who voted for Queen Kamala stayed home.
Oops.
Not exactly the rousing success the Left wants us to believe it was, numbers-wise. And it doesn’t exactly move the needle, policy-wise. Right now, the Left is united by only one thing: seething hatred for all things Trump. Beyond that, they have the Underpants Gnome’s business plan for a political strategy. Even if the No Kings crowds were larger than anything Donald Trump has ever put together outside of an election, it still doesn’t matter because Trump is still President. It’s kinda hard to flex on crowd sizes with a man with access to the Nuclear Football.
And it bears repeating (mainly because I have to get this through the Left’s thick skulls), Trump isn’t acting like a king, dictator, authoritarian, or anything else the Left claims he is, or at the very least he’s no more authoritarian, dictatorial, or kingly than previous Presidents. Not to mention, he was elected twice. Last time I checked, kings don’t get elected. They’re born into the role.
You know, just like the Bush Family. (Sorry, Jeb.)
The thing to remember in all of this hue and cry is Trump is acting in his official capacity as President, and the same can be said of the people he’s appointed. Sending the Marines and National Guard into California to deal with anti-ICE rioting…I mean protesting? In the President’s wheelhouse. Renaming military bases? Under the Department of Defense’s job description. Cutting wasteful spending? Should have been done by Congress, but DOGE was a repurposed department previously created by President Barack Obama, thus it’s allowed.
Unless, of course, you’re going to call President Obama a king, tyrant, etc., and I get the feeling you’re not going to because…Orange Man Bad.
Aside from their abject hypocrisy in the face of authoritarian rule, the No Kings and 50501 Movement have something else in common: they share funding from our good friend Uncle George Soros. And before you Leftists say “But the Koch Brothers,” it should be pointed out the Koch Brothers aren’t in the business of creating groups to invent “grassroots” organizations like Georgie Porgie Pudding and Treason is. And compared to the TEA Party movement, the Soros-backed movements are utter failures on the level of Angel Reese making layups.
To be fair, No Kings did have some positive news coming out of it. That was until the killings connected to it, even tangentially. That’s a good way to curtail any momentum. That, and the fact each protest this year has gone off with all the impact of a popcorn fart in foam rubber. Trump and the Administration have commented, shrugged their shoulders, and kept doing what they were going to do in the first place.
Great fucking job, Leftists.
And guess what? The 50501 Movement is holding more protests. Because what do you after a protest where nothing happens? Do it again and again!
Let me give you Leftists a piece of advice. Take a shower. And beyond that, you have to understand the more protests you hold funded by the same groups only wastes their money and makes you look like dicks. Far be it from me to stop you if you want to look like dicks, mind you, but I at least wanted to warn you in case you missed it. Besides, you’ve done a fantastic job looking like dicks before now.
Right now, the No Kings Day protests and the 50501 Movement protests are pretty much a non-issue anymore. The fact I had other shit to do rather than cover them when they happened should tell you something, namely that they’re too dumb to be taken seriously. Or in my case, comically. When they start pulling in bigger numbers and have a more coherent and non-exclusionary message, then maybe I’ll take them seriously.
And that’s very heavy on the maybe.
Category: Social Issues
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
There was a time in our nation’s history when we were scared of communists and what they were capable of doing. The less psychologically grounded of us saw communists everywhere from school boards to boxes of breakfast cereal. (I knew there was something off about the sun on the Raisin Bran box!) Then, we realized communists were less threatening than a Nerf marshmallow (and only slightly less appetizing) and the “Red Scare” was over.
Now, the people who laughed at the “Red Scare” have a scare of their own: they see fascism everywhere. It’s gotten so all-encompassing, Leftists have resurrected a Nazi term to describe law enforcement officers, that being the Gestapo. Although I’m not sure what a chilled vegetable-based soup has to do with anything…wait, that’s gazpacho. Never mind.
Since there’s not much to talk about with gazpacho, let’s look at the Gestapo instead.
the Gestapo
What the Left thinks it means – the group of fascist enforcers oppressing minorities
What it really means – an overused term designed to defame law enforcement doing its job
Back in the days of Nazi Germany, there were numerous enforcement arms to keep order and beat back opposition. One of these was the Secret State Police, or Gestapo. To put it mildly, they were not nice people. Surely, anyone who gets called the Gestapo would be guilty of the same atrocities, if not worse and/or more, right?
Wellllllll…that’s stretching things more than Reed Richards at a yoga retreat.
Remember, the Left has been calling Republicans Nazis for decades. That includes Mitt Romney, who is the human equivalent of dry white toast. And the same Mitt Romney Leftists praised for standing up to President Trump. What a difference a decade makes.
Well, that, and a new villain for the Left to turn into Hitler 2.0.
Of course, this is by design. Leftists love to paint themselves as the last line of defense between democracy and authoritarianism, even as they resort to authoritarianism to “defend” democracy. But since they’re on the “right side of history” it’s okay to be utter hypocrites apparently.
With increased scrutiny on illegal immigration, the Left’s new favorite fascist straw men are ICE agents. After all, they’re…let me check my notes here…enforcing immigration laws. Those bastards!
To any rational person with a semblance of knowledge about the illegal immigration issue right now, the ICE/Gestapo comparison makes as much sense as anything Queen Kamala the Appointed says. But that hasn’t stopped the Left from making the comparison whenever possible.
And speaking of Queen Kamala, her stumbling mate Governor Tim “I’m a Football Coach and Don’t Know What a Pick Six Is” Walz was one the voices making the connection. At a recent Oversight Committee meeting, Democrats kept hammering this comparion like they were carpenters working straight commission. If I didn’t know better, I would think they were anti-law enforcement! I mean, didn’t the Left say attacks on law enforcement were signs of being traitorous anti-Americans?
Oh, wait. That was the FBI.
When FBI agents started to go after President Trump, the Left cheered. Doesn’t matter whether the charges were more full of shit than Port-A-Potties at a music festival catered by Chipotle, what mattered was the FBI was just going their jobs in enforcing the law. And why not? I mean, it’s not like FBI personnel were giving money to Democrats…oh, wait…
Surely I can’t be the only one to see the irony here. Leftists who bent over backwards to defend the FBI against accusations of political biases by invoking the “just doing their jobs” line are now getting their collectivist panties in a wad over ICE agents doing their jobs. I wonder what could be different?
Oh, yeah, they’re not in charge of ICE anymore. It’s under the leadership of the Trump Administration, which is totes full of fascists because shut up fascist. And since they’re totes fascists, ICE is the Gestapo!
Except…they’re not. If you pay attention to the video footage (which I do because I make stamp collectors look like extreme athletes), there’s no torture, no cases of excessive and unjustified violence, nothing anywhere near the level of actions the actual Gestapo took. It’s political hyperbole cranked up to 948, only because the Left’s dials don’t go up to 950 yet.
Normally, we could chalk this up to politicians being bullshitters, but these aren’t normal times. In fact, we may have blown past the exit to normal a few light years back and we’ve turned off the GPS telling us to turn the fuck around.
In recent years, support for political violence against opponents has risen on both sides of the gulf between parties and ideologies. In case I haven’t made myself crystal clear on this, political violence is a non-starter with me, regardless of who is the target. This is how terrible shit starts, shit you shouldn’t wish on your worst enemies because it tends to boomerang at some point. Not to mention, it makes you look like a total douchecanoe.
With the Left’s framing of ICE as the modern day Gestapo, they’re encouraging, if not out and out justifying, violence against ICE agents. Invariably, this is going to make some Leftists froggy, so when they jump, they’re going to be met with force. Then, the Left will decry the violence against peaceful protesters (who just happen to be looting, burning, and assaulting people other than ICE agents) and gin up support to fight back against the “Gestapo” just like their WWII-era relatives did.
One tiny problem with that. Well, more than one, but this is the one I want to mention here. You see, political violence against the opposition is part and parcel of the 14 characteristics of fascism as observed by Umberto Eco, or at the very least an outgrowth from them.
In other words, Leftists are trying to out-fascist the people they claim are the fascists because democracy or something.
And given how many times Leftists have supported rioting, looting, arson, and the like within the past 5+ years (I’m looking at you, BLM), it’s not out of the realm of belief that they’re okay with the current anti-ICE riots going on in California right now. After all, they’re on the “right side of history” according to them. Of course, if they knew history to begin with, they wouldn’t be trying to downplay the violence they’re explicitly and implicitly encouraging.
But no matter how much the Left cries “Gestapo” in lieu of “Wolf” it’s still bad optics that will only encourage more people to support ICE in the short term, and possibly the long term. The longer the chaos in California continues, the more people are going to support efforts to stop it.
Especially if they pull a real dick move and do something like mocking a working mother trying to get to work while these overgrown toddlers “protest.” But I’m sure no Leftists would be that fucking dumb, right?
Never mind.
Keep doing what you’re doing, Leftists. I’m sure being on the wrong side of public opinion will work this time!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In the aftermath of the electoral fiasco that was the 2024 election, Leftists have been trying to figure out why they lost so many male voters to the Evil Orange Man. And after some soul-searching and thoughtful consideration, they’ve devised a plan to win them back.
Just kidding! They’re spending $20 million on a program called SAM, which stands for Speaking with American Men. This is a departure from their usual approach, which is BAM: Browbeating All Men. While we see how the Left will fuck this up, let’s take a look at it.
Speaking with American Men
What the Left thinks it means – an effort to attract more male voters to Democrat politicians and movements
What it really means – an Astro Turf movement to try to correct a problem the Left caused
The genesis of this idea came from the same place all great political movements start: luxury hotels. So far, the big brain ideas the Left has come up with are:
– using the online space to appeal to younger men
– study the phrasing used to attract young men in these spaces
– buy advertisements in video games
Wow. It’s a wonder Leftists even have to campaign with brilliant ideas like these, amirite? But at least they’ve figured out what men are, so there’s that.
As anyone who has seen the cratering user numbers of Mastodon can tell you, the online world is incredibly fickle. One day you’re getting millions of interactions with each and every post, and the next you’re lucky to show up in the algorithm. (For the uninitiated, algorithm is what the former Vice President thinks he has when he’s dancing.)
Trying to get people to pay attention to something in this space is tricky. Yes, it’s incredibly easy to get people to act like jackasses on TikTok, but that’s because it’s fucking TikTok. But for every overnight dance craze that loses its popularity before you’re done chewing a stick of Fruit Stripe gum, there are many more that fail to do anything more than make the subject being filmed look like a jackass.
Like Leftists using TikTok to make political commentary.
Being able to get users to pay attention to anything on social media takes more than a strategy and a pretty or handsome face speaking words. It takes a message worth spreading that goes beyond a particular audience. It’s 0ne thing to go viral on BlueSky, which is a highly-moderated Leftist echo chamber to rival the Grand Canyon, and to go viral on the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter, which used to be a Leftist echo chamber until Elon Musk bought it and…well, we’re still trying to figure out what he did with it, but whatever it was it stopped being a Leftist echo chamber.
And it’s not a matter of the size of the platform, either. Naturally, you’re going to get a longer reach on a platform that has become a daily habit for most people. Leftist social media “influencer” Harry Sisson is on X, TikTok, and Instagram and his posts garner a lot of attention, but it’s all to parrot Leftist squawking points without any intellectual depth. So, naturally, he’s on the right social media platforms for his intellectual prowess. But is Sisson the right person to attract young male voters? Not unless they identify as teenage girls.
In fact, the Left has been trying to find the “white guy whisperer” for a few months now, and they’ve assembled quite the motley crew (and not the musical kind). Here are some of the people who have stepped up or have been pushed into the role.
– Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota and former Vice Presidential candidate under Queen Kamala the Appointed
– Doug Emhoff, the Second Gentleman under Queen Kamala the Appointed
– David Hogg, gun control activist and possibly former vice DNC chair
– Olivia Julianna, female Democrat social media “influencer”
Wow. With a line-up like that, the only missing piece is Naomi Wolf, who was hired to help Al Gore with his masculinity.
And for any Leftists reading this, I was joking.
The issues the Left have communicating with men have one thing in common: they’re all self-inflicted. The most obvious one is their attitude towards men in general: they fucking suck! Thanks in part to third wave feminism and a healthy disdain for the founding of this country, Leftists have found nothing good in the male of the species. And, speaking as a male, they may have a point. The stereotypical man in Leftist circles is a frat bro, one stage above Cro Magnon but with better cars. They’re uncultured, uneducated, probably drunk, and definitely backwards, but they’re the ones who hold all the power.
Which pretty much describes my opinion of most Congresscritters, but I’m sure that’s purely coincidental.
And when Leftists find someone who doesn’t align with them, they move into harangue-you-into-submission mode. They will shrilly preach about what you’re doing wrong in their eyes, why that makes you worse than literally Hitler, and call you all sorts of names. So, it’s really a mystery why Democrats keep losing the male vote…
Again, Leftists, I’m kidding.
What isn’t a joking matter is the culmination of all of that browbeating and general bitching about men. With male support of Democrats going further south than the border wall, it’s clear the current Leftist model doesn’t work anymore. Men are tired of being told we suck, especially when the majority of us don’t. Even Leftist men are often into causes to get pussy.
Spoiler Alert, guys: It never works. They’ll never fuck you, but they’ll float the idea just enough to keep you from leaving. And there’s nothing you can say or do that will be enough to remove that Rock of Gibraltar-sized block from their shoulders.
Check that. There is one thing: going full Dylan Mulvaney.
And you never want to go full Dylan Mulvaney.
And here’s the funny thing (because it’s about time there’s something funny in this piece). Men really aren’t that complicated. We like simple things, like meat, grilling, and grilling meat. Oh, there’s also booze and women. And maybe fast cars or motorcycles. Oh, and there’s sports.
Come to think of it, men might be more complicated than I think.
Seriously, though, at the heart of every man is four chambers. But aside from that, there’s a need to feel competent at the basics of life. Back in prehistoric times, men were the hunters and gatherers, thus they were the providers. Even though we’ve come a long way since then, the need to provide is hard-wired into men’s psyches. The American Dream was built on that same idea, only with two car garages and white picket fences instead of trying not to be devoured by giant lizards and avoiding tar pits.
In other words, when I was a wee lad.
Leftists overcomplicate this concept (as they often do because to them being confusing is a sign of super-duper intelligence), so they completely miss the answer to their male voting problem. Instead of nagging us to vote for Democrats because reasons, give us a reasoned argument. Or at the very least don’t sound like a harpy when you talk to us. You should have learned that lesson in 2016 after watching Hillary Clinton lose, but apparently you haven’t.
And here’s a fun fact! Many men didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris because they’re sexist and racist. It’s because they didn’t like them. And you know why we like someone like Tulsi Gabbard? Because she’s fucking hot!
No, wait, that’s not it. It’s because she doesn’t come at men like we’re the enemy. Her tone and demeanor are much more inviting and she’s more open to having a conversation even if we don’t see eye to eye. You could have a beer with her while grilling steaks and have a great time.
Try imagining Hillary or Kamala in that scenario. Even if you put it in the best AI out there, it would come back and say, “Seriously, what the fuck, Dave?”
While Leftists continue to try to attract men to their causes, they’re going to be met with more failure than Walter Mondale in 1984 until they come to terms with their misandry. Swearing more and studying how men speak will only take you so far, but to me they come off like the “How Do You Do Fellow Kids” meme. If you want to get men back in your political corner, be real.
And from what I’ve seen and heard so far, Speaking with American Men is about as real as William Shatner’s hair.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With the illegal immigration situation heating up under President Donald Trump, the Left has taken it upon itself to try to keep him in check. So far, that’s been limited to supporting vi0lent criminals connected to existing gangs, crying “due process” at the drop of a hat, helping illegal immigrants avoid ICE agents, and the like. And they’ve been successful…in looking like dumbfucks.
But recently some Leftists decided to push the issue at a New Jersey ICE facility under the auspices of oversight. Now, as a Congresswoman has been charged with assault against an ICE agent and other Congresscritters starting a hand-wringing letter writing campaign, I can officially say they’ve succeeded in out-dumbfucking themselves.
Not all is lost, however. Not only to we get the chance to laugh at the absurdity of the situation, but we also get a chance to further examine what oversight is. (Okay, so the former may be better than the latter, but work with me, people!)
oversight
What the Left thinks it means – making sure the Executive Branch is doing what it should, no matter what it takes
What it really means – a concept that has escaped the federal government some time ago
The first question we should ask ourselves is “What does Thomas look like naked?” After throwing up the last 3 days of contents in our stomachs, we can move to a more relevant and less vomit-inducing question: who has the power of oversight and where does it come from? To answer the second question first, when a Mommy and a Daddy really love each other…
No, wait, that’s a different question. Never mind.
The power of oversight resides with Congress as an extension of Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 of the US Constitution. I say it’s an extension because it’s not really codified in the Constitution and came from where all good ideas start, the Supreme Court. In Anderson v. Dunn, a unanimous High Court ruled Congress had the authority to conduct oversight as a means to uphold its rules. Not a bad ruling overall, but it had the potential to be abused.
Like we’re seeing now.
These days oversight has been mostly a joke played on us by both major parties. Instead of keeping the Executive Branch in check, Congress has decided meaningless hearings and endless investigations that lead nowhere is the order of the day. Even when the evidence is so obvious even Stevie Wonder could see it, we’re treated to a lot of sound and fury, signifying…well, less than nothing.
How many times have we watched Congresscritters preen before the cameras with gotcha questions and more interruptions than Mel Tillis with the hiccups, only to have nothing get done as a result? Lois Lerner, Hillary Clinton, Peter Strzok, Anthony Fauci, and so many others (albeit most of them tend to swing to the Left) get grilled, found to make contradictory statements (also called lying) under oath, get exposed as frauds, and then…they get to walk out without so much as a wrinkle in their dress clothes. The aforementioned Mr. Wonder has better oversight.
This is due to one thing both major parties hold dear: not giving a fuck. When Republicans are in power, they don’t give a fuck about oversight because then they’ll be under the microscope when Democrats are in power, and vice versa. After all, if all the criminal behavior in the halls of power are exposed, the country as a whole could lose faith in our government.
Or as I call it, any given Tuesday.
Although I have to give props to the Congressional Democrats who decided to put oversight into hyperdrive, they made two key mistakes. First, Congressional oversight doesn’t extend to anyone who isn’t in Congress. That means Newark Mayor and potential gubernatorial candidate Ras Baraka doesn’t get to use it to cover his trespassing. Oops. In an attempt to come up with a suitable punishment for Mayor Baraka, I have the following solution: have him remain Mayor of Newark, New Jersey.
Second, and this is important, it doesn’t excuse you from any crimes committed while you’re doing this oversight. You know…like, oh I don’t know…physically assaulting people. Although potential fistfights in Congress is an entertaining prospect, we can’t let a legitimate (albeit underused) power devolve into violence. At least not until I can secure the Pay Per View rights and a cut of the concessions.
Now, before you Leftists continue to downplay the events and turn the Congresscritters involved into heroes, let me ask you a question. Why is it this same passion isn’t being tapped into when a Democrat is in the Oval Office? And the same goes for Republicans when there’s a Republican President. The very nature of politics is shady shit, so it behooves you to keep your house in order if for no other reason than to get a leg up on your competition.
Oh, and there’s the whole strengthening the tattered fabric of this country thing, too.
There’s a reason Congressional approval ratings are more underwater than the Titanic, and not even a Leonard DiCaprio/Kate Winslet vehicle with a Celine Dion song attached to it is going to fix it. For this situation to right itself, Congress has to take oversight a lot more seriously. Not to the extent of attacking ICE agents, mind you, but closer to holding bad actors accountable, regardless of which side of the political aisle they belong.
And that means no more endless investigations and multiple hearings without consequences. If you find out someone you’re investigating broke the law, charge his/her ass! It’s going to make the judicial system in the DC area work overtime and the prisons might be a bit overcrowded, but it’s worth it if only to keep the people we elect to high office in check, even if we can’t vote them out due to them having war chests the size of the combined GDP of third world countries.
Hey, if the Chicago Cubs can win a World Series in my lifetime, anything is possible!
The War of 8020
One of the most attractive elements of Leftist thought is how they take up for the underdogs. Even when it seems impossible, Leftists will side with the less fortunate in their attempts to defeat The Man. But I never would have thought they would actively try to become the underdogs.
It’s hard for me to pinpoint exactly when Leftists went nuttier than squirrel shit, but it was between the 2022 midterms and the 2024 Presidential election, probably when they realized Donald Trump was not only going to be the Republican nominee, but that he had a good chance of defeating President Brick Tamland. To be fair, a cardboard cut-out of Trump could have beaten the President and been far more articulate in doing so, but the point is the same. Somehow Trump broke the Left to the point they would protest breathing if Trump said, “I love oxygen. Oxygen is the greatest thing.”
And I know you read that in his voice.
Regardless of what the sensible action would be, Leftists have decided to take the under in almost every hot button issue today. When it comes to trans women in biological female spaces, they went with the trans women, no matter how creepy they were. Illegal immigrants who just happened to be connected to gangs? They sided with the illegal gang members. Government waste? Pile it on, buddy!
Spoiler Alert: It’s shit like this that cost you the 2024 Presidential election.
Many people have attempted to figure out why the Left takes the losing side of issues lately with various conclusions, ranging from not wanting to give Trump a W to Leftists being utter dumbasses. And to be honest I keep going back and forth between these two extremes (although they’re probably both right). Personally, I think it’s because of how partisan the country is right now.
Not that long ago, Democrats and Republicans could disagree on how things got done, but could find common ground on issues that would benefit the entire country, like defeating the Soviet Union. Once the Soviets fell, we no longer had an outward enemy, so we turned our sights inward and found new enemies. Since then, we got consumed by the Left and the Right fighting like the US and Soviets, only without the possibility of Mutually Assured Destruction.
Nowadays, MAD would be getting off easy. With the rise of Internet and social media culture, both sides are looking for ways to “own” the other side. And this is one reason Trump is so popular among the Right: he is a master of owning the Left. The problem for the Left is they don’t have anybody who can do the same to the Right. Oh, they think they have people, but they suck at it, and if they’re being honest with themselves (which is a stretch, I know), they would admit it.
Since they can’t due to not wanting to give even a micron to Trump, they’re stuck being the party of Jesse Helms, who was notorious for often being the sole “No” vote on bills. Oh, and being racist pricks.
Hence, the reason Leftists are running for every unpopular position with the American people. (The not wanting to give Trump even a micron bit, not the being racist pricks bit.) As a result, Democrats are getting as popular as STDs in a brothel. So, how are they trying to right…or left the ship?
Swearing a lot more.
And I’m not even fucking kidding.
As someone who occasionally peppers his posts with adult language, I can appreciate a good cuss word and, when done correctly, it can add impact to a statement. The way the Left has been doing it, though, is like seeing your grandma curse: it’s unexpected and even a little off-putting. Even when some of the more junior members of Congress do it, it doesn’t feel natural to me. If anything, it feels more like a political calculation that came out of a focus group rather than any genuine emotion.
And what’s worse than the potty mouths on the Left is the fact they keep doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on their unpopular positions because…well, I’m still trying to figure that out. One thing that comes to mind is the Left’s desire to be on “the right side of history.” As noble as that sounds, it’s bullshit that falls apart under its own weight when balanced with another saying, “History is written by the victors.” For the Left’s version of history to be the right one, they have to win.
Granted, with some issues like civil rights and gay marriage, they ultimately won, but only after a prolonged struggle where public opinion shifted to adopt the Left’s position. In a world of TikTok and entitlement, though, that window shrinks significantly leaving only two options: shame the opposition into supporting the cause, or abandoning it when it gets nowhere.
Take the recent kerfluffle over the Equal Rights Amendment caused when President Brick Tamland and Vice President Kamala the Appointed tried to get it “ratified” by saying “it’s ratified.” All it took for the Left to adopt the squawking point was for the aforementioned political figureheads to put it out there. Of course, these same idiots didn’t bother to bring it up for the decades since the ERA failed to be ratified through the existing process. If it were such an important issue, the Left would have made it a cornerstone issue. And it’s not like they haven’t had control of Congress and the White House since the 80s. They had their chance, and they decided it wasn’t important enough to fight for.
So, ladies, how do you feel about voting for Leftists now?
This is going to be a major problem for Leftists going forward. The more they let themselves get played into supporting causes on the losing end of the polls just to spite Trump, the more potential voters they’re going to give away, and no amount of demanding those voters support Leftist candidates because reasons is going to change that. At some point, the political leadership will have to set aside their swearing and figure this out or else it’s going to be the year 8020 before they get a whiff of the White House again.
Not that I have a problem with that, mind you…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In my 55 years of kicking around this ball of rock and water we call Planet Earth, I’ve seen some pretty amazing things. The first Space Shuttle flight. The Berlin Wall coming down. Internet porn…not that I know anything about that, mind you. But this past week, I saw something that caused me to almost swallow my face.
Leftists finally found asylum seekers they didn’t support.
President Donald Trump granted refugee status to white South Africans who were fleeing racial oppression at the hands of their government. So far a whopping 59 white South Africans came to America. And, predictably, the Left lost its collectivist shit over it trying to explain it away through cries of “racism” in lieu of “wolf” and whataboutism to the extent my Bullshit-O-Meter overloaded.
At the heart of this controversy is our asylum process. To put it mildly, it’s more fucked up than having Hunter Biden as an accountability buddy/crack dealer. So, naturally, it’s worth exploring further.
asylum
What the Left thinks it means – a means for oppressed people to come to America and seek a better life
What it really means – a process that needs a serious overhaul
To say our immigration policy is more fucked up than Sybil on LSD is an understatement, but we do try to set forth a semblance of a policy. In some cases, a situation is so dangerous or dire that we have to make exceptions to the normal immigration rules. That’s where the asylum process comes into play. Although it’s been abused…I mean used as a catch-all by previous Administrations that will remain nameless (but it rhymes with Slow Mindin’), there are certain criteria that have to be met before it can be granted. And even then, there’s the wonderful world of bureaucracy to deal with, which makes the process even more frustrating and/or dangerous.
This is where the Left gets things wrong when it comes to asylum. As much as “no one is above the law” has become a mantra when it comes to President Donald Trump, the Left believes the law can and should be circumvented for every Tomas, Ricardo, and Jaime that arrives at our southern border without even trying to seek asylum. Although it’s amazing elected officials are ignorant of the laws on the books and the concept that breaking these laws is a crime, it did lead to one of the most epic takedowns in Congressional history.
Oh, and a tip for the gamblers out there. If you ever bet on the number of fucks Tom Homan gives, always bet the under.
This brings us to the current situation involving the white South Africans. President Trump called what they experienced as a “genocide,” which is a gross overstatement and unnecessary given the conditions already in place. However, there are details that can move that needle one way or the other.
It started with a little thing the kids call apartheid. For almost 50 years, white South Africans treated the black population as second-class citizens at best. This was a bad idea, not just because it was racist and stupid, but because the whites were and still are vastly outnumbered. This practice got the boot in the 1990s due in no small part to Nelson Mandela.
Then, something predictable happened: the oppressed became the oppressors. Once black South Africans got into power, the urge to flip the script was too great, and the white South Africans found themselves on the wrong side of the apartheid stick.
Where things get really funky (and not in a Parliament Funkadelic way) is the passage of a law where white South African farmers had to give up portions of their land without compensation because racial justice or something. Even if you think it’s okay given how much property white South African farmers own, the civil libertarian in me (and hopefully in you) says that’s not right. If you own something and any entity takes it from you, you are due compensation of some kind, whether it be monetary, legal, or legislative.
Now, remember the criteria for asylum I referenced and linked earlier? One of them involves persecution or possible persecution on the basis of…race. And, surprise surprise, white South Africans have a pretty good case for that based on the aforementioned land law.
Oh, and there’s the “Kill the Boer. Kill the Farmer.” song popularized by anti-apartheid groups and more recently by Julius Malema, a political leader in South Africa. While Leftists swing between “it’s not about white genocide” and “it could be construed as being in favor of white genocide,” the simplest explanation is…fuck yeah it’s about white genocide, and only fucking dipshits would say it wasn’t!
Oddly enough, the Leftists who think it’s not about white genocide are the same people who take Donald Trump literally whenever he says anything even slightly controversial in a joking manner.
Regardless, the white South Africans have a legitimate case for asylum, so why is the Left complaining if following the law is so important to them? You know, aside from being hypocritical asshats. Fortunately for us, they’ve tipped their hands early and often. It’s all about racism. Sure, Leftists say it’s Trump being racist because he’s allowing white South Africans to get asylum, but it’s the other way around; Leftists want to deny them entry because of their skin color.
Simple enough, but there’s another reason related to the race issue. Leftists have tried to turn racism from hatred of another race (which it is) into hatred of another race with the inclusion of power (which is bullshit). Without going too far into the weeds, let’s just say the Left’s revised version of racism does more to create minority victims than actual racism does, which makes it racist by definition. Funny how that works out, isn’t it?
Why do I mention this? For one, it pads out the Lexicon entry a bit. But more to the point, the situation with the white South Africans puts the Left’s definition of racism on its head. They may own the vast majority of the land, but that in and of itself isn’t power. The power in South Africa is clearly on the side of the black population, so the Left’s dynamic doesn’t work. But since they can’t admit that, they pretend a) it doesn’t exist, b) it’s totes different because reasons, or c) Orange Man Bad!
The problem, of course, is the law itself. Racial persecution is clearly written and is hard to argue against in this case, but dammit the Left is going to try!
Which is why I think we need to overhaul the asylum process when we’re overhauling our immigration system. To the Left’s credit, they are correct that economic issues are a valid reason to consider offering asylum to others, especially if we want to be seen as a land of opportunity. The question becomes where do we draw the line. The way we’ve done it recently is not sustainable and creates a dangerous strain on our social safety net. If we demand these potential asylees bring something worthwhile to the table (i.e. marketable skills, a good work ethic, etc.), we run the risk of looking heartless or driven solely by materialism.
Beyond that, the current asylum process can take years. There’s tons of paperwork, red tape, and contradictory practices to overcome. So, we’re left with the challenge of streamlining the process while keeping as many relevant avenues to asylum open without stretching ourselves too thin.
Good luck with that.
Seriously, the best way I can figure out how to tick all of these boxes is to create a system to separate the different types of asylee claims to maximize the speed at which they can be processed. And with specialization, it’s going to create a stronger knowledge base overall. Instead of having to have 100 people looking at the full gamut of cases, you can have 10 people working on economic asylum requests, another 10 working on racial asylum claims, and so on. Through that process, the groups of 10 are going to gain an intimate understanding of that particular process. Then, if you have a case that covers more than one asylee area, they can be called in to offer their expert opinions.
With everything electronic these days, doing a background check and filling out paperwork can be quicker and easier. It shouldn’t take cutting down a forest for a mountain of paperwork to come here under dire circumstances. There are other reasons to cut down a forest, after all. (Just kidding, environmentalists!) And we can hire some of the Sallie Mae folks to do the background checks, which will guarantee the asylees can be found.
And finally, and this is the hardest part, we need to approach each claim the same: with a healthy mix of optimism and skepticism. Not every asylum claim is truthful, but we can’t assume they’re all fraudulent. It’s going to take some research and knowledge of world events to pick out the bad actors from the legitimately needy.
That eliminates TikTokers.
But it opens the door for people like me who are curious, compassionate, and cynical. In fact, Gen X is gonna be flush with job opportunities for decades to come, so win-win baby!
As far as the white South Africans, welcome to America, where most people will welcome you and those who don’t claim to be all about diversity. Ignore the latter and you’ll be fine. Most of us do, and those who don’t are getting something out of it, like content for a mildly successful weekly blog series written by a handsome, well hung, and incredibly sexy man.
And since you haven’t found that one yet, read mine!
My 2025 Commencement Address
Another spring has arrived, but a request to give a commencement address at a high school, college, tech school, hairdressing college, or even clown college hasn’t. So, once again a graduating class will be deprived of my words of…well, I wouldn’t call them wisdom so much as wise-assery, but the point is the same, as it the annual result. Enjoy!
Greetings, members of the Class of 2025. I know you were expecting someone like Robert Downey Jr., Katy Perry, or the San Diego Chicken, but their asking prices were a bit too steep. After a phone call full of begging and pleading, your high school/college/tech school/hairdressing college/clown college got me under one condition: that I stop begging and pleading.
Your typical commencement address tends to follow a standard formula: tell a few stories, offer some life advice, and conclude with some inspirational words that will make you feel like you can do anything. I know, because I’ve been through a few of these in my life, either sitting where you are now or out in the audience waiting for a friend or loved one to cross the stage and get a diploma or a reasonable facsimile. But if you are familiar with my work (and if you are, I’m so, so sorry), you know I’m not exactly a by-the-book guy. Which, now that I think of it, explains my grades…
What was I saying? Oh, yeah, the commencement thing.
One thing I always try to do in my speeches is give you a realistic view of the world you’re about to enter with all of your youthful enthusiasm, hope, and fearlessness. That way you’ll be prepared when the world grinds that out of you.
Not too inspiring, right? But it’s what will most likely happen unless you have a dream job waiting for you on the outside, and even then you might have to eat crap and learn to love the taste of it. That’s why they call it a dream job: if you get one, you’ll probably wake up and realize it isn’t real.
The daily grind has a tendency to make you shrink your aspirations to fix in a box of someone else’s creation. And these people are going to convince you not to aim high, but aim a little closer to medium. For most people, that’s high enough, but not everyone is like that. There are always outliers who will put their hearts and souls into a career, hoping their efforts will get noticed and rewarded accordingly.
And these people will be some of the first to get burnt out.
That shouldn’t stop you from dreaming big, though. It’s during these tough times that we get to see who we really are and what we truly believe. Not everyone handles pressure in the same way. Some rise to the occasion. Others will buckle under the pressure. And others will find a way to blame someone else for the tough times. The people in this last group are known as politicians.
Anyway, the best way to dream big is to not let your work define your life. Take up hobbies, meet people, catch a movie every once in a while, or just get out of your apartment, house, condo, or whatever you call home to see the world around you. The more your work/life balance leans towards the 9-to-5, the less of life you actually experience. So, the solution is simple: part-time or temp jobs!
Of course if you want silly things like a steady paycheck, health insurance, and, oh yeah, food, that strategy may not pan out so well.
This isn’t to say you should slack off on the clock. When you have a job, whether it be delivering pizzas or writing code for a new AI program, put your best self forward. There’s a reason why people my age are always complaining about the work ethic of younger generations: we’re old. But a good number of us were brought up with a solid work ethic, so we have expectations. Granted, you’re not us, but at least meet us halfway. Show up and show out, as the kids (i.e. you) say. Or not. Either way, if you have a job, do it to the best of your ability. Failing that, try to fake it or get a Gen X mentor. You may not like what we have to say, but we’ll be honest.
And brutally so. Let’s just say Gen X’s filters got shot off in the war. Granted, it was the Cola Wars of the mid 80s, but those wounds still run pretty deep.
Something else I should mention that will help you in the long run is to learn when your emotions are overriding your intelligence. Not every battle has to be fought, no matter how much you feel it should. And I say this as someone who has run into more than a few brick walls because I let my feelings write checks my brain couldn’t cash, and it affected my personal brand.
For those of you not up on corporate speak, a personal brand is how your coworkers and superiors see you. So, if you come off as insufferable, that’s going to stick with you until you either rebuild it through a lot of work, time, and personal reflection or find a new job. Find a way to channel your emotions in a more constructive way while on the clock. When you’re at home and have a couple of adult beverages in you, then you can complain about how screwed up things are.
Or you could exercise or something. Whatever trips your trigger warning.
If you take nothing else from my speech, I hope you take this. You may not have control over everything in your lives, but you control what choices you make. The way you approach whatever obstacles get in your way will have more of an impact on your future than you realize. That requires a little less “live for the moment” and more “live so you can pay your rent so you don’t have to live in a cardboard box or with your parents in 6 months.” Or maybe live with your parents in a cardboard box the way the economy is going.
Regardless, you have a vested interest in your future, so act like it, for the love of Pete! Yes, that means you may have to work at a dead-end job for a while to make money until your ship comes in (Pro Tip: avoid having your ship be the Titanic), but that’s how you earn your break, coffee or big. If nothing else, keeping your nose to the proverbial grindstone shows potential employers and yourself that you can tough it out to make it to the other side. And, as someone who has done that, I can tell you how sweet the fruits of your labor are.
After all, I wouldn’t be here today without me begging and pleading!
Congratulations, Class of 2025!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
It wasn’t that long ago that I graduated from college. Okay, maybe it has been, considering I graduated with a Masters in 1994.
Excuse me for a moment while I weep to myself and apply Ben Gay to my aching body.
Anyway, one of the aspects of graduating was having to pay back all the money I borrowed to go to college and get a degree I barely use. But, for what it’s worth, I’ve read a lot of books. Okay, now I have to weep again…
These days, the crying isn’t just limited to me. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon announced the department would start collection attempts on outstanding student loan debt in default. As you might expect, students impacted by this aren’t happy. After all, President Brick Tamland tried to forgive student loan debt through various means, the most obvious one being “I’m the President, or am I?”
This has become a political issue, so naturally politicians are going to get involved. And when they do, I am here to give commentary. Oh, and to mock the appropriate parties.
student loans
What the Left thinks it means – an oppressive economic burden placed on the backs of those least capable of paying it
What it really means – loans taken out to pay for a college degree that more often than not doesn’t translate to the real world
I will warn you at this point things may get tangental because there is a lot of ground to cover. Of course, if you’ve read me for any length of time, you’re asking, “So what’s different?”
Not that long ago, going to college was somewhat of an achievement. You either had to be really smart or really rich to go. Then, someone (probably someone in the admissions department) came up with the idea that more people needed to go to college. From there, the notion was put in the minds of young people (and their parents) that you had to go to college or else you wouldn’t be successful.
Then, someone else (probably someone in the accounting department) came up with the idea that more students meant more money. And what’s a great way to raise a bunch of money in a short period of time? I mean aside from stealing it. You raise tuition! That way even if your institute of higher learning has an enrollment drought you might be able to make a pretty penny. That, and the textbook prices.
There is a downside to this approach, namely pricing yourself out of the market. Then, a third person (probably someone in the government) decided the best way to address this is to offer student loans. Then, even more young people could go to college, which made everyone happy.
At least until the kids graduated and they had to pay back the money they borrowed.
See, the thing about the government getting involved in the student loan game is it allowed colleges and universities to jack up tuition costs, which meant prospective students had to borrow even more just to go to a 7 AM Color Theory in American Literature class three times a week. Or, more likely, not attend that class and crib notes off a classmate without a life. After all, there was drinking and drugs to do!
Not that I know anything about that, mind you.
The Left is on the right side of the student loan debt issue, at least superficially. The amount of debt that has to be run up just to attend college these days is astronomical, and with a job market that can be softer than Taylor Lorenz’s feefees, being able to pay back the money owed can be tough. Not impossible, mind you, but harder than it needs to be, just like the language in the loan application.
Where the Left goes banana-shaped on the issue is in figuring out who’s responsible, mainly because some of the finger-pointing would have to go towards some of their allies. Since student loans have come under the auspices of the federal government, it’s easy to think there is a Mount Everest-sized mountain of unending money just waiting for people to take without consequence. And that group of people includes…drumroll please…college administrators and Boards of Regents. These are the people who evaluate tuition costs, and in recent years they’ve refused tuition increases as often as I’ve refused to eat medium rare steaks: it’s never come up.
And when you consider a significant percentage of administrators lean to the Left, it’s Leftists who are making the student loan debt issue worse.
To borrow a phrase from Philip Joseph Watson, “Imagine my shock.”
But the damage goes even further. With the rising cost of tuition, are students getting the bang for Uncle Sam’s buck? Well…let’s just say a lot of the banging going on is limited to the coeds. Students and parents alike believe tuition is too high and can create economic anxiety with students, which negatively affects their ability to learn.
Not that the curricula may have that much value anymore. Sure, you’ll have the hard sciences and more business-focused courses, but most of the time the courses being offered will help you in the job market as much as tattooing “I’m Unhireable” on your forehead. And I’m saying that as someone with an English Language and Literature degree! So, if you’re looking for a cushy corner office job with your Non-Binary Native American Tap Dance degree, you’re shit out of luck.
Unless, of course, you decide to go into teaching. You may not get a corner office, but being a professor can be lucrative and, aside from doing scholarly research to keep up on the trends in the field of study, it’s not too bad of a gig. Of course, this doesn’t help the student loan situation any, but hey.
Another area of agreement I have with the Left on the student loan issue is the expectations being put upon young adults. The documentation necessary to apply for a student loan is enough to make the Sierra Club cry like the Native American from that commercial. There’s a lot of legalese and verbiage to wade through and even then you may not know enough of the details to know what’s expected of you. To help with this, I have a simplified student loan process.
1. Tell the borrower how much they owe.
2. Tell the borrower when and how to make payments.
3. Tell the borrower what happens if/when payments can’t be made.
That’s it. And really that’s as complicated as it needs to be. Cut out the “party of the first part” jazz and get to the point. It’s going to make everyone a lot happier.
There’s another level to the student loan issue where the Left is at cross purposes. One of the squawking points is it’s impossible for 18 year olds to understand the terms of a student loan, so it’s irresponsible for lenders to hold them responsible for the debt. Yet, they also believe a child can know whether he or she is trans as early as 3 or 4.
So let me get this straight (or whatever sexual orientation you are). A preschooler can know he or she is trans, but an 18 year old can’t figure out that if you borrow money you have to pay it back at some point? If you flip the ages, it makes more sense, but as it stands in Leftist circles, it doesn’t, and I can’t make it make sense.
The reason for this contradiction is simple: Leftists aren’t known for making sense. But more to the point, treating young adults as though they’re children creates victims in search of an oppressor. And, surprise surprise, the oppressor tends to be the nameless, faceless monolith of whatever Boogieman the Left wants to blame for it this microsecond. Combine that with the ideological instruction these students are getting, and you have a ready-made army willing to go to the wall for a cause.
And a bunch of underinformed foot soldiers looking for direction.
This piece of advice may be a little late for some, but it needs to be said. Before you apply for any loan, look over the terms. This is Common Sense 101, but far too often people sign the documents before they think about the consequences. That’s one big reason so many people ran into problems during the mortgage industry implosion of the late 2000s: they assumed the good times would keep rolling. Then when shit went sideways, they weren’t prepared.
And that brings up another piece of advice. If you have a child or teenager in your lives, teach them about fiscal responsibility early and often. (Like voting in Chicago!) Taking a few hours to teach them about budgeting, saving, and smart spending will save them years of having to deal with the negative repercussions of overspending and underearning. If you want a quick course, tell them about the national debt and how both major parties spend like drunken sailors.
And if you’re in the group of young adults coming to the realization those loans you took out are coming due, you won’t get anywhere by complaining on TikTok, nor looking for Big Daddy Government to bail you out. After I graduated college, there were more than a few lean years as I tried to find my footing in the corporate world. That’s normal, but it’s not impossible to overcome if you plan accordingly.
This isn’t to give the Right a pass when they suggest graduates stop eating avocado toast to make ends meet. That’s a simplistic viewpoint that doesn’t help the problem. If you want to help, offer your knowledge on how to budget and determine how to recognize needs versus wants.*
*Offer void to anyone in government right now
Student loans have become a necessary evil (emphasis on “evil”) due to forces outside of the borrowers’ control. Regardless of where you fall on the political spectrum, we should strive to address the core issues and bring them under control so college students and their families don’t spend restless nights worrying how to pay for an education and focus on ore important activities.
Like heavy drinking!
Extremist Makeover- Harvard Edition
It’s been a rough few years for the good folks at Harvard University. Controversies ranging from alleged plagiarism by one of the administrators to, well, a whole lotta antisemitism on campus have turned the faces of alumni and administrators…crimson.
I’ll see myself out.
Okay, I’m back. Now, I may not have an Ivy League education, but I have a few ideas to help Harvard out of its current situation.
First off, you have a Code of Conduct that everyone is supposed to follow, but it’s not. When you have a set of rules and you ignore them, it doesn’t end well. You might wind up like Congress!
Seriously, though, the Code of Conduct shouldn’t just be a good idea that occasionally gets enforced depending on the situation (or more specifically the ideology of the offenders). Either have it or don’t. And if you have it, use it!
Along with this, you might want to tone down the tone-deafness when it comes to the anti-Jewish sentiment. I know things in Gaza are as unsteady as Britney Spears these days, but there is a fine line between protesting and menacing a certain segment of students who may or may not agree with Israel’s actions. Not to mention, you might have a few Jewish lawyers lining up to sue Harvard if you don’t turn the anti-Jewish sentiment from an 11 (because it’s one higher) to, oh, a -43.
Now, for the administration to accomplish these two initial steps, they have to stop trying to act like the “cool parents” and start acting more like Red Foreman from “That 70s Show.” Take control of the situation, hand out punishments appropriate to the offenses, and stick to your proverbial guns. Don’t try to reason with the offenders. Don’t coddle them or encourage them. Lay down the law, or in this case the Code of Conduct. And if some of the student body doesn’t like it, call them dumbasses (if you’ll pardon the vulgarity) like Mr. Foreman would do.
Also, and I hate to bring this up, but an Ivy League education isn’t as prestigious as it used to be. Granted, the quality of higher education has gotten a lot lower in recent decades, but Moose Knuckle Community College, Tire and Lube, Hairdressing Salon, and Mini Mart is no Harvard. It used to be an honor to attend Harvard, Yale, or any other Ivy League school. Now, it’s a pit stop for rich kids before they get a nepotism hire or a role in a company that looks more at where you went to school than whether you can actually do the job.
You know, like Congress!
Yes, I know I used that joke earlier. What can I say? I like recycling!
To stem the tide, at least where Harvard is concerned, the administration needs to take academics seriously. That means attracting the best and brightest, not just to attend, but to teach. And that means finding people who want to teach, not just pawn off work to TAs so they don’t have to teach an 8 AM Advanced Bisexual Chinese Poetry About Dwarfs class.
And while we’re here, can we do something about the useless classes and majors that permeate colleges and universities these days? I’m sure there’s a market for The Philosophy of Katy Perry’s Pseudo-Space Launch, but that doesn’t mean Harvard has to offer it. Be a bit more picky than Taylor Swift when tracking down another ex-boyfriend to write songs about for a future album. Strive for the highest quality of curricula and the teachers for them. Sure, you may not get as much money by not offering the aforementioned Katy Perry course, but you won’t also get called out for offering such a vapid course in the first place, so it’s a win-win.
This next bit may be harder to address, but you won’t know if you don’t try. Find professors whose politics are closer to, say, the middle than to the freaky outer limits of the Left. This is going back a few decades, but the best professors I’ve ever had were ones who taught the coursework without interjecting politics, like, at all. I’m sure they had their ideological beliefs, but it was hard to pick out from the material being taught. Professors shouldn’t be punished for having political opinions (that’s what tenure is supposed to prevent), but it shouldn’t be the core of their teaching style, either.
Finally, have a real commitment to free speech on campus. And, yes, that means hearing from all sides, not just the ones you agree with because, believe it or not, there are some intelligent people out there on the Right. Imagine learning economics from Dr. Thomas Sowell, for example. Not only would you get a high-level education on the subject, but it would be in a manner that is engaging, challenging, and thorough.
And given the number of champagne socialists running around on campus these days, they could use an economics course or fifty.
Although it’s going to take a while for Harvard to go from laughingstock to leading the academic world, I don’t think it’s a lost cause just yet. Making a few changes will make the Harvard experience worth chasing again. The alternative is to become the academic equivalent of the “Snow White” live-action movie: underwhelming, over budget, and more sparsely populated than the hairs on Vin Diesel’s head.
Extremist Makeover – Disney Edition
To put it mildly, the current state of Disney is looking bleak, and this is the same company that gave us “The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes.” After getting two of the biggest intellectual properties in pop culture history in Star Wars and Marvel, it was assumed the House of Mouse would be churning out profitable movies and TV shows.
Yeah, about that…
Instead of making money, Disney started making enemies of its core audience. Sure, you had the Avengers movies which raked in tons of money, but live action versions of “The Little Mermaid” and more recently “Snow White” made less money than I did working for a fly-by-night three-day-old sushi franchise called “Still Better than Chipotle.” The fan bases that would normally flock to these movies flocked to the Interwebs to trash Disney’s offerings as “woke garbage.”
And those are the good reviews!
Granted, Disney hasn’t helped matters by putting out woke garbage under the guise of entertainment. Whether it was Kathleen Kennedy stinking up the Star Wars franchise (with the help of J.J. “I Haven’t Seen a Lens Flare I Haven’t Loved” Abrams) or the third wave of Marvel movies and TV shows that have focused more on diversity than, you know, coming up with good stories, it seems Disney has lost its way.
Well, I’m here to help in my own unique way. And considering I’m more of a Bugs Bunny than a Mickey Mouse fan, you know things are bad.
Let’s deal with the elephant in the room, and I’m not talking about Dumbo: you’re driving away potential fans with what you’re doing. I get that you want to grow your base while recognizing the diversity that’s out there, but you’re going about it all wrong. Your approach so far has been to inject the diversity you want to see in the world, wrap it in a half-baked plot, and claim whatever ism you want to blame for the inevitable poor performance. But here’s a little secret.
Not everyone who criticizes the flaming dumpster fires you call entertainment is a bigot. Yes, there are people like that in every group, but you have to try to sift through the hate and trolling to find the kernel of truth. And considering there seems to be a consistent theme of “this is bad and you should feel bad,” you might want to pay attention.
Here’s an example from my own experience. After hearing all sorts of bad things about “Captain Marvel,” I decided to give it a watch. After all, I didn’t want to judge it unfairly and I have an affinity for bad movies. I turned it off after 10 minutes because Brie Larson was so unbearable as a “girl boss” character. I didn’t get any sense of the character she was playing (and I place a good chunk of the blame for that on Larson herself) and I didn’t really care to learn anything more about her. She was just…annoying.
This is one of the things Disney capitalizes on, yet fails to understand in any discernible way: girls want to be princesses, too. Not every girl wants to be a girl boss, and not every female character has to be one to be interesting, or in Larson’s case, not be repulsive to potential fans. Even making Captain Marvel a Disney Princess in “The Marvels” falls flat because she lacks one of the major parts of being one: we like the character.
Compare this to Merida from “Brave.” Although she may be overlooked as compared to the others, she is both determined without being, well, Brie Larson-levels of annoying. And she is, now listen carefully, relatable. We can see ourselves in Merida because she goes through many of the emotions and experiences we do or have. She’s the everyman…er girl…er Princess.
Are you starting to see why “Snow White” flopped more than a drunk fat fratboy jumping into a pool during Spring Break? I’m sure Rachel Zegler is talented, but she didn’t exactly endear herself to the potential audience by putting herself over the Disney cartoon on which her role was based. Even if you wanted to do an updated version, you don’t have to dump all over the source material.
Especially when it’s one of the best animated films Disney has ever done, one that has been beloved for almost 90 flipping years!
This is Marketing 101 stuff, folks. Know your brand and protect it at all costs. In short, don’t use a major IP for an outhouse. In fact, this may be the first step towards Disney regaining its footing: require Disney execs to take a marketing class for an actual grade, minimum grade of a C+ or they get booted. I’ll even allow them to take it at an institute of higher learning suited to what appears to be their intellectual level, Greendale Community College.
By the way, #sixseasonsandamovie.
While the current execs are busy at school, find talent within the company who have an actual passion for storytelling, film-making, acting, et cetera, because these are the folks who will rebuild the foundation of the House of Mouse. Much of the pushback against Disney right now is based on the notion they’re more interested in pushing agendas than producing movies and shows people want to see. And on some level, they’re right.
You have to decide whether the agenda or the final product is more important. Look at it this way. If you want to spread an agenda, you need an audience, and nobody’s going to pay to see your agenda-driven passion project if you’re not making people want to see it. Tone down the agenda and weave it into a good story with characters we feel for. Sure, that means acting roles for the aforementioned Ms. Larson and Ms. Ziegler are going to be few and far between, but I think it will be better for everyone involved. And by everyone, I mean the audience.
Another possible option is to spin off a section of the company that will specifically work on the agenda-driven shows and movies. It will still be part of Disney, just under a different part of the company umbrella. That way you can tell the stories you want to tell without having to worry about having to make money. In short, you’re going to become the brother-in-law who moves in, sleeps on the couch, and eats all the food in the house without chipping in.
As part of this spin-off, you will need people who know about the IPs you’re bastardizing…I mean using. For that, you kinda need the fans you’ve been crapping on to help guide you. For all their faults, they care about the source material and can bring insights into the process that you might not have thought of in your dream to bring an albino quadriplegic gender-queer otherkin Jedi order into the Star Wars universe. Or at the very least, they can devise a canonical reason why such an order exists instead of relying on “muh fee-fees.”
Ditto for the Marvel IPs. Your decisions have turned a guaranteed money-making machine into a product that is lucky to recoup its money. Sure, they hit all the ideological marks you wanted, but that doesn’t mean anything if you’re not getting eyes on the product and driving away potential fans. For example, “She-Hulk: Attorney at Law” has gotten middling reviews and gotten more than its fair share of hatred, some by people who would complain about anything (basically 99% of people online), but some who have a legitimate love of the character.
Of course, when the star of said show goes out of her way to attack the fan base to this very day…yeah, not a good look.
The best way to navigate your way out of this situation is similar to that with the Star Wars franchise: come up with good stories and engaging characters and let them do the talking. And as a Marvel fan, I can tell you there are a lot of characters that haven’t been tapped, but certainly can be with the right approach and with people who actually care about them. And if you can’t find a great story during the entire history of Marvel to adapt, you’re not looking hard enough.
So, Disney, you’re not out of the woods yet, but you’re not a completely lost cause. Let me give you a piece of advice to get you back on track. Take everything you’ve done over the past few years, all the advice you’ve gotten, all the direction you’ve been given, and the like. Then, do the exact opposite. Before you know it, the House of Mouse will be back on a solid foundation.
Of a lot of money.