In the Meme Time

Another Leftist meme to come crashing down in flames. Unlike many Leftist memes, this one doesn’t have a hint of truth. But it does try to play with your emotions instead of facts. But it’s totally off the mark.

This meme depicts two women. One is a Christian Nun. The other is a Moslem woman. Both are wearing a head covering which is the focus of the meme.

The meme states that if you are not bothered by the Nun’s head covering and you are bothered by the Moslem woman’s head covering. Then you are a bigot.

At face value (the emotional side), the meme would be correct. But there is a huge difference between these two women and why they are wearing these head coverings.

The Christian Nun is an ordained member of the clergy. She has taken various oaths that go along with her call to the religious life and she lives within a religious community, often closed to the outside world. The habit and wimple she wears is an outward sign of those oaths and her commitment to her Faith as a Bride of Christ Jesus.

The Moslem woman is not a member of the clergy nor is she ordained. She does not live within a religious community of sisters. The hijab she is wearing is a sign of submission and required by Moslem culture which places women to be, at best, property. It is enforced by Moslem laws with strict punishments, including death, if violated.

These are not the same head coverings and they are worn for vastly different reasons. To be bothered by a woman in hijab is a good thing. Not a sign of bigotry as the meme suggests. But a sign that you care about the rights of women which are suppressed within Moslem culture.

Unanimous Opinion

The Supreme Court’s recent opinion regarding President Donald Trump’s ballot status was correct. And here is why this it the correct outcome of this court case.

First off, the 14th Amendment was born in the aftermath of the War Between the States. Many of it’s clauses were written for the situation of the time and place. The goals could not be accomplished by legislation alone.

The insurrection clause in particular was written as a punishment against the leaders of the Southern States. Banning them from public office. Not because they rose up against the Union. But as revenge by the Northern States who did not want to seat the former Confederate officers in Congress.

Secondly, President Donald Trump has NOT been found guilty of insurrection or participating in an insurrection, or leading an insurrection, or inciting an insurrection against the United States. Thus, he cannot be removed from any ballot or banned from holding office because of an insurrection.

And lastly, the events of January 6th were not an insurrection by any stretch of the imagination. The video evidence speaks for itself and to this truth as does the testimony of credible eyewitnesses.

So there you have it. Three valid reasons why the Supreme Court’s opinion on this matter is the correct and just opinion and why it was unanimous.

A Dog’s Life

Normally, I write pieces where there’s a bit of humor mixed in with the serious points I try to make, but this isn’t one of those pieces. Instead, I want to talk briefly about a topic I care about deeply because it’s affected me personally.

For the past ten years, I have been a proud dog owner and recently became a foster dad for an older dog for the first time. Growing up, I always wanted a dog, but my parents (correctly) decided I wasn’t mature enough to take care of one. That, and the fact I had a fear of dogs from a young age, made dog ownership more of a dream than a reality.

Then, a little Bichon Frise named Chico came into my life. My wife and I adopted him from the local Animal Rescue League at the age of 9 without knowing much about his history. After watching him react with a combination of fear and anger at males (and me specifically), we surmised Chico came from a puppy mill.

Puppy mill. Two words that make me cringe every time I hear them.

To put it mildly, puppy mills are the worst way a dog can live, if you call what goes on at puppy mills living. Cramped cages, lack of love and care, a perpetual breeding ground where puppies aren’t allowed to be with their mothers and adults are only useful as long as they produce litters. Once they can’t, they’re sent away to shelters for others to adopt them.

In doing so, these puppy mill breeders leave their former revenue sources with injuries. Some of them are physical, but most of them are psychological. Dogs are trusting and loving by nature, unless their environment is such that trust and love are alien to them. Then, they act on instinct, an instinct fostered by how they were treated prior to being adopted. That leaves a lot of broken dogs that will need patience and love to live anything close to a normal life.

That was Chico. It’s also Stella, the mini poodle we’re fostering right now. And so many more. Too many, really.

The problem is there’s a market for dogs and so many ways to get one from puppy mills. All it takes is a little dishonesty, a lot of looking the other way, and keeping as many potential buyers in the dark as possible. You may not even know you’re getting a puppy mill dog until after the transaction is done. Sure, you can adopt through a seemingly reputable source, but that doesn’t mean the dog you’re getting is free from the puppy mill experience.

Then, when your new dog starts acting up in ways you didn’t anticipate, what happens? In today’s disposable world, those broken dogs get put back into the system until they’re either adopted, fostered, or even put to sleep.

All because some scumbags wanted to make a buck by any means necessary, even at the expense of a dog’s life.

The way to counteract this is to do your homework. Work with only reputable dog breeders if you want a dog to raise. Sure, it’s going to cost more money, but the love you get far exceeds the money you’re going to pay to get it. But if you’re not willing to raise a puppy, there are older dogs that need the same love you would give a puppy. And, yes, some of them will be puppy mill dogs by the law of averages alone, but they need a chance to live, too.

Regardless of which way you go, be prepared for a lifetime commitment. That requires a lot of patience and love for an animal whose whole life is you.

Chico and I went through a lot together, but at the end, we were the best of friends. I hope to replicate that with Stella. Even if she is adopted next week or next year, she will need to know how to trust again. And as long as it takes, I will do my best to earn her trust and give her a happy home full of love.

After all, isn’t a dog’s life worth it?

Our Brother-In-Law

This is your annual reminder the war between Russia and Ukraine is still going on and we still don’t have any idea of what the fuck we’re doing in it yet. I mean, aside from giving billions of American tax dollars to a cause that’s ill-defined outside of “Putin Bad” and has no clear end date in sight.

Oh, and did I mention we’re backing the losing side?

Actually, that’s a bit premature. They haven’t lost yet, so there’s always a chance Ukraine can turn things around…provided, of course, we send more money and arms.

It was at this point I came to a realization: Ukraine is like the stereotypical lazy brother-in-law. They don’t do much, spend what little money they have on shit they don’t need, and always come around when they need just a few bucks to get them through until they can get on their feet. And, because they’re related by marriage, we tend to relent in order to keep the peace within the family.

That doesn’t work so well when an entire country is the brother-in-law and we’re strapped for cash ourselves. Regardless of what Leftist squawking head tells you, the economy isn’t so rosy. Inflation continues to rise (although at a much lower rate than the previous 2 years, so yay, I guess?), and Puddin’ Head Joe keeps finding ways to make the US Dollar worth less than the acknowledgements section of a narcissist’s autobiography.

Like, oh I don’t know…giving billions to a foreign country without asking for any of it back?

Of course, the Leftist warmongers will mention Ukraine is fighting for freedom and we should support it or we’re Russian assets. Which is why so many of these same warmongers are trying to tie aid to Israel to aid to Ukraine because…freedom, I guess?

Actually, the two are not connected in any way. And if you’ve been following the events in Ukraine prior to the war with Russia, you can see why, but for those who haven’t let’s just say Ukraine has…a bit of a neo-Nazi problem. Which means we have a bit of a neo-Nazi problem because we’re funding them in the name of freedom, all the while telling us neo-Nazis are all over the US and evil, nasty people who can’t be reasoned with.

You know, just like Antifa!

This contradiction doesn’t seem to bother the Left that much, but it bothers me. We cannot hold Ukraine to a different standard than we hold our own citizens, even if we don’t like the implications. This is the kind of idiocy that got both Iran and Iraq hating our guts in the early 80s when they were having their own war. We tried playing both sides at different points and we got fucked as a result.

Now, we’re repeating the same mistake. After trying to be buddy-buddy with Russia as far back as the Obama Administration (remember Hillary Clinton’s “Reset” button?), we’re now blaming them for everything from inflation to supply line issues to the fact Taylor Swift is dating Travis Kelce. And when you consider Russia and China are getting along like the aforementioned Swift and Kelce, that doesn’t bode well for us.

But freedom…I guess?

So, it looks like we’re going to be letting Ukraine sleep on our couch for the foreseeable future. But I’m sure they’ll find a job…I mean win the war with Russia soon. They just need a few billion to tide them over until they win…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

With almost every election in the past 25 years or so, there have been accusations of one side or the other trying to get an unfair advantage though what is loosely called “election interference.” This can take on many forms, but the Left seems to be particularly concerned with election interference this year.

Maybe it has something to do with their Presidential candidate being only slightly more coherent than a piece of burnt toast…naaaaaah. If we’ve learned anything from Leftists, it’s that they’re honest brokers truly looking out for the best interests of their ideological cult…I mean country. Regardless, we have a tough nut to crack, so let’s get cracking.

No, Hunter, I’m not talking real crack here, buddy.

election interference

What the Left thinks it means – outside parties influencing American politics through underhanded and illegal means

What it really means – election shit Leftists do, but never get held accountable for doing

One of the bedrock principles America’s had throughout its existence is fair elections. Voters across the country would spend more time in local libraries and churches than they would the rest of the year and cast ballots for candidates they felt would do the best job in a given role. When we started electing incompetents, though, that dynamic shifted to whichever scumbag we liked more.

Anyway, this came into question in 2000 in the election between George W. Bush and Al Gore. I won’t go into a lot of detail here because I’m still going to therapy over it, but for those of you who weren’t there, the Readers Digest Condensed Version is Al Gore tried to use recounts in select Florida counties to win the state’s electoral votes and failed. This sent shockwaves throughout the political landscape. I mean, who could have imagined a thoroughly unlikable and out-of-touch former Vice President would lose?

I mean, aside from anyone who paid attention to Al Gore.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Hanging Chads, Leftists decided Bush cheated, thus he wasn’t legitimately President. This lead to conspiracy theories involving then-Florida Governor and W’s brother Jeb, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris, the US Supreme Court, and several boy bands getting their hands dirty while installing George W. Bush. Never mind the fact most, if not all, media-generated recounts repeatedly showed Bush won Florida. It was a conspiracy, dammit!

Then, before you could say “Not My President,” the election interference disappeared in 2008, even though not much in the lines of election security had changed. Hmmm…now who won the Presidency in 2008? Surely the fact the Left’s choice for President winning had no bearing on whether the Left thought election was tampered with, right? I mean that would be totally be a dick move to selectively call out election interference based on who was in office!

And it was just such a dick move they did in 2016 when Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton. The only difference between the 2000 conspiracy theories and the 2016 ones was the particular parties involved. And election security? Still not that different than it was back then.

Then, before you could say “Orange Man Bad,” election integrity wasn’t an issue in 2020…except where it was and glossed over by Leftists and turned into treason if you dared not accept one of the most fucked-up elections in history as totally legit. And now Puddin’ Head Joe is fucking everything else up and is in jeopardy of losing the White House to Trump, guess what’s coming back? That’s right, election interference!

But what does that actually look like? Depends on who you ask. To a normal person, a lot of the shit that’s been going on since 2000 has been election interference, ranging from potential threats of violence (Black Panthers outside polling places in 2008) to irregular counting procedures (counting ballots after the counting was supposed to be concluded in 2020). In other words, Leftist Election Strategy 101.

To Leftists, it’s anything Republicans and conservatives do to prevent the Left from cheating. Pass a law preventing campaign volunteers from handing out bottles of water to people in line, which could be considered electioneering? That’s election interference! Call for Voter ID laws? Election interference! In fact, I think you can count on the one hand of the world’s worst shop teacher the number of things the Left wouldn’t consider election interference.

To put it mildly, Leftists care about election interference like they care about the gay community: only when it suits their larger political ends. Otherwise, it’s issue non grata. The way you can tell? Leftists aren’t overtly spending money on election security. If they were really concerned about Russia, China, or even Nickelback affecting the 2024 election, they would be coming up with all sorts of election integrity boondoggles where Leftists could get rich..er and nothing would get done.

See what I mean?

The Left’s ideal version of election integrity is one where they’re the only ones allowed to cheat and win. But by taking this approach, they’ve ensured they can never be taken seriously on this subject by anyone who has a brain, which means anyone who isn’t a Leftist. Meanwhile, real election integrity is eroding before our eyes because few Republicans care to even touch the issue, let alone take the heat from the Left for trying to do something to restore faith in the system. If we want to see a return to the good old days where we can accept election results without all the bullshit, we have to take the heat and pack a lunch. Just avoid mayonnaise and cole slaw.

In the meantime, call out the Left’s bullshit when they bring up election integrity as an issue. Ask them what they intend to do the next time one of their preferred candidates win to ensure outside forces don’t tip the scales. And be prepared not to get an answer. Or have them call you a bigot. Or have their heads explode. You know, whatever works.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

When Alabama comes up in the news, it’s usually in relation to a citizen doing something insanely stupid. This week, however, the state made the news for something at least somewhat smart.

Which, of course, made Leftists freak out.

Recently, the Alabama Supreme Court ruled frozen embryos are considered children and subject to the same legal protections as other children under the state’s abortion laws. Of course, Leftists started raising all sorts of objections, ranging from the chilling effect (their words, not mine) on In Vitro Fertilization to the ruling being the result of Donald Trump (surprise surprise) to there not being enough oat milk for the Left’s free range Cheerios. And you know how serious they are when they start putting up stupid memes comparing chicken eggs to embryos to show how “stupid” the ruling was.

The concept of when life begins is subject of a lot of debate and all of it surrounds the embryo. Which means we get to talk about it, and by talk I mean you get to read my semi-informed opinions on the subject!

embryo

What the Left thinks it means – a prospective human

What it really means – the formation of a human baby

So, when does life begin? That depends on who you ask. The people who know a thing or two about human physiology will tell you it begins when there is cellular division, which can’t happen without a spark of life. The people who flunked out of human physiology class and became Leftists say life begins once the fetus exits the birth canal. Up until that point, it’s just a clump of cells.

That’s going to come as a surprise to any test tube babies out there.

Regardless of where you fall on the spectrum of when life begins, there is something perverse about how the Left treats embryos and fetuses for that matter. Instead of seeing them as humans, the Left sees them as objects without agency and, thus, useless to their political agenda except as an accessory to abortion rights. After all, a woman can continue to vote for Leftists, but an embryo can’t.

And as long as the Left continues to support abortion on demand (and contrary to what they say, some of them do), they will have a vested interest in dehumanizing a human life. Make no mistake, kids, an embryo is a human life. I’ve often wanted to ask pro-baby-death…I mean pro-choice advocates what comes out of the womb if it’s not a baby. Is it a basketball? A Shetland Pony? The transmission for a 1956 Buick? I’ve never had the chance, but a man can dream…

Meanwhile back at the main point, the Alabama Supreme Court’s decision makes sense in the context of protecting life. Once you dig past the sensationalist headlines and Leftist mischaracterizations, there is a real issue at stake. One of the lawsuits that lead to the decision involved a hospital patient who tried to take out some of the frozen embryos, got freeze burned, and dropped the embryos, causing them to die. Now, for the pro-baby-death…I mean pro-choice crowd, this is literally the kind of thing they claim to be against: letting women choose what they want to do with their bodies. The couple in this case chose to freeze an embryo, and the patient stripped that away from them.

Not that you would hear that from the Left, mind you. To them, the decision is backwards because…feefees. And to make sure the gay community got a shoutout, Leftists said the decision strips same sex couples of the ability to start a family.

Okay, time out here. Extending the legal protections of life to embryos prevents gay couples from having families? Well…let’s see if I can put this tactfully…how in the Wide World of Fuck does that make any sense? If these same sex couples want IVF to have a child, there’s nothing in the ruling that would prevent that. The same goes for couples looking to do IVF. All the ruling does is make it illegal to kill embryos and set up punishment for those who kill them. That’s it.

It was at this point we realized the Left was full of shit.

But, wait, it gets better! Leftists are now saying they will be freezing embryos and claim them as exemptions on their taxes. The thing is such an action would not only support the pro-life argument, but also the argument people are overtaxed as it is. To put it another way, and I’m speaking for myself here, your terms are acceptable.

In their attempts to look and sound smart on this decision, Leftists have exposed their true nature. They don’t care about embryos at all. They care more about the votes they get from the mothers of those embryos and any self-reflection on whether there’s a human life at stake is strictly optional, but highly discouraged. It’s this lack of consideration that drives me to be more on the pro-life side personally, even though I’m much more libertarian towards others. My personal opinion applies to me, myself, and some guy named Earl.

In the meantime, I think I’ve found a way to get more Leftists on board with protecting embryos. Tell them the embryos self-identify as trans. They’ll fall all over themselves to prevent any of them from dying or look like hypocrites in the process. Either way, the embryos get to live!

And that’s a win for everyone. Especially Earl.

The Not-So-Great Replacement

If you’ve been paying attention to the Left in recent years (and to be fair why would you since you have jobs and lives), you’ve heard about the Great Replacement Theory. In short, it’s the belief Jews are bringing in immigrants to replace white people. Of course, it’s wrong because without white people, Leftists would have no one to blame for shit.

But those same Leftists are facing their own Great Replacement Theory, but it has nothing to do with race or ethnicity. It has to do with who will be running for President for the Democrats in 2024.

The current presumptive candidate is President Puddin’ Head Joe, but given his propensity to, oh I don’t know, be a feeble-minded buffoon on a good day, the Left is trying to figure out what to do if his mental and/or physical health continues to deteriorate. To put it mildly, their options are scarcer than meat options at a vegan barbecue. Let’s take a look at these wieners…I mean winners.

Kamala Harris – Current Vice President and leader in the Government Official Who Makes Puddin’ Head Joe Look Sentient contest. Her list of accomplishments to date have been impressive…in just how blank the list is. Her popularity is somewhere between Bidenomics and Ben Shapiro at the BET Music Awards, and only one of those has a good beat that you can dance to. Leftists are trying to replace her, so elevating her to the Presidency would be a step in the wrong direction.

Dean Phillips – The “Who Is He?” candidate. To his credit, Phillips has brought up Puddin’ Head Joe’s age and low approval rates as reasons to find someone else. But as those calls have gotten louder in Leftist circles, it hasn’t moved the needle on his candidacy. And given how his party treated Robert Kennedy Jr., it’s not surprising so many are still Ridin’ With Biden even if that ride ends up at the bottom of a ravine. And speaking of Mr. Kennedy…

Robert Kennedy Jr. – Noted vaccine skeptic and bane of the Left’s existence because he didn’t Trust The Science. Much has been made of how his anti-vaccination stance has negatively impacted his extended family, but not much has been made of…how can I put this…his being fucking right about the COVID-19 vaccine. Since the narrative of his “homewrecking” has become the go-to for the Leftist hivemind, it’s unlikely he’ll get a fair shake or an honest hearing from Leftists and the media (but I repeat myself). So, he’s running as an Independent in the hopes that will prevent the Puddin’ Head Joe stink from sticking on him.

Jill Stein – The scapegoat of Hillary Clinton’s failed 2016 Presidential bid (since Leftists can’t admit the former First Lady is a shitty candidate), Stein is making another run for the White House for the Green Party. If you like recycled ideas that wouldn’t even work in theory, you’ll love her current platform…which appears to be only marginally different than her 2012 and 2016 platforms. I admire the tenacity, but when not even Leftists are willing to give your Leftist squawking points a first look, let alone a second, you might be in the Pat Paulsen category of Presidential candidates: a joke that comes around every 4 years and is forgotten afterwards.

Cornel West – Yes, that Cornel West. I can tell how much of an impact he’s going to have on this year’s election by the fact I didn’t even know he was running until I did research on the candidates. Gotta justify those speaking fees somehow!

Marianne Williamson – One of the few bright spots from the Left in the 2020 election. Sure, she’s nuttier than squirrel shit, but at least she was honest and willing to listen. No wonder Leftists don’t like her. I know she’s suspended her campaign already, but I would be remiss if I didn’t include her.

Other Democrats who some thought might run include Joe Manchin and Michelle Obama. With Manchin being as popular in Leftist circles as Rush Limbaugh in San Francisco, that would be a non-starter. Michelle Obama, on the other hand, still has the popularity she did when she was First Lady, but she said she wasn’t interested in the Presidency.

So, that leaves the Left with jack and shit for potential replacements for Puddin’ Head Joe, and Jack left town. This poses a problem for the Left in 2024 and beyond because they haven’t really developed a solid bench of potential candidates. Even rising stars like California Governor Gavin Newsom and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer have enough baggage to keep them where they are for now. In another 4 years, that may change, but for now the Left’s Presidential candidate bench is shallower than a Taylor Lorenz article. Or, Lorenz herself, for that matter.

In retrospect, the Left may have been better served by losing the 2020 Presidential election because it would have forced them to find better candidates that could have better capitalized on Donald Trump’s unforced errors. Not that they would have had any in the first place, but one can dream. As it stands, though, they have a doddering old fool at the head of the ticket, and a doddering middle age fool backing him up, and the lack of viable replacements is a problem that could cost them the White House for years to come.

Looks like the Left will have to get more dead people to vote!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

When I’m not writing blogs, banging my head against the wall until I get a concussion, or wondering if the Sweet Meteor of Death will be coming back for the 2024 election, I like to play video games. For me, they provide me with an escape from the real world so I can continue to be a functional (and, more importantly, a non-incarcerated) member of society.

But as with most fun things, Leftists had to go and ruin it by creating controversy. Granted, the Left has been trying to insert itself into video games for over a decade now and have failed. But their repeated and often embarassing failures have not deterred them from trying again. Think “Groundhog Day” but with video games. Oh, and a lot less comedy.

The latest attempt came from our good friends in GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. GLAAD recently released a report stating 1 in 5 active gamers are LGBTQIOUAEIOUSOMETIMESY and the gaming industry as a whole needs more representation of that community.

Son of a bitch…

representation

What the Left thinks it means – making sure all minorities can see a reflection of themselves in aspects of society

What it really means – superficial bean-counting without actually doing anything to help

Unless you’ve been living under a rock or trapped in Puddin’ Head Joe’s brain, you know members of the LGBTQMEANWHILEBACKATTHEHALLOFJUSTICE community exist and are prominent figures in society, mainly because so many of them can’t shut up about it. That community is slowly finding its way into various aspects of society and politics. Put simply, they’re visible and fabulooooouuuuusssss!

So, why aren’t they better represented in video games? The GLAAD report surmises it’s because the industry doesn’t think about them as viable protagonists. The exception to this is independent games where representation is much greater. But it also increases the likelihood this representation comes in really shitty games that a trained monkey could make better with an Etch-A-Sketch and a fifth of Everclear. Still, GLAAD felt confident in saying the gaming industry has to do a better job in making sure LGBTQIAIOUDEFENSE members get seen in their games.

And we can totally take an organization with a Board of Directors member named Peppermint seriously.

Unusual names aside, GLAAD is trying to come from a good place. They want everyone to feel included in video games. Is that so wrong?

Welllllll…it’s all about how that comes about that matters. That’s where I take issue with the notion of representation in this context. It’s not a matter of including a gay, lesbian, trans, bi, queer, etc. character in a game; it’s about making it make sense within the context. Trying to shoehorn a character that ticks off the flavor of the month box on the inclusiveness checklist makes it harder for gamers to accept him/her/it.

And here’s a fun little fact to consider: gamers are predominantly male. The numbers are getting closer to gender parity, but gaming is still a male’s domain. That means gaming studios are going to cater to where their cyber bread is buttered, as any capitalist worth his/her/its salt would. And make no mistake, game companies are in the business to make money, not to make social statements. If the social statement threatens the money, guess what’s going to be tossed aside faster than Hunter Biden goes through hookers and blow?

That’s where the calls for representation come into play. Since the community has a long reach when it comes to media and social influence, they can mobilize a PR nightmare within a matter of Twitter posts. And in that environment, nobody wants to be on the wrong side of a Twitter mob, so the game companies tend to bend the knee and comply. Just look at the template Anita Sarkeesian used to “help” women get more representation in video games.

Here’s the thing about Twitter mobs, though: they only have the power you allow them to have. Even as the GLAAD report gets mainstream traction (thanks NBC), the bottom line is still the bottom line, and no amount of virtual huffing and puffing from online activists will change that. Money talks, and bullshit walks.

And bullshit is the best way to explain the GLAAD report.

It turns out the gaming industry is already evolving with the times and has been since the 1980s. The early days of representation were less than stellar, but things have turned around so gay, lesbian, bi, and the other orientations are not only visible in games, but are sympathetic, realistic characters. And I’m not talking about low profile games, either. Some of the most popular titles of recent memory have represented the LBGTQAAAAAVVVEEEEMARRRRIIIIIAAAA community prominently and positively.

Including a game that was targeted by the aforementioned community, Hogwarts Legacy. After comments from J.K. Rowling that struck the trans community the wrong way, trans rights activists (including GLAAD, by the way) called for a boycott of the game. And the boycott, much like Fani Willis’s ability to not make herself look like a corrupt asshat, failed miserably.

I attribute the boycott’s failure to two factors. One, the game developers anticipated the controversy and created a transgender character. Of course, these Leftist idiots wouldn’t have known that unless they played the game. Oops!

The second, and more prevalent, reason was…gamers really don’t give a fuck about LGBTQIUDCANWEMILKTHISJOKEDRY representation. They care about…get this…good games. Sure, there are assholes who will make the biggest deal about “protecting games from woke culture,” but most of the gamers are more interested in whether a game entertains them more than who gets represented in the game. The Left completely missed the point by not understanding the audience they wanted to persuade.

And now they’re repeating the same mistake with the GLAAD report. At the very least, Leftists are consistent in being wrong and committed to recycling, albeit with bad ideas.

The point of representation in Leftist circles is to demand compliance instead of asking for consideration. But the thing to remember is no matter if you bend over backwards like a spineless yoga guru, it will never be enough. There will always be another goal to meet, milestone to achieve, or mountain to climb. So, the best way to win the game is not to play.

Say…that could be a great line for a movie! If only there was a plot, maybe involving a teenager who hacks into a government computer and almost starts a nuclear war with Russia…nah. Too implausible.

Anyway, the Left’s commitment to representation is skin deep. Notice how they don’t demand a slow, out of shape white guy be showcased in the next NBA video game. (By the way, I am available for consultation if you want to go down this road, 2K Games.) It’s always about the representation they want to push. And that’s why we need to take their calls for representation with a grain of salt.

The size of Mount Everest.

The False Gospels of He Gets Us

I wrote about this group in March of last year. You can read that article here: https://bynw.com/he-gets-us-more-than-you-know/

This is going to focus on the “He Gets Us” movement and their false gospel advert during the Super Bowl last week. It’s shocking how many ways this group can twist the gospel message of Jesus into something wicked and evil to the non believer. They are truly promoting an antiChrist with their “Feel Good” version of Jesus.

Within this latest advert it talks about how Jesus was a good neighbor because he washed the feet of his friends and enemies alike. Really. This what this advert claims Jesus did during his ministry on earth. Now to the unbeliever, who has a fleeting knowledge of Jesus stories from Sunday School to draw upon. The will recall that Jesus washed some feet. So it must be true and of course we want to do the same.

The advert shows still pictures of various feet washings. An abortion protestor washing the feet of woman who has just murdered her child in the womb. An illegal alien and trespasser getting his feet washed by a neighbor. And a priest washing the feet of an active homosexual male.

All of these images are false. Jesus never washed the feet of an unrepentant sinner. Likewise, Jesus never washed the feet of a Pharisee, or religious leader, a Roman soldier, or the money changers in the Temple. All of these people would have been the enemy of Jesus. Not once in Scripture does it state that Jesus washed any of their feet.

Scripture does state that Jesus violently turned over the tables of the money changers in the Temple and then proceeded to whip and chase them from the Temple calling them thieves.

Now, Jesus did wash the feet of his followers. Godly and holy men who were of character and repentant of their sins. Jesus washed their feet to show them they in order to lead His church, they must lead as servants to the body of believers. These are the only people that the Biblical Jesus washed the feet of, his followers.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

While you are enjoying the Super Bowl, the commercials, the food, and all of the pomp and circumstance, there is a genocide going on. Not in some foreign country, but rather our own shores.

Leftists, especially those of the LGBTQ1A+GWBJIBBAJABBA community, have been warning us of a trans genocide going on. Sounds pretty serious, doesn’t it? Certainly, if there’s a genocide against members of the trans community, we have to do something!

And I have chosen to write about it.

trans genocide

What the Left thinks it means – trans people being subjected to everything from discrimination to violence

What it really means – a term that conflates non-genocide with genocide for PR purposes

The first thing we need to do, aside from keeping our eyes from rolling because we’re talking about this general subject again, is define what a genocide is. Our good friends at Dictionary.com define it thus:

the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group

That makes trans genocide sound very serious. The problem? The numbers don’t match up to the rhetoric. According to a group that tracked violence against trans people from October 2022 to September 2023, there were 320 deaths. Compared to the 2.6 million trans people in America, the aforementioned deaths came out to a staggering 0.00012308% of the trans population. And when you consider other mitigating factors (race, whether they were sex workers, where the killing occurred), it gets harder to point to a definitive movement to eliminate trans people.

That’s when the Left changed the definition of “genocide” to include non-genocidy actions, like alleged marginalization and mean words. So, it’s not just the actual killing of trans people that counts, but anything they can perceive to be kinda sorta possibly a call for violence. And as we all know, trans people are known to be demure and serious, like Dylan Mulvaney.

For the Leftists reading this, that was sarcasm.

The reason for the expanded desecration…I mean definition is simple: to make as many people victims as possible. And it whips up enough hysteria to get people with TikTok-level attention spans upset and demanding action. And who gets to swoop in and show they care dammit? The Left! Funny how that works out, isn’t it?

What’s not so funny is the lack of action by Leftists to address the situation. Sure, they make a fuss to “raise awareness” of the issue, but that’s like a taking a squirt gun to a five alarm fire: it’s something, but it might as well be nothing. You know, like most of Puddin’ Head Joe’s policies?

But the trans activists are okay with nothing getting done because they don’t care about results as much as they care about being the center of attention. A demographic breakdown of the trans community last year found over half of them are under 35 years old. Now, that in and of itself isn’t particularly damning, until you consider the number of narcissists in that age group. With the advent of social media and the desire of young people to be seen, many young people thrive on being attention whores.

Including trans people.

Further complicating matters is the fact men tend to be more overt with their egos than females. Even if you’re a 6’9″ 389 pound former linebacker from the Midwest who goes by Camille and dresses like Scarlett Johansson cosplaying as the Hulk, the ego is still there and will always be there. Throw in the flamboyance that comes with high visibility trans people and you have a glittery yet toxic cocktail.

So what does this have to do with trans genocide? Turns out quite a bit due to, surprise surprise, ego. What’s better way to gain sympathy (i.e. attention) than to be the victim of something heinous? And with the Left willing to give them as much attention as possible and as much leeway to showcase and promote their lifestyle, it’s a match made in Hell packaged as a heavenly union.

This, of course, creates a copycat effect. Even if the worst thing a trans person encounters is being misgendered, it has the potential to turn him/her into victim, which can inspire others to look for offense in the tiniest of forms. And remember, you can only take offense. It doesn’t just exist in the world in free range cage free conditions. And if it did, it would be way overpriced at Whole Foods.

Let me make something crystal clear here. I don’t advocate for violence against anyone for any reason. Well, except if you cut me off in traffic. Then it’s on!

Seriously, though, no one should be targeted for violence because of their lifestyles. Yes, I know trans rights and transphobia are real things, but they’re not worth killing each other over. And they’re certainly not worth lying about to garner attention.

If the trans community wants me to believe there’s a trans genocide out there, I’m going to have to see evidence that can’t be explained away by other factors. It’s a bit like the COVID 19 death counts where the people who died with COVID were counted as deaths because of COVID. There is a distinction that makes all the difference.

Even if we accept the 320 number provided earlier as solely because the victims were trans, it’s not indicative of a trend or even a TikTok fad. Under the strictest (and most accurate) definition of the term, an actual genocide would involve many more deaths than 300+.

That’s why conflating genocide with what’s happening in the trans community is utterly damaging to the community itself. By inflating the numbers and watering down the definition to the point getting a trans person’s drink order wrong is “proof,” you gain victims, but lose credibility. Call it the Trans Boy Who Cried Wolf, if you will.

I would also take these folks more seriously if they spoke out against trans activists attacking other trans people who don’t agree with them. I mean, if trans genocide includes harsh words and death threats, wouldn’t those trans activists be engaging in…trans genocide? And what about the harsh words against former trans people who are detransitioning? More trans genocide, perhaps?

Hey, I don’t make the rules, folks. I just point them out to people unclear on what they are.

Ultimately, I want the same thing I want from any controversial topic: a rational discussion where the facts are laid out, no matter how ugly they are for one side or the other. With the kind of hysteria surrounding trans genocide, I’m afraid that’s not going to happen anytime soon. It’s okay, though. I can wait.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have to get back into my cryogenic chamber and wake up in another 200 years. See you soon!