Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Being a member of law enforcement at any level isn’t a cakewalk, especially in these politically charged times. This is doubly so for the men and women on the front lines of our southern border, who tend to catch heck for sneezing in the general direction of an illegal immigrant.

This past week, a photo of a Border Patrol agent on horseback apparently whipping an illegal immigrant from Haiti made the rounds, setting off a firestorm of criticism. Even though there were no actual whips in the photo, the Left whipped up resentment towards the Border Patrol. Yes, the same people who want to defund the police, abolish ICE, and say no human is illegal thinks the people enforcing our borders are meanie-heads.

And as we’ll see, it’s no coincidence these issues are connected.

Border Patrol

What the Left thinks it means – the tyrannical arm of the US government, targeting poor defenseless people trying to make a better life in America

What it really means – a group of people trying to hold the line against illegal immigration without much support from politicians

America has been a beacon of hope for many an immigrant for centuries. But as anyone who has ever owned a bug zapper will tell you, a beacon can attract less desirable elements who will use every trick in their arsenals to take advantage of our largesse. Unlike the bug zapper, though, we tend not to electrocute illegal immigrants. Instead, we take them into our country without stopping to think about the consequences.

To try to curtail the criminal element and deter future border jumpers, ICE and the Border Patrol work around the clock trying to get a handle on things. Unfortunately for them, we as a country haven’t gotten a handle on things since the 1980s. Politicians from the Left and the Right have failed to put a dent in the waves of illegal immigrants coming into the country and using our resources. Thanks to current President and hairplug spokesmodel Joe Biden, ICE and the Border Patrol have their short-staffed hands full.

Provided, of course, the Left doesn’t smack their hands for trying to do their jobs. Just look at their “solution” for dealing with the Border Patrol agents who were accused of whipping Haitian immigrants: take their horses away. Thus, making their jobs more difficult. All because the Left jumped to a conclusion Robbie Knievel wouldn’t even try with full medical coverage. But that’s par for the course for the Left in this situation.

See, the Left has a vested interest in keeping a steady stream of illegal immigrants coming into the country like teenagers to a K-Pop concert. This interest takes on multiple forms, but they all wind up fulfilling the Left’s political and social goals, thanks in to figures like Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, Saul Alinsky, and our good friend Uncle George Soros. All four of them have had a pretty strong hand in shaping Leftist ideology for decades, and it doesn’t end well for us. Here is a brief description of what they’ve added to the Leftist hivemind.

Cloward and Piven – developed a strategy to overwhelm the social support system to create more poverty and upset within the country, causing discord and fomenting revolution

Alinsky – the author of Rules for Radicals, which outlines ways for Leftists to make progress on social and political issues

Soros – advocate/creator of the Open Society Institute, which advocates for no borders whatsoever and everyone being a part of one global society, as well as an effort to control state election offices to help Leftist politicians get elected

With Soros and his disciples promoting the idea there shouldn’t be borders, it allows Leftists to promote ideas that will give the green light for illegal immigrants to come here. Once here, the Cloward and Piven strategy kicks in, putting a strain on existing programs through sheer volume. When critics come out against the first two concepts, Alinsky’s rules come into play. The result? More potential Democrat voters, which allows the cycle to continue. It’s brilliant in its deviousness.

And what’s one group of people who can throw a King Kong-sized monkey wrench into all of this? The Border Patrol. If they’re allowed to do their job, it will curtail the number of illegal immigrants coming into the country and getting all the bennies the Left is willing to give them because…reasons. So, instead of figuring out a way to…you know…change the laws on the books, the Left focuses their attention on the ones least capable of fighting back.

Including purposely mischaracterizing a photo to make it look worse than it actually was.

Unfortunately for the Left, the narrative is starting to break down like the Socialist Socialite after losing her battle to defund the Iron Dome in Israel. The primary source (i.e. the photographer who took the picture the Left is using to bash the Border Patrol) is saying the photo is being taken out of context and doesn’t reflect what really happened. Furthermore, the Border Patrol and eagle-eyed horse riders are pointing out the lack of whips in the photo itself. Even so, Twitter Leftists and their governmental counterparts are clinging to the original lie…I mean story. There are a few reasons for this, but one that should be at the top of the list is confirmation bias.

For those of you who have a life, confirmation bias is when a person believes a certain way because it affirms what they already believe. The Left already believes the Border Patrol is a bunch of racist thugs anyway, so it’s not that much of an effort to believe in the narrative in spite of the evidence to the contrary. That, and the fact the Left hate to admit they’re wrong more than The Fonz. Imagine that. A group of dishonest idealogues that already hates law enforcement trying to paint a group of law enforcement agents in a bad light? Who knew???

Well, those of us outside the Leftist hivemind did. While we wait for Jen Psaki to circle back and tell us another lie, keep the Border Patrol in your thoughts and prayers. They need them now more than ever.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If you listen to the Left for any amount of time (and, to be honest, why would you?), eventually the conversation will come to race. And by “eventually” I mean within microseconds. Recently, there’s been a new term that, surprise surprise, directly connects to race: white rage. Whether it’s CNN’s Brian “Mr. Potato Head” Stetler claiming Fox News’ Tucker Carlson stokes white rage or current Head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark “Not Vanilli” Milley testifying the military should take training to avoid white rage, it seems the Left wants to make it a thing, and a racial thing at that.

But, just like with Critical Race Theory, it’s not exactly clear what white rage is. Good thing there’s someone who can cut through the bullshit and get to the heart of the matter. But since that person is off, you’ll have to let me do it.

white rage

What the Left thinks it means – white people’s reaction when their power and influence in the world is threatened, the most important problem in America today

What it really means – an accusation with little actual proof, but a lot of actual racism

As a white man, I get labeled with a lot of shit from the Left based solely on the color of my skin and what they believe what I believe. The Left sees me as a Bible-thumping, flyover country bumpkin who hates gays, blacks, women, albino midget Eskimos who walk with a limp, and so on. Now, to be fair, they are right about the albino midget Eskimo bit, but the rest of it is based off a serious of assumptions the Left has deemed to be true without affirmative proof.

And that’s the same basic principle behind white rage. As Leftists can’t leave a PR crisis untouched, they point to the 1/6 “insurrection” as evidence and bludgeon anyone who supports Donald Trump as someone who is one bad day away from being a mass shooter or insurgent against America. And if we’re not careful, white rage is going to create chaos (and that’s the Left’s job, darn it)!

Now, where have I heard that kind of verbiage before? Wasn’t there a movement in, say, the mid-to-late 90s that were considered to be dangerous crackpots not unlike the people the Left claim are out there waiting to strike? Why, yes. Yes, there was! It was the militia movement, and the rhetoric started to kick into high gear not long after the Oklahoma City bombing. The Left did their best to paint Timothy McVeigh as the typical militia member, even though he was kicked out of his local militia and had a record voting for Democrats, but why let the facts get in the way of a good narrative, right?

Last time I checked, the militia movement of the 90s didn’t cause any of the things the Left said would definitely happen if we didn’t do something right now. If anything, they just wanted to be by themselves to LARP as the National Guard, which is perfectly fine in my book. Just leave me be and don’t ask me to pay for your reindeer games.

Now, the Left is trying to resurrect the fear of militias and spin it into white rage. Within the Leftist hivemind, it works, mainly because a) it reaffirms their preconceived ideas about non-Leftists, and b) most Leftists today may not have even been born in the 90s or were too young to remember Militia Mania. That makes it easier to be successful than a coke dealer working on the Hunter Biden account. But here’s the thing: the fact it’s easy doesn’t make it right. Just like with the militia movement rhetoric, there isn’t anything concrete that suggests white rage is even a thing.

Except if you look at the Left.

Last year showcased a lot of violence and destruction from members of Antifa and Black Lives Matter. Although the Left swears up and down they weren’t responsible, the mugshots after the arrests show a different story. It seems most of the people arrested were…white. And the majority of BLM members? Also white. Hmmm…destroying property, attacking cops…that sounds a lot like the way the Left characterized 1/6, doesn’t it? And if 1/6 is an example of white rage, logic might lead us to conclude Antifa and BLM are examples of white rage, too.

Of course, this isn’t about logic. This is about pushing a racist narrative because the Left needs to make us believe white people are evil racist bastards. Call me conspiratorial, but I find it interesting the whole white rage concept didn’t get traction until fairly recently during a time when the Left wants to push Critical Race Theory that teaches…white people are evil racist bastards. With the pushback against CRT coming from mostly white parents, the Left appears to have scrambled to find a reason people might be against it and landed on white rage. On a side note, I swear the Left has a giant wheel with derogatory phrases they spin whenever they want to blame whites for something.

There’s a rule of thumb I’ve seen online that applies here. If you replace the racial word with a different race and think it’s racist, then it’s racist. This concept certainly applies to white rage, but there’s a twist. By assigning rage to whites only, the Left suggests no other race can get angry, which diminishes the other races’ agency. Under the Left’s constantly-changing definition of racism, that would be racism.

But in a Rod Serling-esque twist, I have to point out the ones who claim there is white rage…are white Leftists. They seem to have forgotten in their rush to make white rage all the rage who they are.

Normally this is the part where I give you advice on how to deal with the latest Leftist controversy-du-joir. This time there isn’t any advice to give because white rage is going to fall in on itself without us having to lift a finger. There is simply too much implausibility and illogic to adopt at once for it to survive much outside of the Leftist bubble. But should you run into a Leftist bound and determined to talk about white rage, ask them how they felt about the Antifa folks arrested in Portland and how they were predominantly white.

Then ask them to repeat what they said about white rage.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If there’s one thing Leftists love to do more than spending other people’s money, it’s playing with the English language. With the advent of “cancel culture,” the Left got caught off-guard a bit, but have since rolled out a new term to describe people getting rightly called out for bad behavior, either in the past or right now. Enter Hunter Biden and a couple of emails where he used a word that can be construed as negative towards blacks. Oh, and did I mention Hunter is white?

While we wait on the Left to try to walk out of the rhetorical minefield they’ve created, let’s take a closer look at this revamp of cancel culture.

consequence culture

What the Left thinks it means – holding people accountable for bad words and actions

What it really means – cancel culture with no time limit

Although it’s nice to see the Left embracing consequences for bad actions, as opposed to trying to federally subsidize them, let’s not fool ourselves. The Left believes in consequences…for everybody else. And they are the only ones who can determine what constitutes an offense and how severe it is. But the best part? They are the only ones who can determine if someone is forgiven. That’s a pretty sweet gig if you can get it, and if it has a good dental plan.

So, where does the consequence part of consequence culture come into play? If you’re a conservative or even a libertarian like me, it always applies. Even if your only crime is not being as Leftist as the hivemind, you can be a target. Just ask Ellie Kemper. She was crowned Queen of Love and Beauty at a debutante ball in 1999 connected to the Veiled Prophet Organization. As a result, she was attacked last week on social media for participating because the group had “an unquestionably racist, sexist, and elitist past,” according to Ms. Kemper’s apology.

Here’s the issue. By the time she was part of the pageant, the group had integrated. Gone were the days of white supremacy and/or exclusivity. Ms. Kemper was punished because she won a pageant from the wrong group at a time when that group had become more racially diverse. Why they chose Ms. Kemper to attack is beyond me, but then again most Leftist thinking is beyond me these days.

So, why does Hunter “I Prefer Coke to Pepsi” Biden get a pass for being a racist and Ellie Kemper get lambasted for not being one? Well, we’d better call Saul. Alinsky, that is. In his book Rules for Radicals, Alinsky gave us 13 rules that the Left continue to use. Without going into a diatribe on all 13, the basic ideas come down to how to hurt your political enemies while ensuring your allies don’t get bored with your agenda.

One of these rules in particular strikes me as apropos in the aforementioned instances: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” For the purposes of this sketch, the enemy is anyone who isn’t a hardcore Leftist. The key to this rule’s effectiveness comes down to appearances. If the Left wants you to think it has the power to hurt you personally, professionally, or monetarily, they will project an air of invincibility and popularity in the public circle. An example of this is their “right side of history” bullshit.

The obvious weakness with that argument, as well as their use of the Left’s version of The Art of War, is its reliance on illusion. Once you pull the curtain back and see who Oz really is, their strategy goes the way of disco. After that, the Left will only have the power you let them have. And with their ANTIFA and BLM squads LARPing as revolutionaries, the only card they have left in their deck is threat of violence. Then, it becomes a value decision: are you willing to ruin your life and the lives of your family members to hold a particular point of view?

That’s where the Left’s concept of consequence comes into play. Their goal is to silence the opposition by any means necessary. Knuckle under or be brought to heel. Of course, you could always pull a David Brock and become a rabid Leftist. Then, you can have all the coke binges, illegal firearms, and criminal activity you want. The Left will go out of their way to ensure you are protected from those mean ole conservatives! I believe the Mob has something similar. I believe it’s called…protection?

Wait. Is that what is at the heart of consequence culture? Why, yes! Yes it is! With a little help from Uncle Saul, the Left has perfected the art of the shakedown to the point Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton may want to take notes, and not C-notes for a change.

But remember what I said earlier about this approach’s fatal flaw. As long as the Left has to deceive to make their point, they are never going to argue from a position of power unless we give it to them. On top of that, the more they play fast and loose with who is eligible to be held accountable, the harder it becomes for them to argue in good faith. These two strikes alone are enough to undercut the Left, but the third strike come from us. The Left needs us to act emotionally so it plays to their strengths, but they will get thrown off if your reaction doesn’t match their expectations. Their overconfidence becomes their Achilles heel because it limits their ability to see other options besides the ones they assume will be the ones we will take. Deprive them of their actual strength and deny them the power they want you to think they have, and they are weaker than Logan Paul’s fight game.

Then, really surprise them by holding them accountable to the rules they set up for everyone else because…well…consequence culture.

Who Is That Masked Man?

By the time you read this, I will have gotten my second COVID-19 shot, mainly because of the screaming and crying I’ll be doing afterwards. As a result, I may not need to wear a mask all the time, provided the CDC doesn’t flip flop like John Kerry in cheap sandals working a VFW pancake breakfast. However, I’ve made up my mind to continue wearing a mask indoors.

This isn’t a decision I’ve taken lightly. On the one hand, I’ve spent a good chunk of change on cool-looking masks that show my appreciation for different fandoms. On the other, my glasses keep fogging up, so I have to readjust my masks on a regular basis. But there was one factor that tipped the scales for me.

Other people.

Now, I’m not just talking about making others feel more secure or giving them one less thing to worry about. I’m not even talking about being accused of being an anti-vaxer/conservative/Republican/Trump supporter/science denier/whatever new name the Left wants to call me today. I am, however, talking the people who have taken it upon themselves to be the Mask Police.

Even before COVID-19 was a thing, there were people who constantly wanted to get in other peoples’ business for one reason or another. Usually, it’s because they don’t have lives of their own and want to create drama so there is some excitement to talk about. Plus, it feeds a need in them to be righteous (even if it’s the self variety) and to virtue signal.

And neither one is worthy enough to warrant such people to act.

Good luck trying to tell them that, though. Judging from my thankfully few interactions with them, they don’t seem to be the most open-minded of folks. And as a male in a family where stubbornness is a feature instead of a bug, that’s saying something if I’m the one pointing it out. What sets these folks apart from a Gladys Kravitz type is the fact they feel justified in causing harm to others in the pursuit of their goals. If one of them sees you infringing upon what they think the rules should be, it isn’t that much of a stretch for him or her to figure out who you are, contact your employer, and advising them of the kind of scumbag you are (to them). If not that, they’ll publicly shame you, often with high pitched screaming that would make dogs turn their heads to the noise.

And that’s why I’ll keep wearing a mask, if only to save my hearing. The larger point, however, is why we’re allowing the self-professed Mask Police to dictate how we act, whether it be indirect action like me wearing a mask to avoid confrontation or direct action like punching them in the nose. They are nothing short of bullies, and I’ll bet more than a few of them talk at length about online bullying because, well, zero self-awareness.

But it’s all about personal responsibility, right? To a point, yes, but not to the point the Mask Police take it. With the Internet, we have access to tons of information we might not otherwise have, and a good chunk of that is personal. A post on Facebook here, a mildly controversial statement there, and before you know it, you’re worse than Hitler. And if you think I’m exaggerating to make a point, I only wish I were. There are news reports by the thousands of people being harassed offline for actions and sentiments taken online, and it’s not just the Trump fans, either. We have reached a point where we run right for the nukes when all we need is a fly-swatter all because we think we’re right to do it.

But here’s where I part ways. In some cases, it’s necessary to expose a scumbag so others know about it and can take or demand action be taken to rectify it. But not everyone is a scumbag. Yes, not your BLM-loving sister-in-law or your Trump-loving cousin, and certainly not a complete stranger you ran into at the Shop-N-Save. You have to know your boundaries, and I’m afraid the Karens and Kevins of the world don’t.

That’s where we come in. As much as I don’t like to start conflict, it’s come to the point where I feel I have to step in to deescalate these situations or at least take the heat off the person being targeted. Because even though I wear a mask, it doesn’t mean I’m excused from duty when a situation gets heated. If I want to live my life without harming others, I have to allow others to do the same and stand up when someone is harming someone else.

That includes you, Mask Police. Nobody appointed you to this task, so you have no authority unless I give it to you. I’m masking up so you won’t have to find out what happens when I dig in for a fight, but don’t think I’ll knuckle under if you overstep your authority. Let me put it this way, in the words of a great philosopher.

Don’t start none, won’t be none.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

If you’re a news junkie, last week was a coke-fueled Charlie Sheen-esque bender. Between the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Narnia…I mean Palestine, hackers halting production and causing a gas shortage on the East Coast, and Caitlyn Jenner being, well, Caitlyn Jenner, one man rose to the top of my list of topics to cover: Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Fauci is a divisive figure in the field of medicine, but with the Left he is a golden boy who can do no wrong. (I’ll get into the reason why later, so stay tuned.) Sure, he has his critics, but the Left is able to excuse the alleged transgressions and treat him as the most credible person on Earth regarding COVID-19. Whether the rest of us should put as much faith in him…well, let’s just say there’s enough material to craft a Leftist Lexicon entry.

Dr. Anthony Fauci

What the Left thinks it means – a world-renowned infectious disease expert, a man of science

What it really means – an indecisive medical expert who loves the limelight more than the science

I know I’m speaking heresy here, but I’ve been following Dr. Fauci’s advice about COVID-19 from the start. As a fan of science myself, I paid attention to his briefings and really tried to digest what he said. That is, of course, until the advice he gave started flying in the face, or rather mask, of common sense. At first, he said masks weren’t effective. Then, he said they were. Now, he’s even suggesting wearing double masks. As much as I like to follow the science, it’s hard when the science careens in wild directions like a drunk Super Ball.

Of course, the Left chalks this up to the science changing rapidly. They have a point, but only to a point. With something as tricky as COVID-19, the science is bound to change rapidly as new data become available. Having said that, these changes typically don’t happen from one speech to the next…in the same day…and without alerting people (namely, the audience) to the change. An inflexible boilerplate speech regarding a global pandemic isn’t a good look.

That’s where the Left comes in. No matter what Dr. Fauci says that contradicts himself or other scientific sources, the Left treats it as gospel. Ironic, given how hostile the Left is to organized religion…or is it?

Ever since global warming became a thing back in the 1990s thanks to Al Gore, the Left has deified science to the point it cannot be challenged without being called a non-believer. What do they call people who question the “science” of global climate change? Aside from “people who didn’t flunk science like the climate change cultists did,” they’re called “science-deniers.” Now, I’ve always found this to be a misnomer because I know of very few people who deny science. Maybe they have a different opinion or place a different value on it, but not too many people out-and-out deny science.

By the same token, though, it’s also a pretty big tell that the Left has turned science into a religion, if not a cult that would make L. Ron Hubbard salivate. You know, if he were alive and stuff. But it’s funny to me to watch Leftists mock people of faith for believing what they consider to be silly and unfounded ideas while these same Leftists hang on every word Dr. Fauci says like it’s manna from Heaven.

And that’s where the “Party of Science” goes off the rails. The major problem with putting science on a pedestal is the fact…now hear me out here…it can be wrong and/or corrupted. Science at its best is bound by human understanding, and a lot of the time our understanding lags well behind the science, causing a lot of bad ideas under the guise of scientific fact. World history and more than a few graveyards are full of examples of what can happen if we’re not putting on our thinking caps and our morality pants before trying something we think will be cool.

And I think we’re on the verge of making that mistake again. Not that I think Dr. Fauci is a quack, mind you. The problem I have is putting so much faith (and, yes, it is faith, possibly of the blind variety) in what he says that we stop thinking for ourselves and questioning ideas that don’t seem to make sense. At worst, we raise questions that get answered honestly and factually, which pretty much eliminates much of the “Party of Science.” Anything beyond that is gravy. Hard science is built on the foundation of challenging ideas and finding a better understanding of the world around us. Anyone who professes love for science but hates to have it questioned when it doesn’t make sense may be entrenched in the Cult of Science or covering up for mistakes they know they’ve made.

I’m looking right at you, Michael “Hockey Stick Graph” Mann.

But let’s give Dr. Fauci the benefit of the doubt and not paint him with the same brush as Al Gore’s number-fudging buddy. Let’s look at his track record with COVID-19.

On second thought, I’m sure his acolytes and he would appreciate that we not do that because it shows he wasn’t always following the science. Instead, it seemed like he was following the politics. When the Left said we didn’t need to wear masks, he said we didn’t need to wear masks. When the Left said COVID-19 wasn’t that big a deal, Fauci agreed. Once the Left’s tune changed (i.e. when they figured out how to blame Donald Trump for their incompetence while trying to memory-hole their own statements), Fauci’s did, too. And let’s be clear, the Left wasn’t following the science; they were following their typical political mantra, “Orange Man Bad.” We can criticize the way President Trump handled the COVID-19 situation, but we will be doing a grave disservice if we don’t include those who contributed to the lack of trust in the science.

And that includes Dr. Fauci.

The fact such a prominent medical figure can be so publicly contradictory without his credibility taking a bigger hit than the aforementioned Mr. Sheen at the aforementioned coke binge is a mystery to me, but remember the Left doesn’t think about the long term, just what they can get away with in the short term. With Dr. Fauci, they got a walking contradiction that they could spin into an appeal to authority complete with a doctor’s coat and a semi-impressive CV. The fact he could be turned into an anti-Trump cudgel was a bonus. And with grown adults fawning over him like teenagers at a BTS concert, I’m guessing the good doctor doesn’t mind the attention because he typically works under thankless conditions.

At what cost, however? Sure, the action figures and the “Fauci Ouchie” Twitter posts are neat, but at some point, that attention is going to fade and Dr. Fauci will become just another old white man in a lab coat that the Left will pretend not to know. If you’re reading this, Dr. Fauci (and I know you are because, why not), remember Cindy Sheehan? That could be you in a few months.

I hope you like ditches, Doc…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

There are times when I shake my head in disbelief at what the Left takes seriously. This is one of those times.

It starts with New York Times tech reporter Taylor Lorenz taking her role to new depths by attempting to publicly shame a conservative mother online through bullying her daughter. Rightly, Lorenz has been called out for this behavior. Then, she started complaining about online harassment she’s received, which caused many a Leftist to ignore the utter garbage she did to warrant the attention. Thanks to Tucker Carlson naming Lorenz and using a photo of her available on the Times website, the victimhood meter got turned up to 11 through the invocation of a magical phrase the Left has been using for the past few years, “online violence.”

Let’s demystify this term, shall we?

online violence

What the Left thinks it means – mistreatment of minorities and women online, including taunts, insults, and trolling

What it really means – a made-up controversy with real-life inspiration

With the advent of the World Wide Web (thank you, Al Gore…not!), American society changed forever. Even though we were able to chat with people around the world, our worlds shrank inward. Things we wouldn’t say to people in public were said online, often with our real names attached to them. And don’t get me started on Rule 34. If you don’t know what that is, please don’t ask. You really don’t want to know.

Out of that change came troll culture, which then turned into American culture. And as exchanges got more heated, egos got more fragile. People on social media go from bully to victim in a matter of keystrokes. Hell, I’ve been shit-talked by 12 year olds playing Call of Duty.

Does it cross lines of civilized society? Absolutely. Should we be trying to do better than throwing more shade at people than Rosie O’Donnell sunbathing? No doubt. Is it violence? In a word, no. In two words, fuck no.

Words, by definition, cannot be violence because they lack the ability to be physical. When spoken, they are the expulsion of air through the mouth combine with muscular actions. Even a literal tongue lashing doesn’t involve actual lashing of the tongue. Words can inspire violence (i.e. fighting words), but the words themselves don’t commit the violence.

Now, let’s add in the online element. This may come as a shock to many people, but online life isn’t real life. Even if you believe words are violence (which just confirms you’re a dumbass), the fact the words occurred in the cyber-ether renders your opinion more useless than Eric Swalwell’s security clearance.

So, why are so any people convinced online violence is really? One, online life has made people dumber than a bag of hammers. More importantly, though, it’s a clever play on words the Left uses to convince people it’s a serious problem by playing to their emotions through the negative implications of violence. Let’s be honest. There are very few positive aspects to violence, and those that are positive usually cost at least an extra $50…not that I’d know about that, mind you…

Where was I again? Oh yeah, Leftist word play. By invoking the concept of violence, the Left counts on us to fill in the blanks and assume the worst. Adding the word “online” makes it seem widespread and a direct threat to us personally because everybody and their Grandmother is online these days. Although I get a chuckle imagining an octogenarian trolling a 20 year old over his or her taste in anime, the desired effect is to get us afraid of what could happen.

And by creating that fear, the Left can take your voice, equating legitimate criticism with the modern equivalent of an elementary school taunt, only with more vulgarity. As with other times the Left attempts to manipulate us through creative wording, the key to countering it is to recognize it for what it is and call it out. What Taylor Lorenz and her enablers are trying to do is to escape responsibility for being reprehensible to someone with less power than they have. With Tucker Carlson calling her out, the shoe is on the other foot and now Lorenz is getting a taste of karmic justice.

Let’s just say she’s not a fan. Which makes it all the funnier to me. So, win-win!

Meanwhile, don’t fall prey to the emotional manipulation the Left is using here. They want you to avoid using your brain and simply believe, just like one of the Left’s online darlings Anita Sarkeesian says: Listen and Believe. But when what you’re being told to believe is absurd on its face, you have my blessing not to listen.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The Leftist world was shaken to its core within the past 2 weeks due to allegations of sexual harassment against New York Governor and the Left’s example of how a state can handle the COVID-19 crisis (more on that later), Andrew Cuomo. As of this writing, three women have come forward to accuse the Governor of inappropriate sexual advances, up to and including unwanted touching. In light of these allegations, the Left have circled the wagons to try to discredit the accusations as politically motivated due to former President Donald Trump’s impending legal case before the state court.

Meanwhile, the rest of us are scratching our heads trying to figure out the new rules about sexual harassment. Is it okay to do what Cuomo did, or is it excusable because Trump did worse more often? If only we had a weekly piece that would explore the Left’s mindset on issues like this…oh, wait!

sexual harassment

What the Left thinks it means – unwanted sexual advances or comments made by men in power that make the victims uncomfortable or frightened of possible reprisal

What it really means – unwanted sexual advances or comments made by men in power that make the victims uncomfortable or frightened of possible reprisal, unless you’re a Leftist

We’ve come a long way since Anita Hill accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment, but we’re no closer to making progress on the issue. Powerful men and women have used it to get what they want for decades, and if current events are any indication, it’s still happening. That’s why the #MeToo and #BelieveAllWomen movements got started, folks! Well, that, and it’s easier than a Paris Hilton murder mystery novel plot to appear like you care by tweeting and re-tweeting hashtags.

When it comes to actually doing something about the problem…I guess it depends on who the Left considers an ally. I’m old enough to remember when Senator Bob Packwood was run out of office for chasing a secretary around his desk, and rightly so. Then came Bill Clinton, who was accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault. Certainly worse than chasing a secretary, but not to the Left. They said the accusers weren’t credible, accused them of being money-hungry, and tried to paint the Commander in Briefs as a victim of a “right wing smear.”

Guess what? The Left is doing the same with Cuomo. As inconsistent as they are about what constitutes sexual harassment, they are consistent about recycling bad ideas.

In Cuomo’s case, though, the Left has a bigger target: Donald Trump. Ever since Trump mentioned grabbing women by the puddy tat, the Left has painted him as a sexual predator. As a result, every time a Leftist gets caught doing more than talking about such an act, the Left brings up Trump. I seem to recall there being a term for trying to deflect negative facts by bringing up a tangentially-related person, but I can’t seem to come up with it. What about you, dear reader?

Although I can’t completely discount the possibility of Trump acting like, well, Trump, it doesn’t excuse what Cuomo is alleged to have done. It also doesn’t help Cuomo’s cause that there are photos of him doing what he’s accused of doing, and that the photos support the allegations against him.

But it shows a lot more than the Left wants us to see. For one, it shows us how ugly Cuomo is. I mean, money and power may be aphrodisiacs, but there are limits!

More importantly, though, it shows how far the Left will go to protect their own, even at the expense of optics and ideological consistency. I don’t have the hard data on this yet, but I’m willing to guess a good chunk of the #metoo folks are defending Cuomo by any means necessary at the expense of women. Yet, these are some of the same folks who wonder why more women aren’t believed when they come forward with their allegations. Hmmm…well, I can’t figure it out. I’ll leave it to the “smart” Leftists.

Another tack being used by the Cuomo defenders is they want to have an investigation done into the allegations before they will call for him to resign. By the way, Justice Brett Kavanaugh is on Line 1. He wants to have a word with the Cuomo supporters.

Seriously, though, the defenders will try to act like they’ve always wanted investigations into sexual harassment allegations. I know you’re going to be surprised, but the Left is lying about this, too. When it comes to the Right, any and all allegations are believed, no matter how weak they are. Case in point: Christine Blasey Ford and the aforementioned Brett Kavanaugh. For Kavanaugh, the mere allegations were enough to disqualify him from the High Court, even though Blasey Ford was as credible as a Nigerian prince’s email. The more we dug into the allegations, the less believable they were.

That wasn’t a problem for the Left, though. They still invoke Blasey Ford’s name to show they support and believe women. When the roles are reversed, no benefit of a doubt is given. Whether it’s Paula Jones, Juanita Broadrick, or Tara Reade, the women have to be lying or being used by the “Right Wing Smear Machine” (Patent Pending) to bring down an innocent Leftist.

Even if the “innocent Leftist” has photos of him doing what he’s alleged to have done.

The thing to remember about the Left is they politicize sex because they politicize everything. When it comes to sexual harassment, they play jump rope with the tightrope they expect the rest of us to walk. And since the time of Anita Hill, they’ve learned how to play Double Dutch to the country’s detriment. When you are allowed to play fast and loose with the rules you personally set, you can justify anything.

That’s how cults get started. And Amway.

Right now, Cuomo is benefitting from the Leftist double standard, oddly enough in two ways. First, he’s skating on behavior that would get most of us drug through the mud by the people defending him. Second, it takes attention away from a more serious issue, that being his boneheaded approach to dealing with COVID-19 by putting patients with the elderly, one of the groups most susceptible to contracting it…and dying from it. Then again, the media have done a piss poor job of covering this aspect to Cuomo’s incompetence, so they’re focusing on the sexual scandal because sex sells. If the Left can get us to focus on the sex, they’re betting we’ll forget about the killing of Grandma and Grandpa. Then, once the sexual harassment story goes away, so does the nursing home scandal.

Unfortunately for them, that’s not how it works, kids.

Using sexual harassment as a means to cover up a major scandal is low, even for Leftists, because it shows how little they care about women’s issues that don’t rhyme with abortion or the gender pay gap. They can and will use women to achieve political ends, thus making the women affected by sexual harrassment and sexual assault acceptable losses as long as the Left gets what it wants.

In other words, the Left are the sexual predators they keep warning us exist.

The thing we have going for us is consistency. While the Left changes their rules at the drop of a hat, or some other article of clothing for that matter, we rely on facts and evidence gathered through research and logical thinking. No matter who is being accused, we want there to be an investigation where every allegation can be verified or rejected. What’s more, we don’t care whose ox gets gored in the process. As long as we continue to follow that mindset, the Left will ultimately lose.

In the meantime, Andrew Cuomo should be held accountable for what we’ve seen him do. Even though his sexual harassment is being used as a scapegoat, the fact he and his ideological partners are willing to throw women under the campaign bus to protect him should make the Left take a seat.

As in a Colosseum’s worth.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As we get closer to the first full school year under COVID-19, it’s interesting to see the differences in whether the schools are open, closed, or on a hybrid system. Many schools are open without issues, while others are closed up tighter than Rosie O’Donnell in a size 1 dress. After the Center for Disease Control reported public schools were safe to be open, there was one tiny little problem.

Teachers’ unions.

These unions have taken it upon themselves to build a case against opening schools, citing potential health issues (i.e. contracting COVID-19) as reasons schools should remain closed. And the Left, following the science, has sided with…the teachers’ unions.

Who are these people who can defy science without the self-described Party of Science get upset? Let’s find out!

teachers’ unions

What the Left thinks it means – a union devoted to ensuring top quality teachers are represented and are free to teach to the best of their abilities

What it really means –  a unaccountable union devoted to donating funds to the Left while holding no standards for the union members, no matter how much it hurts students

It’s scary to think about how much power teachers’ unions have as compared to their private sector counterparts. While a labor union can order strikes to get better wages and/or benefits, their impact is still relatively limited to a company or industry. A teachers’ union’s reach can span generations and impact millions of students and families to the point society itself is forced to change. The kindergarteners of today are going to grow up to be the Leftists of tomorrow, thanks to teachers’ unions.

Now, I’m not saying this as someone who doesn’t know the ins and outs of public schools. I am a public school graduate, and many of my family and friends have direct experience with the public school experience, and it’s getting to be where we’re all singing the same song. In my lifetime alone, I’ve watched public schools go from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance every morning to not reciting it to possibly not have any student know what it is in the first place. Sure, they’ll know all about inclusion and how to use condoms before they’re even past the “girls/boys are icky” stage, but not how to do simple math, write complete sentences, and the three branches of government. You know, stuff that’s kinda important to creating the next generation of citizens?

And the sad part is we let it go unnoticed and unchecked until it was too late to do anything about it.

That’s by design, so it’s not all our faults. Teachers’ unions love to work in plain sight while hiding their true intentions and devices. And, as you might expect, it all comes down to money. Thanks to the Department of Education (which is as useless as footnotes in a TMZ article), teachers’ unions are paid heavily to promote Leftist ideals under the guise of education. The only cost is these same unions funnel money back into Leftist coffers to support “pro-education” candidates. Once those candidates get into office, they can appropriate money to the teachers’ unions, who turn around and use those funds to…oh, I don’t know…build and maintain office buildings in Washington, DC. But I’m sure it’s for the kids…

If you believe that, I have swamp land in Arizona I’d love to sell you.

In fact, I’m hard-pressed to find anything teachers’ unions do for students, but they’ll bend over backwards to protect even the worst teachers in their ranks. Including defying the direction of the CDC. Let that roll around in your noggins for a bit. School districts are being kept shut in spite of the science we’re supposed to be following according to the Left because of a bunch of people who probably don’t teach science saying it’s too dangerous to teach because of a virus with a high-90% survival rate.

If that doesn’t tell you how much power teachers’ unions have right now, nothing will.

As much as I’d like to say there’s an easy answer to curtailing this power, I can’t. I mean, I can, but I wouldn’t be accurate in doing so. Instead, all I can suggest is to keep tabs on what is being taught in your local schools. Even if you no longer have children in school, the only way to combat indoctrination via teachers’ unions is to stay involved. Get on the school board. Keep current on what is being taught and try to combat the misinformation. Above all else, expose the bad actors whenever you can. After enough exposure, the teachers’ unions will lose their cover and will be forced to take action. After all, nothing hurts Leftists more than exposing their tactics.

And besides, how can we mock them if they aren’t exposed to be the total dipshits they are?

The United States of Orwell

We’re less than a month into the Biden Administration and we’re already seeing changes in the way things are getting done. Unfortunately, those changes aren’t good ones.

In the past week alone, the following events occurred:

– Leftists and non-Leftists called out the Biden Administration for promising $2000 COVID-19 relief checks, only to watch the President and the DNC lower that amount to $1400, citing the $600 previously approved was a “down payment.”

– White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki scoffed at the use of anonymous sources for news leads potentially critical of the Biden Administration.

– Biden supporters have expressed a desire/need to limit conservative voices in mainstream media, social media, and in general, suggesting they should be “named and shamed” so people don’t ever do business with them or take them seriously.

– Members of the media are arguing any seemingly dishonest statements from President Joe Biden lack nuance or, more frequently, advise the dishonesty was far worse under President Donald Trump.

New York Times tech columnist Kevin Roose wrote the Biden Administration needs to appoint a “reality czar” to address what he called a “reality crisis.”

– Leftists have eagerly supported “reeducation camps” for Trump supporters as a means to “deprogram” them.

– The Biden Administration requires people to wear masks on federal property as a means to stop the spread of COVID-19 while he has been photographed without one, leading Leftists to try to explain it away.

– Joe Biden announced a program to roll out COVID-19 vaccinations that matched what the Trump Administration was already doing at the same rate.

– Leftists are calling the incoming Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg the first openly gay person to serve in a Cabinet, thereby erasing Richard Grennell’s existence as the first openly gay person to serve in a Cabinet.

We’re not in the Upside Down, kids. This is what is actually happening.

Right now, we’re being told to believe what the government and its agents are telling us, even if it doesn’t live in the same neighborhood as reality. If you though the “gender is fluid” debate was insane, we’re entering a whole new suburb of Crazy Town.

And this is by design. The Left’s playbook has always relied on affecting change through manipulation of language. If they can get people to think a certain way through framing a topic in a certain way, Leftists can reshape perception, which reshapes the audience’s reality even if it creates self-delusion. Although there are many real life examples of this happening, there’s a literary one that seems to fit what the Left is trying, and in some cases succeeding, to do: 1984.

And before you Leftists call me out on it, I have read the book and understand it quite clearly. Unlike you, I also understand it’s not an instruction manual.

Whether it’s Big Brother (the fictional entity, not the TV show) or Big Biden, the principle of controlling the narrative is vital to the outcome. The more they can get you to believe 2 + 2 = 5, the better able they are able to convince you of other absurdities, like there are more than 2 genders, white people can believe they’re black, and it’s okay to enact fascism under the guise of preventing it.

George Orwell would be proud. Or frightened. Or confused.

But you needn’t be any of those because non-Leftists have a secret weapon that undercuts the Left’s most Orwellian of policies: free will. When you really think about it, the Left requires subservience to be successful, but only if you choose to be subservient. We can’t all be as outwardly rebellious as Number 6 from “The Prisoner,” but we can camouflage what we believe through the kind of intellectual subterfuge the Left employs. Outwardly comply, but inwardly resist. At some point, the Left will over-reach and their house of cards falls down.

And that’s the other secret weapon we have: the Left is just that stupid.

No matter what, the Left always manages to find a way to ensure defeat after securing victory, usually within a short time. Their main flaw is and always has been they don’t typically think strategically in advance of the next election. They think in terms of what wins now versus what will win years from now. The whole $1400 check debacle is proof of that. They keep doubling and tripling down on the “it’s basic math” argument when they need to be thinking of how to deliver what was promised without trying to weasel out of it. That doesn’t help anyone, let alone the people who actually need the money. Plus, once more people realize why they didn’t get $2000 in the first place and what party caused it (Spoiler Alert: It’s the Democrats), it’s not going to end well.

So keep your chins up, dear readers. No matter how many times the Left tells you 2+2=5, just remember these same rotten eggheads came up with Common Core.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The Left loves recycling. Just look at the ideas they keep bringing up even after they’ve failed worse than Michael Dukakis trying to look tough driving a tank. One of the ideas that has come back into vogue for the Left is cancelling student debt. And with the possibility of Democrats taking back the Senate as of this writing, the idea may become a reality before we know it.

And in typical current year fashion, there’s a hashtag to promote the idea, #CancelStudentDebt, designed to get the President and Department of Education to use their powers to forgive federal student loan debt. But as anyone who’s seen “Jurassic Park” a couple of times will tell you, just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. Should we? Let’s discuss it further, shall we?

#CancelStudentDebt

What the Left thinks it means – a great way to stimulate the economy and allow college students to put their money towards more practical means

What it really means – a way to remove consequences for people who ran up debt studying stupid majors

Back in the day, going to college was a big deal because it meant you had the intellectual drive and economic ability to go. To help people less fortunate, but no less driven, than wealthier families, student loans were created, and it proved to be the gateway to higher education. As time passed and Leftist ideas about education took hold, the value of a high school education got devalued faster than Arthur Andersen’s reputation, so college went from a luxury to a necessity.

Then, Leftists started coming up with all sorts of crazy majors that result in an utter lack of marketable skills outside the halls of academia. Of course, the students who take on these crazy majors don’t find this out until after they graduate with a ton of debt and a lack of ability to do anything more challenging than asking whether you want to Mega-Size your drive-thru meal. Instead of going back to the colleges and universities that gave out the academic equivalent of a Burger King crown, these students (who are all Leftists because that’s what they’ve been indoctrinated to be) look to the government to help them again after asking them for help to get the useless degrees they got in the first place.

Funny how that works, isn’t it?

When it comes to cancelling student debt, I can see what the proposed economic benefits could be. Not having to pay through the nose monthly to pay for the education received would be allow young people to put more of that money towards living expenses, like rent, food, and, oh yeah, the latest iPhones. Just because you have more money to spend doesn’t mean you will spend it wisely. As someone who ran up credit card debt like a scammer at the Moonlight Bunny Ranch, I am proof of that.

Although this will put money back into the economy (at least on paper), it also allows people to run up a different kind of debt. If you think student loans are bad, wait until you see the interest payments on credit cards. (Of course, the Left also wants to cancel credit card debt, but that’s a blog post for a different time.) And unlike student loan holders, credit card companies expect to get paid monthly and have the tools to really make your life a perpetual 2020. Given how much people spend these days to get the latest stuff and their lack of even a cursory knowledge of basic economics, I don’t think I’m going out on a limb saying cancelling student debt will be a bane to the folks who ran up the student debt and a boon for credit card companies.

Here’s a fun little fact to mull over if you support cancelling student debt. The people who tend to default the most on student loans are…doctors and lawyers. In other words, the Left are inadvertently helping former students who could afford to pay their debts, but choose not to. Tell me again how you Leftists are against tax cuts for the rich again…

But there are a few groups of people who will be left behind with this idea. Some people worked their way through college without student loans, while others have been paying off or have paid off their debt. To put it simply, these folks are hosed. Yet, these are the ones who will be expected to make up the shortfalls of cancelling student debt, all while not getting any of the benefits. As it turn out, that may be by design.

When the Left thinks of economics, they think in terms of winners and losers. If someone gets ahead, it’s solely because they took advantage of someone else, even if the former did everything by himself/herself. When you view the world like this, there will always be a power dynamic that has to be “corrected” to make things “fair.” So, the Left will always see those who have paid their debts as the ones with power and the ones who ran up the debts but haven’t paid them as victims.

The one thing the Left overlooks in this dynamic is choice. We choose to go to college, we choose what classes to take, we choose what majors we want, we choose to accumulate debt, and we choose whether to pay off said debt. That’s a lot of choices, and all of them personal choices. That means the people complaining about crushing student loan debt are the ones who put themselves there in the first place. But since Leftists are incapable of accepting responsibility for their actions, they will blame others for the stupid decisions they make and expect the government to bail them out.

But that’s not how it works. The government isn’t there to be your babysitter, nor is it there to fund your dreams of finding a job in the Albino Native American Pottery Poetry field. At some point, you have to realize a lot of the crap you’re experiencing is on you and you might need to figure out how to get yourselves out of it. The first step towards that end is realizing you’ve made some horrible decisions, and I’m not just talking about getting multiple piercings to the point you trigger the metal detectors in airports 3 states over. Take a look at who and what you support and what role they’ve had in shaping your decisions. If they’re the cause or at least the cheerleaders of your bad decisions, they’re not role models; they’re enablers, and they might just be making a buck or two off your misfortunes.

In the meantime, let’s take the hashtag activism for a walk on the responsible side. Even if you agree with the #CancelStudentDebt notion, there are parts of it that, if unresolved, will lead to the biggest producer drop-out rate since Atlas Shrugged. And without someone else’s money to fall back on, what will Leftists do?

Probably create another hashtag.