Since Kamala Harris picked Governor Tim Walz to be her running mate for the 2024 Presidential election (all without dealing with the silly little detail of getting actual delegates through the primary process), the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) have been working overtime to fluff up the ticket like it was on a porn set. Not that I know anything about that, mind you…
The result has been glowing reviews, lots of money being raised, and social media abuzz with talk of joy surrounding the ticket. Polls that showed Harris less popular than an STD have flipped, leaving the Trump/Vance ticket to scratch their heads in amazement. Either that or they need Head and Shoulders. Regardless, it’s the political equivalent of Lazarus being raised from the dead.
On the surface, it’s a mystery. How could a Vice President known more for word salads and failed initiatives than success get the upper hand on a former President known more for word salads and odd initiatives, but still can count successes on both hands? It starts with the framing of the Harris/Walz ticket. And for that, we can thank the Walzster. He had the bright idea of calling the Trump/Vance ticket “weird” which caught on like wildfire. Then again, TikTok videos catch on like wildfire, too, so it’s not exactly a high bar.
If you missed my tepid take on the “weird” controversy, I got your hookup. Although I have panned the notion, I can’t argue with the results. It’s become a Leftist squawking point and a clear point of irritation for Trump/Vance, which takes attention away from the issues, thanks in part to the media.
But that’s only the first part of the equation. Although Trump and Vance have been refuting the allegations they are “weird,” Harris/Walz have taken a step into another phase of the campaign: reimagining their ticket as the ticket of joy. Since being chosen, Walz has been seen as more of a father or grandfather figure, and Harris has been emphasizing how she represents hope and joy.
Hmmm…hope as a campaign platform. Nah, it would never work!
Harris has also tapped into the youth culture by adopting a “brat summer” approach. For those of you who don’t know what that means, be glad you’re uninformed because it’s just as stupid as it sounds. But, again, the results speak for themselves at least for now. Whether the young people inspired by the Harris/Walz joy offensive get inspired to vote is still in question, but I’m sure there’s a Kinko’s in Washington, DC, already working on printing up prefilled ballots for Harris/Walz.
So with all this joy and positivity going around, there can’t be a down side, can there? As your resident cynical curmudgeon, I can say there is, and it’s pretty easy to spot if you’re paying attention.
Which means Leftists are completely in the dark about it.
The first thing to point out about the joy offensive is it’s based on nothing. No policy statements, no real interviews or press conferences, not even an updated campaign website with policy positions (but more than a few ways you can donate to the campaign). Which, if you really think about it, is pretty on-brand for Kamala Harris, but that’s not important right now.
Now, compare the joy the Harris/Walz/media narrative spins to what’s actually going on right now. If you listen to the squawking heads like perpetually-wrong-but-never-in-doubt Paul Krugman, everything is fine and you’re just too dumb to realize it. (And, yes, that’s really what they’re suggesting/saying.) Yet, if you go to where the people really are, things aren’t good. Inflation is higher than Willie Nelson in Amsterdam on 4/20, goods and services are more expensive, and you need a third mortgage to get a tank of gas, mainly because you used your second mortgage to get groceries for the week. No amount of joy is going to make any of this go away, but by God, Harris/Walz is gonna try!
And there’s a good chance they may succeed, at least for now. But try paying your mortgage with joy. Just let me know what happens after the foreclosure sale.
The great irony of this approach is it’s policies like the ones Harris/Walz have advocated that has caused the pain. Appealing to people’s desire to be happy is designed to get people to ignore that little fact. Who cares if Harris was the Border Czar in spite of the media saying otherwise? Who cares if Walz made it okay to take away parents’ children if they didn’t want to mutilate the children if little Timmy feels like little Tammy for a hot minute? Who cares if the COVID lockdowns caused more problems than they allegedly solved? Just be happy, dammit!
I can’t deny there are times when we need diversions from the flaming dumpster fire that is America 2024. Video games, movies, writing semi-well-received blogs with marginal humor, those are all ways to tune out the world and plug in to your inner peace. Your mileage may vary, but the point’s the same. We shouldn’t expect politicians to provide us joy. Unless, of course, your joy comes from spending billions of dollars you don’t have on stuff that doesn’t work. That’s retail therapy on steroids, kids.
More to the point, if you think government has the ability to bring you the joy you seek in life, you’ve already succumbed to the trap. The more a government can “give” you, the less likely you are to find it yourselves. And that’s by design. Leftists believe Big Daddy Government is the sole provider of all things good, nice, and, well, joyous. The more Leftists get you to believe that, the more likely you are to support them, which helps them perpetuate their power and money bases.
And the less likely anything really positive will get done. After all, government isn’t in the problem-solving businesses because a problem solved is a revenue and power source lost. But as long as they get you to believe the Left will fix things if given enough time, money, and power, they don’t care!
I’ll be interested to see how long the Harris/Walz joy offensive will work and if it will evolve or get tossed aside once Trump/Vance start landing rhetorical punches. At some point, Harris/Walz is going to have to stop talking about joy and start talking about policy, and that time is coming soon. With a matter of weeks left before Election Day, the joy offensive is going to have to give way to substance.
And no amount of joy can hold back the hands of time.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Since current Vice President and (hopefully) future unemployed politician Kamala Harris announced she would be running for President instead of President Brick Tamland, a lot of people got excited. Mostly…white Leftists. Using Zoom calls, white Leftists of both genders (and, yes, there are still only two) showed up to proclaim their love for the Vice President and urge others to join with them to make her the first female President of the United States.
For the sake of brevity and not to give these folks more traction than the Harris campaign…I mean the mainstream media have given them, I’m going to refer to them as Whites for Harris. And the more we dig into them, the weirder it gets. And hopefully the funnier it gets.
Whites for Harris
What the Left thinks it means – white people supporting Kamala Harris because they believe she is the best candidate for President
What it really means – Leftists whose motivations for supporting Kamala Harris are more personal than political
White Leftists are an odd bunch, and being a recovering one myself, I can attest to that. Of course, I was weird before then, but that’s not important right now. On the one hand, white Leftists see themselves as the only ones who really know what’s going on with minority populations. Not because they put in the effort to understand the struggles of people who don’t look like them. That would be too much work! Instead, they just feel they know what minority populations think and feel by virtue of…being Leftists.
Of course, this runs counter to the other hand: white Leftists are ashamed of being white. They bear it like a cross, which is odd when you consider how anti-religion some of these same asshats are. Regardless, they think they owe it to minorities to overcome their privilege and do whatever they can to accommodate these minorities.
And, yes, it’s just as cringy and ass-backwards as it sounds.
But not nearly as cringy as the Zoom conferences themselves. Yes, they did manage to raise a lot of money for the Harris campaign, but they also managed to make white women and white men look worse than they think they already look. I would say the jokes wrote themselves, but they were the jokes.
Although they think their hearts and wallets are in the right place, white Leftists have a more personal reason for playing second fiddle to Harris: they’re looking for absolution. To them, being white is an unforgivable sin. To those of us who actually think about this shit, it’s fucking stupid. Being ashamed of your skin color because you lack melanin is like being ashamed of having red hair and freckles in a family where both are commonplace. You can’t control what you’re born with, so it’s Socialist Socialite levels of dumbfuckery to feel one way or the other about it.
But it’s the guilt that makes white Leftists such easy prey for the Harris campaign. All they have to do is encourage white Leftists to open their wallets, canvas neighborhoods, and commit to doing whatever they can to get Harris into office, white Leftists get to feel like they’re erasing their racial debt. Of course, it’s only a fraction of what whites need to do to make up for past misdeeds, but it’s a start.
And here’s the funny part. Not funny for them because they don’t have a sense of humor, but funny for the rest of us. No matter how many hours or how much money they donate and raise, it will never be enough to absolve white Leftists for being, well, white Leftists. There will always be another atrocity to atone for, another injustice that must be made right, another sin to be forgiven.
But remember, kids, Leftists are super smart. Just ask them. And they’re totally not in a cult like those MAGA Trump supporters!
Yeah. And I have farmland in Antarctica I’d love to sell you.
What’s more, this approach isn’t new. Oprah Winfrey used to make white women feel bad about themselves only to have her swoop down like Black Jesus and “solve” all the problems she convinced them they had. It became like a cult of personality, only the personality in this case was of the media variety. And with the way the media is hyping up Harris it’s only a matter of time before history repeats itself and she becomes Oprah 2.0.
Only without a book club, unless you count coloring or comic books.
The Whites for Harris movement can best be described as using racial guilt as a means to get a vastly underqualified and unpopular woman into a job she was never elected to do. Remember, Harris has received zero votes in two Presidential races so far, and the only reason she’s a shoe-in for the nomination is because the Democratic National Convention appears to have decided to give her the nomination in spite of the lack of delegate votes for her.
The protectors of democracy, ladies and gentlemen.
If you happen to be a White for Harris and you’re reading this, you’re being played for a sucker by someone who will keep moving the goalposts so you will continue to get played. Even if you’re convinced Kamala Harris is the only person who can stop Donald Trump, you have to wonder if it’s because you actually believe that or if you think you do so you feel good about it. If it’s the former, more power to you. Just know I’m going to be mocking you for it with all the compassion of a honey badger on PCP. If it’s the latter, I’m still going to mock you, but with the added knowledge you’re a sucker. And since you are, I have farmland in Antarctica I would love to sell you.
But, in the spirit of bipartisanship, I have a catchier name for Whites for Harris, and it’s one that I’m sure will help foster good will between whites and minorities as well as acknowledge the role whites have in this election.
Try Honkies For Harris on for size!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Political attacks have been around since, well, pretty much since this country was founded. Whether you’re accusing your opponent of being a practicing homo sapien who consorts with thespians or the press of being nattering nabobs of negativity, the slings and arrows of outrageous soundbites are the country’s second favorite past time, with the first being wanting to speak to the manager.
This election cycle is no different. But this time, the big negative statement making the rounds is…”weird.” Donald Trump is weird. JD Vance is weird. Republicans are weird. Even Barron Trump is weird.
I didn’t say it was a good negative statement.
weird
What the Left thinks it means – an effective political slam that accurately describes the Right
What it really means – a lame-ass insult that is designed to create a false dichotemy
Recently, I got into a brief political discussion on Facebook (because I’m not cool enough to get on real social media) regarding Vice President and presumptive Presidential usurper…I mean candidate Kamala Harris being less possible than an STD. The Leftist who responded to me tried to convince me otherwise because she raised a bunch of money and got a bunch of people to register to vote. After I countered it with facts, she replied “You live in an alternate universe.”
And to Leftists, I do. And most likely, you do, too.
This is because the Left has it in their collectivist heads they are the normal ones. Of course, this flies in the face of, well, normality, but what do you expect from a group who thinks there are 948 genders, men can get pregnant, and they are protecting democracy from fascism by being fascists?
Although it’s fun to mock the idea of the Left shitting on the weird, there’s actually a purpose behind it. By painting the Right as weird, they are subtly trying to paint themselves (and consequentially their viewpoints) as normal. And they’re serious about it, if the 6’8″ man in high heels and gaudy makeup who wants to be called Loretta G. Hotpants is any indication. To the Left, the weird shit is their normal and they want everyone to agree…or else!
Yep. Totes normal.
The problem is what the Left is trying to pass off as normal really isn’t. And I’m not saying this as someone who mocks the Left with the regularity of someone on a Metamucil and Colon Blow diet. All politics and humorous asides, well, aside, the Left is into some really freaky shit and it’s getting harder to lay a guilt trip on us for not dancing to their tune. At some point, you freak out the normies to the point they say “Enough.” Or “Get the fuck away from me!” You know, whichever.
Guess what, Leftists. You’ve reached that point and gone well beyond it. And no matter how you try to dress it up as normal, it ain’t.
That’s why the move to paint the Right as weird isn’t going to work. Yes, there are things Donald Trump, JD Vance, and others say that make me cringe, but more often than not, they represent what most Americans believe. Read that again. Americans, not just Republicans.
In case you Leftists are confused, let me spell it out for you. If you freak out normies, you tend not to win their votes, no matter how much you try to convince them the other side is the weird one. How do you plan to save democracy if you can’t win more votes?
I mean aside from fabricating more votes than humanly possible, that is.
But that would be election denial, and we can’t have that. It’s not like I’m Stacey Abrams, after all…
To their credit, the Trump/Vance campaign is striking back at being called weird by pointing out the obvious. Although it does have the potential to come off as deflection, which is what the Left wants us to believe is happening, it doesn’t completely work on that level. I mean, it’s hard to call the Trump/Vance ticket weird when your side looks like freak show rejects, but if you think you can pull it off, go for it.
Where I think the Trump/Vance campaign could handle the “weird” label better is with a tactic Trump has used in the past: savage mockery. Point out how juvenile the label is. Come out and say, “Is that the best you can do? I’ve been insulted better by worse people.” (And, Mr. Trump, if you wish to use that line, call me and we can work out a deal. I might even throw in a few more pointed zingers since I think I’m pretty good at them.)
And that’s really all you need to do. Leftists hate to be mocked, and taking their “weird” declarations with all the seriousness of a dedication in a coloring book would stick in their craws like nothing else. Or make it a two-fer and ask them if they’ve exhausted their “fascist” budget for the campaign and have to resort to weak-sauce shit that went out of fashion in elementary school. And, believe me, calling Trump/Vance “weird” is the mixed-drink-at-a-really-cheap-strip-club of political insults. It’s the mayonnaise of digs. It’s unremarkable, grating, and generally underwhelming.
Or, to put it another way, it’s the Kamala Harris of negative campaign messages.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With President Brick Tamland announcing he was not limping…I mean running for reelection, the eyes of the world turned to Vice President Kamala Harris as the heiress apparent. And that means we get to do a deep dive into her accomplishments so far.
Fortunately for us, that deep dive doesn’t take that long since she’s accomplished what other Vice Presidents before her did: Jack Shit, and Jack left town.
But one role she had was Border Czar. Or not, depending on who you ask. In true Tamland fashion, she was put in charge of looking into the reason why so many illegal immigrants are coming here. (Spoiler Alert: it’s because we have the best free shit in the world.) And in true Harris fashion, she visited El Paso and called it a day. But she hadn’t been to Europe, either, so it’s totes cool, guys!
While the Left tries to figure out what excuse to use to try to cover up Harris’s ineptitude on the border, it gives us a chance to wade into the wonderful world of what a Border Czar even is.
Border Czar
What the Left thinks it means – a title bestowed upon Vice President Harris by evil Republicans to try to connect her to the border crisis (which doesn’t exist, by the way)
What it really means – a meaningless title given to a meaningless figurehead
The concept of policy czars has been around for a while. The first ones came about during the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Presidency to address certain aspects of World War II and the economy, but later expanded into areas like combating drug abuse, reading, and weatherizing. (And I wish I was kidding about those last two.)
Put bluntly, being a policy czar today is like being salutatorian of summer school: only a few people actually care about it and even fewer will remember it. And in the end nothing gets done, really.
Which means it’s a perfect gig for someone with a lot of time on his or her hands and who isn’t expected to succeed in any meaningful way. You know, like the Vice President.
It also means it shouldn’t be done just to put a body in a seat when it come to addressing a high profile issue like illegal immigration. Depending on which lie you want to believe, our southern border is either perfectly secure (but Republicans are totally to blame for record-breaking crossings) or less secure than an unlocked Ferrari in South Central LA. And for your eagle-eyed readers out there who click on the links, you’ll notice these statements come from two different members…of the same Administration. But you know who didn’t weigh in on the border situation?
The fucking Border Czar herself.
Now, I’m no policy wonk, but I would think one of the most important elements of being a Border Czar is presenting a consistent, fact-based message. Unfortunately for us, the Tamland Administration’s consistency is in denying the problem exists until it gets to a point where they have to do something to make it look like they’re doing something. Meanwhile, illegal immigration is still very much an issue, despite Harris’s brilliant message to some looking to enter the country illegally: do not come.
Well, Kams, they’re not listening. Or maybe they’re trying to figure out your message amidst the vomited word salads you frequently put out there as cogent statements.
Maybe that’s why the Left is trying to scrub the collective memories of the general public by denying she was the Border Czar. After all, Kamala Harris has to beat Donald Trump, even though she’s never won a national election by herself yet. The last time she tried to win the Presidency she pulled out of the race before the Iowa Caucuses after Tulsi Gabbard bitch-slapped her into oblivion.
It also means I got the same number of delegates Harris did and I didn’t even run.
It’s clear Harris’s role as Border Czar has been a dismal failure (and I’m being verrrrrrrrrrrrry generous here). This begs the question of why we need one in the first place, especially considering we already have one: the President. If you remember your civics homework (or in the case of Leftists if you’re hearing this for the first time since you blew off civics to protest), the Executive Branch is responsible for enforcing the laws of his country. That means the President and his staff are the Czars and they’re not doing a good job.
That means anybody who is called a Czar becomes a lightning rod to absorb any criticism for when they fuck up their one jobs. But, as with so many government jobs, you can’t be fired for being incompetent. If anything, it’s a career enhancer. (See the current President and Vice President for two examples.) Plus, you get a nice stipend and a government pension, and that much capital goes a long way to fix any hurt feefees.
But the immigration problem is still there. Pretty soon we’ll have to throw the concept of the Border Czar on top of the pile of other well-meaning, but poorly-executed government ideas, like the War on Drugs, the War on Poverty, and making the Socialist Socialite a Congresswoman. Yet, there isn’t really much of a will to do anything about the problem from the Czar on down because there’s too much to be gained by both sides of the issue. The Left use illegal immigration to help their candidates win and create a “humanitarian crisis” that only Big Daddy Government can fix. The Right use illegal immigration to create scary scenarios where all the jobs are taken, only violent criminals make it across, and no one but them can fix the problem.
But where the Right gets it right (see what I did there?) is in pointing out the national security aspect of illegal immigration. Open borders, such as the kind promoted by the Tamland Administration, create gaps in our security network. And with Leftist dipshits on record as not wanting to even look for illegal immigrants let alone deport them, those gaps are going to get wider and harder to close. Worse yet, we don’t have much of a strategy for dealing with the implications.
Certainly this is something a President (or a prospective President) should take seriously enough to do more than appoint some toadie to do nothing and get paid for doing it. The last guy who even attempted that got called all sorts of names, ironically by some of the people currently in charge of the failed border policy but are now trying to copy what Donald Trump did. See, President Tamland can’t help but plagiarize!
Ultimately, though, we don’t need a Border Czar in the same way we don’t need an extended warranty for a beater from Uncle Sleazy’s It Was Like That When We Got It Used Car Emporium where their motto is “No Refunds.” It’s a worthless position that should already be covered by the existing leadership structure.
Then again, this is the federal government we’re talking about here. Expecting leadership in Washington is like expecting the hooker to fall in love with you after you pay her. Not that I know anything about that, mind you…
What Happened to Democracy
The Democratic Party has screamed that electing Republicans will destroy our democracy. Yet in the wake of President Biden’s withdraw from the 2024 election the Democratic Party and their supporters seem to have tossed democracy out the window.
Kamala Harris is now running for President and has taken over the Biden Campaign. But she hasn’t received a single vote for that office in any primary or caucus election.
We the people, the foundation of democracy, haven’t voted for her in that office. She hasn’t earned a single delegate for the Democratic National Convention in August.
But the DNC has anointed her the position of presumptive nominee anyway. All of Joe Biden’s delegates, won through the caucus and primary votes, are not automatically delegates for Kamala Harris. They are free agents and can vote for anyone at the DNC.
Unless of course democracy is only lip service for the Democratic Party. Then of course we see the true colors of this party of tyrants.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
This past week has been a bit on the wild side. I’m not talking 80s Motley Crue backstage party wild, either. I’m talking Alex Jones debating Art Bell while doing mushrooms and truck stop speed with Gary Busey wild. Or as Mr. Busey calls it, Tuesday.
Former President and current Republican Presidential candidate Donald Trump was wounded by an attempted assassin’s bullet while at a rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. As events unfolded, questions arose surrounding how such a security clusterfuck could have happened, and a lot of fingers pointed at the Secret Service. You know, the people who are supposed to protect the President and Presidential candidates?
Well, Leftists are starting to call criticisms of the Secret Service (especially of the female Secret Service agents at the scene) “right wing attacks,” which caused my Spidey-Sense to tingle. It was either that or my dandruff shampoo, but I’m going with the Spidey-Sense angle. And it also gave me the inspiration to dig a bit deeper.
the Secret Service
What the Left thinks it means – a band of men and women devoted to protecting the President under any circumstances
What it really means – a group of men and women who may be politically compromised
The Secret Service started in 1865 as a means to curtail counterfeiting after the Civil War. Originally under the umbrella of the Treasury Department because, well, counterfeiting, it was moved into the Department of Homeland Security in 2003, which isn’t a good thing in this humble blogger’s opinion. Regardless, the Secret Service’s role has evolved into what we know today and into a few areas we don’t consider.
When it comes to protecting the President, they succeed far more than they fail, even investigating threats or potential threats before they can escalate. So, it’s thankfully rare when they err. When the Secret Service does its job well, we don’t see them. When they fuck up, we do because it’s not exactly easy to hide when the President gets shot at.
Or in this case, a former President and potential future President.
Whenever there’s a high profile scandal, one of the first things people do is look at those in leadership to see if there are any decisions that affected the outcome. For the Trump assassination attempt, we can look to Kimberly Cheatle. And, Lucy, you got some ‘splainin’ to do!
In the aftermath, politicians are taking a closer look at the failures and what could have caused them. Based on what is coming out right now, there appear to have been staffing issues that spread the protection thinner than it should have been. Even though the Secret Service is pushing back against allegations the Trump campaign were denied additional security, it’s kinda hard to take it seriously after they initially blamed local police for the failures and noted safety concerns for Secret Service agents because of…get this…sloped roofs.
Yeah. These assholes are totally cereal, guys.
And, as with most things in Washington, DC, demands will be made, but nothing will get done. Yes, I realize this is both cynical and jumping the gun, but given how previous fuck-ups have been swept under the rug, I have more faith in 3 day old gas station sushi than in anybody involved being held accountable, least of all Ms. Cheatle who may have gotten her job because of Dr. Jill Biden, wife of President Brick Tamland.
If this is even remotely true, it would explain a lot when it comes to the failures. With President Tamland looking weaker than Joy Ann Reid’s grasp on reality, the possibility of Vice President Kamala Harris having to take up the reins and making President Tamland look lucid in the process, and Donald Trump picking up steam, there is a vested interest in letting things slip a bit to keep the current Administration in power. Not to mention, the Left has ramped up the hate, making Trump sound more and more like a real threat to life, liberty, and the pursuit of TikTok videos.
Of course, I’m sure the super-heated rhetoric from the Left has nothing to do with someone wanting to shoot Trump. That would just be silly! I mean, it would take a really dumb person to believe saying mean things about a politician and his or her party would lead to violence.
Oh, by the way, Steve Scalise is on line 1.
Either way, the Left is circling the wagons (as well as the drain) around the Secret Service, using the same playbook they used when it was the FBI caught screwing up in the Left’s favor. They paint the criticism of the female Secret Service agents attempting to protect Trump as misogynistic, even after footage came out showing such an agent struggling to put a gun back in a holster. They brush off calls for Ms. Cheatle to step down, instead presenting her as a defiant leader.
All to protect the agency responsible for nearly bungling their way into the history books as the ones who let a major party Presidential candidate get whacked. Fucking brilliant!
Regrettably, I can’t help but feel the Secret Service has been infected with the same ideological biases that still fester in the FBI’s ranks. Support who you want, but don’t let it affect your job. When you let your hatred of a man overrule your better judgment, it’s time you hang up your black suit and tie, kids. On the other hand, if incompetence instead of hatred caused you to make mistakes that could have cost a candidate his life and actually cost two people theirs, you shouldn’t wait to get fired. You should resign in shame.
But that would require having shame, wouldn’t it?
In the Meme Time
In the aftermath of the assassination attempt against President Trump we are seeing this meme popup a lot. Posted by those useful idiots on the Left.
Of course the only talk about President Trump’s ear, like that is the thing we are deeply caring about. No, that isn’t it. A person lost his life defending his wife and children. Taking a bullet that would have killed them instead. This deeply saddens us.
What the Left doesn’t understand is that we care deeply anytime there is a tragic loss of life. No matter who is the victim. It doesn’t matter if it is President Trump, a 3rd grade classroom, a crowd at any public function, or even a Democratic politician. We treat them 100% the same.
We give the victims and survivors our thoughts and prayers. God said that prayers can move mountains and we believe this with all our hearts. We mourn with those who have lost a loved one. We care deeply at the tragic and senseless loss of life.
What we don’t do is blame the gun. It was the gunman who pulled the trigger and paid the price for that heinous crime. We even grieve for his family as well. But we don’t call for stricter gun legislation and regulations. In fact we call for these to be lifted. That way more people can be armed and able to defend themselves against evil in the public square.
Assassination Failed
There is a lot of controversy around the assassination attempt on Saturday of President Trump. And a number of failing by the Secret Service.
The roof-top of a building less than 500 feet away from the stage should have been secured but it wasn’t. An armed individual was able to use a ladder and gain access.
One of the police snippers had eyes on the gunman for over 3 minutes before he opened fire. But the Secret Service did not allow the sniper to take a shot.
Multiple eye witnesses reported the gunman to the police and other security personal prior to the attack. But they did not act on that information.
These and many more questions arise from this assassination attempt. And the answers will undoubtedly produce more questions.
Even now there are parallels being drawn between this attempt and the assassination of JFK. There are those who do suggest that this assassination was carried out by the CIA.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In the aftermath of President Brick Tamland’s horrible debate performance, Leftists and the media (is there an echo in here?) have been stuck between a rock and a hard place. At least Bill Clinton isn’t involved or else it would be between a rock and a hard-on. Anyway, media types find themselves on the horns of a dilemma: continue to carry water for the Left, or actually do some reporting to confirm what we’ve been seeing for, oh, the past several years.
The latest victim, if you can call him that, of this dilemma is George Stephanopoulos, former White House Communications Director under the aforementioned Commander in Briefs and current lapdog…I mean journalist for ABC News. His crime? Answering a question about whether President Tamland could serve another four years. This got Georgie Boy in some hot water with his bosses, who demanded he clarify what he said and apologize for…and I’m not making this up…jeopardizing his and the network’s objectivity.
I’ll let you stop laughing before I continue.
Anyway, the Left is now concerned with appearing objective after spending decades not giving one tenth of one shit about it. Say, might that be because they’re covering up the fact they’ve been slobbering over President Tamland’s every move until he screwed the pound, let alone the pooch? Naaaaaaaaah!
So, let’s take a deep dive into objectivity and why the Left sucks at it.
objectivity
What the Left thinks it means – balanced reporting of the facts without emotion, which means not feeding the narrative of the Right
What it really means – balanced reporting of the facts without consideration of ideology
Back when I was young and stupid, I wanted to get into the journalism field. Not for the money because, well, there isn’t any in journalism, but because I wanted to be someone who could uncover the hidden truth. And as I went along in my studies, I grew more and more enamored with the romanticized ideal of what a reporter should be.
Then, I got to graduate school and heard an editor from a local paper say it was impossible for reporters to be objective. To say it blew my mind at the time would be an understatement. After years of having objectivity pounded into my young brain, here was someone in the journalism field telling me it was all bullshit (a position this person held years after the initial proclamation).
It was also around this time that a certain popular Democrat President started to wow people in the press, which made it easier to get them to slob on Slick Willie’s knob.
And I hope to all that’s holy it was only figuratively.
Granted, the press wasn’t completely objective in the 1980s. They made subtle (and not-so-subtle) jabs at Ronald Reagan during his tenure. Ironic, given how the press is covering President Tamland, but that’s a blog post for another time. Once the media threw up its collective hands and said “objectivity is impossible,” the blending of political ideologies and hard news was complete.
And journalism went in the shitter.
Then, with the advent of “reporters” like Taylor Lorenz, the shitter is the highest modern journalism can aspire to be.
Fortunately for the media, people let them slide because they still retained at least some credibility from being seen as legitimate news sources. No matter how much they shit on Republicans, conservatives, or anyone who isn’t them, people tended to give the press the benefit of the doubt. Anyone who disagreed with the idea these DNC stenographers were calling balls and strikes was written off as a partisan crank. Even when the alleged crank was an insider.
And guess who came along to fuck it all up. Donald Fucking Trump.
Trump made it possible for people to rip on the lack of objectivity in the media, not to mention the out-and-out partisan lying. From that point on, the Left couldn’t swing a dead cat without hitting someone who was calling out their bullshit. Oh, and pissing off PETA.
The problem the media face right now can be traced back to when they decided objectivity was impossible. By choosing sides, they started eroding the veneer of honesty previous generations built, but at least they got to hang out at all the cool kids’ parties. Because that’s far more important than not being lapdogs to people you agree with politically.
By the way Leftists and media folks (there’s that echo again), that was a joke. Much like Taylor Lorenz’s reporting only intentionally funny.
What isn’t so funny is the implications of how media silence or out and out denial of President Tamland’s deteriorating mental condition. The larger scale implications are easy enough to pick out and bad enough as it is (a cardboard cutout of the President would be better suited mentally to be President), but from a journalistic standpoint, it’s pretty bad. If these journalists who are supposed to be reporting the news knew about this and stayed silent, their credibility should be fucked more than a porno star. This is a legitimate news story, but apparently our intellectual betters thought it might worry us too much to think our President has the mental capacity of a turnip, so they kept it to themselves.
At least, that’s the explanation that would make more sense than their sudden realization President Tamland is on the intellectual downside of a hill on the world’s tallest roller coaster and plummeting rapidly. Their feigned surprise only worsens the issue, an issue that would never have happened if they had been…objective.
The thing is objectivity isn’t as impossible as the Left and the media (I must be writing this from the bottom of the Grand Canyon) make it out to be. Yes, we all have biases and perspectives we bring into any situation, but objectivity doesn’t require you to not have them. It requires us to overcome them to provide as many sides of an event as possible. Of course, Leftists have made this impossible in recent years by taking the attitude no one outside of their intellectual gangbang has a valid point of view, so all they hear is what everyone else in their bubble hears: Leftist squawking points. That’s all well and good if you’re at a political rally, but it’s shitty when you’re in the news business.
The sad part is I’m not sure the media are ready to have a conversation about the place objectivity has in modern journalism because newsrooms have become mini political rallies of a sort. There are still a handful of reporters out there calling balls and strikes, but they’re few and far between compared to the multitude of dimwitted half-baked bloggers or social media “influencers” who call themselves reporters. The fact ABC News made George Stephanopoulos retract his statement (made while he was off the clock, by the way) shows how far down this rabbit hole we’ve gone. What ABC News did under the guise of maintaining objectivity is bullshit incarnate. If they were really concerned about objectivity, they would have been out front with the President Tamland story before everyone else, given it a fair treatment, and let the chips fall where they may. You know, like journalists used to do?
But something tells me ABC News was more concerned about getting invited to dinner parties and keeping access to the President than in telling the truth.
The Party of Despotism
The Left is always saying that Republicans want to take away the “rights” of others. That electing a Republican president will open the door to a dictatorship.
But every dictator in history has come from the Left and we would be fools to believe otherwise.
Even in the United States this is true. And the public record supports it.
Check the public record for yourself and see which political party has dictator tendencies. The closest thing we have to the dictator ability to “rule by decree” is the use of Executive Orders. As this have the power of law.
Since our founding there have been 15,883 Executive Orders written over the last 248 years. That averages to 64 every year.
There have only been 5 political parties, plus George Washington, to have made it to the Presidency. Some presidents didn’t issue any Executive Orders while others issued a great many of them.
The Federalist Party had only 1 President. And he issued only 1 Executive Order.
George Washington, our first President and unaffiliated with any political party, issued a total of 8 Executive Orders.
The Democratic-Republican Party had 4 Presidents and in total they issued only 9 Executive Orders.
The short lived Whigs Party also held the Presidency 4 times, but they issued 34 Executive Orders.
We have had 19 Republican Presidents. Together they have issued 7,342 Executive Orders. It seems high but the previously mentioned parties have all been short lived while the Republican Party has been around for 170 years. Averaged out, that is 386 Executive Orders for each of the 19 Republican Presidents.
But the Democratic Party with only 17 Presidents has issued over a 1,000 more Executive Orders. Topping the list so far at 8,489 penned by a Democratic President. That’s 499 averaged out for each of the 17. Far more than the Executive Orders issued by Republican Presidents. Even Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Leftist like no other, issued 3,728 Executive Orders during his long Presidency.
The numbers don’t lie. Numbers can be fact-checked, double checked, and triple-checked. The numbers are clear. The Democratic Party rules by decree as a dictator every chance they get. And far more often than any other political party in American history.
So in November, remember to preserve Liberty and the Republic. Don’t vote for the dictators in blue.