The past seven days has been rift with excitement, high hopes, and general giddiness from the Left because of one group of imbeciles…I mean Congresscritters: the January 6th Committee. After two long and expensive years, we are finally going to get to the truth about former President Donald Trump and the insurrection that brought this country to its knees!
At least, that’s what we’re being told. And we know Leftists would never lie or get people’s hopes up for no reason. That reminds me, has anyone seen Robert Mueller lately?
While we wait for the aftermath of the committee’s prime-time extravaganza, let’s see if we can’t pull off a Carnac the Magnificent performance by looking at the committee as a whole.
the January 6th Committee
What the Left thinks it means – a bipartisan effort to hold Donald Trump and his followers accountable for trying to overthrow the government
What it really means – a waste of time and money to get back at Donald Trump and his followers for winning the 2016 election
If there’s one thing the government knows how to do, it’s how to waste money (although, taking away our rights through pointless regulation is a close second). One of the ways they do this, or both for that matter, is through creating special committees to investigate one issue or another. And if it’s a hot button issue, you can bet your bottom dollar that isn’t already spoken for by the IRS that someone in Washington will say, “You know, we should form a committee to investigate why dogs lift their legs to pee.”
I didn’t say they were good hot button issues.
In the aftermath of the “insurrection” on January 6th, Leftists came up with the idea to investigate why it happened and who was responsible for it. Of course, they already “knew” Donald Trump was involved because…well, Donald Trump. So, like they do with global warming/climate change/climate catastrophes/whatever buzzword is popular with the Green New Deal crowd this microsecond, they worked backwards in the hopes they would find something that would produce the necessary linkage between Trump and the events of January 6th.
And after almost a year of public statements, committee meetings, and promises to bring people to justice, the January 6th Committee has…a TV special. Not the good kind like “A Charlie Brown Christmas” or “Frank Zappa’s Polka-Palooza,” either. We’re talking “Al Gore Reads War and Peace Live” levels of crapitude. Listen, nothing says “this is not a serious bunch of folks” like getting a TV producer to help make the message understandable and appealing to the general public. Hell, most of the public today doesn’t even watch network TV for the same reason they don’t take a drink out of the toilets at Chipotle: they’re full of shit.
Much like the politicians comprising the committee, appropriately enough. Looking at their roster there is a who-cares of political operatives, puffed up egos, and useful idiots. And that’s just Adam Schiff, the House Democrat partially responsible for the dreadful first impeachment trial of Donald Trump. Oh, and I forgot to mention he leaks more than a saggy diaper.
But he’s not the only subpar superstar here. There’s also Jamie Raskin, the House Democrat partially responsible for the even worse second impeachment trial of Donald Trump. (I’m sensing a pattern here.) The other House Democrats on board aren’t much better, ranging from the chairman of the Homeland Security Committee (not a bad get, to be fair) to someone whose main accomplishment to date has been…being friends with Nancy Pelosi.
But don’t think the Democrats are the only ones having fun picking committee members! They have two Republicans, Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger, to give the illusion of bipartisanship without sacrificing any of the committee’s lack of reputation and gravitas. Yes, I know most House Republicans refused to assist with this clown show…I mean committee, but that’s not without reason. For one, the members House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy suggested were shot down by House Democrats because, and I’m paraphrasing here, they didn’t want conspirators to the crime investigating it. More importantly, however, most House Republicans see what Cheney and Kinzinger didn’t: their presence was meant to be a distraction to give the impression the committee was a true bipartisan effort.
This is where I have to step in and clarify a point that often gets misunderstood by Leftists. Not all Leftists play for the blue team. Some Republicans have adopted Leftist thinking and tried to mold it into the main party by any means necessary. The problem is not every Leftist Republican is as overt as Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski. Some of them like Florida Senator Marco Rubio seem like rock-ribbed Republicans, but would be just fine with Big Daddy Government as long as they are running it. Just look up his changing positions on “common-good conservatism” and tell me he’s not willing to be an ideological switch hitter if the power grab was right.
And now, back to my rant on the January 6th Committee already in progress.
Both Kinzinger and Cheney are on the committee to a) give the illusion it’s actually bipartisan, b) give the Left some measure of cover against legitimate complaints as to the committee’s political ends, and c) stick it to Trump Republicans. But it’s this last reason that seems to be the prevailing one. As I mentioned earlier, the January 6th Committee is one big “fuck you” to Donald Trump after he beat Hillary Clinton in 2016. We can argue from now until “Firefly” gets a second season about whether it was a good idea to elect Trump, but it cannot be denied the Left has a raging hate-boner for him and the people who support him. While the committee itself has their collective hands on the table, the Department of Justice has been arresting protesters for various crimes, some legit, most bullshit, and have been keeping them in custody indefinitely. Basically, they’re being treated slightly better than suspected terrorists at Gitmo. And unlike the suspected terrorists, these protesters are American citizens with rights that are being denied by the very government investigating their actions.
All because Donald Trump beat Hillary Clinton.
This isn’t to say there weren’t some idiots who took things too far because, well, there were. Their crimes should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Where I draw the line is calling what the majority of protesters did (peaceably assemble and not cause a fuss) an insurrection as a jumping off point for a mockery of justice wrapped in national security bunting. The entire premise of the January 6th Committee is predicated on the idea there was an actual threat to democracy (which we’ve never had in America) as presented by these protesters.
And that, dear readers, is bullshit.
No matter what the January 6th Committee televised special says or shows, it’s hard to overlook the numerous problems the committee has created merely by taking a bogus narrative and running with it like it was being chased by the defensive secondary of the Los Angeles Rams. But the best is yet to come. After being hyped as the end-all-and-be-all of investigations into the January 6th situation, committee aides are walking it back slightly, saying the TV special is an “opening argument” according to the Washington Post.
Oh, good. There may be more of this shit coming to TV screens near you. Yay?
The biggest problem I have with the committee (I mean aside from the laundry list I’ve already spewed for your reading pleasure) is it doesn’t seem to be serious in its stated mission. The fact Adam Schiff is allowed to get coffee for the committee, let alone have one of the seats on it, should outrage anyone with two brain cells to rub together. In other words, non-Leftists.
And with the committee’s TV special, their lack of seriousness is confirmed. Why in the hell would they need to televise what most people already know if they’ve been following the story? Why has the investigation been solely in one direction while ignoring actions from Democrat leaders that exacerbated the situation? Did members of the federal law enforcement community infiltrate the protest and attempt to incite criminal behavior, as some have shown on video? Is it really an insurrection if no one actually tried to overthrow the government?
These are the questions (among many, many others) the January 6th Committee can’t or won’t answer. This tells me they don’t want to get to the bottom of what happened; the Left needs the overblown “threat” as a weapon to give the impression Trump supporters are threats to America that are on the verge of destroying the country, overthrowing the government, and green-lighting a new “Dukes of Hazzard” series! The horror!
The biggest problem the Left faces with the January 6th Committee is the same one they faced with both impeachment trials, the Mueller Report, and everything else they thought would end the Trump Presidency: they overpromised and underdelivered. Just about everything they threw at Trump was all sizzle and no tofu, and to be fair there wasn’t that much sizzle to begin with. This is merely the latest in a long line of failures that make the “Scary Movie” franchise look good, and that’s a tall order.
Fortunately for us, the Left is more than up to the challenge of finding new ways to disappoint people!
Ignorant Meme
There is a meme going around on Social Media right now that was so poorly thought out it just makes me laugh. Of course the useful idiots are posting and re-posting it every day.
So where to begin with the flaws of this meme? It obviously a half baked idea, much like most of the Left’s so-called “thoughts.”
Well we will start at the beginning.
Its a letter to the editor of a printed newspaper. I think only the Left still reads those rags. And without Social Media anything in a newspaper doesn’t stand a chance of getting any circulation in the world these days. Not a very good start.
Nothing is less patriotic than giving up your arms to another nations military. The is the definition of surrender. I don’t think that the author of the letter even knows what patriotism is or how it works.
Not a lot of Americans, patriotic or otherwise, even OWN an assault weapon. But this shows the ignorance of both the author and the Left who continue to put out this kind of garbage. They really mean any semi-automatic rifle, which is most of them. But none of them are assault weapons by definition.
Then how does the desired outcome happen? One cannot mail weapons or ammunition through international mail. That and sending American weapons to a foreign nation, you would need to send ammunition too otherwise it would be worthless.
To have them shipped, would be an expensive and logistical undertaking. Sending weapons to a foreign nation’s military would be a violation of any number of treaties and international agreements.
Thus causing the senders to be war criminals at the least if not plunging America herself into this war and escalating the scope of the conflict.
Again, the idea is bunk to begin with and there is no way to implement the idea either. What fools are those who believe this kind of nonsense.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
After every mass shooting (except for the ones that occur nearly every weekend in Leftist utopia Chicago), Leftists bring up the need for “common sense gun control.” Of course, they never come out and say what that would look like, but, dammit, they care!
With the most recent shooting in Uvalde, Texas, though, Leftists changed tactics. Instead of calling for gun control, they’re now calling for gun safety. On the surface, that’s a move in the right direction since it seems to be an area of common ground between gun owners and gun control advocates.
If you’re expecting a “but” here, you should. There’s more to this concept than the Left wants us to know.
gun safety
What the Left thinks it means – a movement to curb gun violence as much as possible
What it really means – repackaged gun control
Advertisers love to play with phrasing to get consumers to believe a certain product is better than another or to gin up new interest in an existing product. That’s why you see “new and improved” in ads and on packaging. The idea is to get you to think a certain way that will either reinforce your current buying habits or get you to consider changing them.
The same principle is at work here. By switching from a pointed phrase (“gun control”) to one that seems more neutral (“gun safety”), the Left is hoping you will consider changing your opinion on gun control. After all, who wouldn’t be in favor of gun safety? Maybe Alec Baldwin, but he’s an outlier.
The thing is gun safety means different things to different people. Most gun owners already practice gun safety, such as not pointing guns at others and keeping guns and ammunition secured and stored in separate places. These are actions people can do themselves without having Big Brother giving us direction on how to do it. And considering the federal government has utter morons running departments, if not full branches, maybe we don’t need their help.
To Leftists, gun safety has nothing to do with what individuals can do, but rather what the government can do because they believe government is the source of all good (except if that government is run by those evil Republicans who take money from the National Rife Association to prevent meaningful and sensible gun laws from being passed). That’s why all of their solutions to the gun problem revolve around passing more laws, banning more guns, and demanding more from gun owners than they expect from the criminals who commit gun violence. But there is one common thread throughout these efforts.
Leftists don’t know shit about guns.
That fact alone should render their opinions on gun safety as irrelevant as Joe Biden’s teleprompter. Yet, with their emotional appeals whenever a shooting happens, no one stops to think whether we’ve tried some of these suggestions before. News Flash: we have. And it hasn’t stopped mass shootings at all. What it has done, however, is make the vast majority of mass shooters legal gun owners. That’s right. Most of the mass shooters (outside of Chicago, of course) have passed the background checks the Left have demanded. What’s next? More background checks to make up for the background checks we were told would stop mass shootings and didn’t? More hoops for law-abiding citizens to jump through that criminals will ignore?
The truth is the Left needs there to be more mass shootings to justify their power grabs in this case and to protect themselves from the inevitable backlash once enough gun owners get tired of being treated like potential criminals for merely wanting to own firearms. Now, if you’ve been paying attention (and I know you have), this runs counter to what the Left is saying they want now, gun safety. Banning certain guns doesn’t make them or us safer. The same with background checks, limits to ammunition purchases, or the number of bullets a gun or rifle can shoot before needing to be reloaded. In fact, nothing they’ve proposed have anything to do with safety, but everything to do with controlling people.
Just as it was intended.
There is one thing the Left can do to show their commitment to gun safety, that being offering gun safety training. Of course, they’ll have some competition from…the NRA. Yep, that same NRA that is super-duper evil and wants to kill schoolchildren so Bubba can have an AR-15 (according to the Left). Why haven’t gun safety advocates on the Left come up with something similar?
Because it’s all about getting rid of guns altogether. Oh, sure, Leftists won’t come out and say it unless they’re in friendly company, but that’s been their goal for a while now. No matter how they rebrand their approach, the endgame is always get rid of guns.
So, what do we do? Call out the newly-minted gun safety crowd and ask them what they’re going to do about actual gun safety and not the laundry list of Leftist demands that always come out after a shooting. And don’t let them get by with bullshit answers, either. Press them like they want to press gun owners to comply. Then, when they fail (and they will), point it out and tell everyone who will listen about their real agenda.
But if you want to really push for gun safety, Leftists, I have a piece of advise. Don’t arm yourselves. Leave it to the police to protect you. You know, the police you want to revamp/defund and have called racists with badges?
Have your next of kin let me know how that works out for you.
What is an AR-15?
Most people would say an Assault Rifle, after all that’s what the AR means. And they would be wrong. AR stands for ArmaLite Rifle, the original manufacturer of the weapon.
The AR-15 has been copied by multiple manufactures over the decades since its introduction in 1956. And are commonly called an AR-15 even though they are truly an AR-15 style rifle.
The term Assault Rifle is debatable. Since “assault” is an action and thus any rifle can be used in an assault and be called an assault rifle in my book. Hell you can have an assault screwdriver if you use one in an assault.
But this is how the US Military defines an Assault Rifle:
- It must be capable of selective fire. (that means Semi-Automatic, Fully Automatic, and Burst)
- It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, examples of intermediate cartridges are the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62×39mm and 5.56×45mm NATO.
- Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.
- It must have an effective range of at least 300 meters (330 yards).
The Colt AR-15, the most common AR-15 rifle in civilian hands, is semi-automatic-only. It is not capable of selective fire and therefore NOT an assault rifle by definition.
Semi-automatic weapons are the most common form of firearms today in both handguns and rifles and they have been around for a century. Semi-automatic means you don’t have to cock the weapon every time you fire a round. The next round loads automatically for easy firing.
The Browning BAR MK 3 is the same as any AR-15. Except it doesn’t look like a scary military weapon. Which is really why some people seem to hate the AR-15 style rifle.
Firearm enthusiasts like the AR-15 mainly due to the weapons versatility and dependability. A tried and true design that takes a lot of punishment.
So it’s not really the weapon that is the problem. We have had semi-automatic rifles and pistols for more than 100 years at this point. Although we have had mass shootings documented as far back as the 1920’s. A time period of high crime, gangsters, and fully automatic weapons. I’m guessing that mass shootings go back to the beginning of firearms.
Yes the weapon makes it easier to kill innocent people. But it shouldn’t be punished, nor should law abiding people. The weapon is necessary for a free people to remain free against an oppressive government. When a government becomes contrary to the Will of the People. Guns are the first victims.
The TikTok War
If you can believe it, the conflict between Ukraine and Russia is now over 100 days old. What’s worse, I still have my Horrendous Withdrawal from Afghanistan decorations up!
For a brief time, it seemed Ukraineamania was running wild. Everybody and their grandmothers were putting Ukrainian flags on their Twitter profiles along with supportive phrases showing how much they support freedom because, well, freedom. Then, over time, the virtual support was still there, but the vocal support died out. Even the media moved on, save for occasional puff pieces on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that would make Teen Beat sue for copyright infringement.
It wasn’t until recently that I noticed the void of pro-Ukraine voices, and it got me thinking as to why. I came up with two possible reasons, one more plausible than the other given the American media. The first reason was the media was so heavily invested in backing Ukraine that they were hiding bad news to maintain the facade. Although this is true to form for the media (see President Joe Biden), I decided it wasn’t the case because it would require actual journalism to be done and today’s media just aren’t up to the task.
The other, more plausible explanation is the media stopped covering it like it did in the beginning, so people stopped paying attention to it. I mean, it’s not like there are people dying for their country or anything, right? Oh, wait…
This lack of attention isn’t just at the personal level, either. In the past 100+ days, has anyone who beat the drums of war like a Neil Peart solo come up with a concrete reason why the US has to get involved in the Ukraine/Russia conflict? If they have, they’ve hidden it pretty well. And, yes, I know “because freedom” is persuasive to Americans because we value it so much, but that isn’t a justification to commit to an action. If it were, US forces would have been deployed to a few African countries where young men are fighting for freedom against an oppressive government.
Funny how that works, isn’t it?
Seriously, though, the fact we don’t have any straight answers about our involvement in the Ukraine/Russia conflict, let alone the conflict itself, has been a sore spot for me since the beginning. If I am to support intervention in a foreign country, I kinda need a reason I can sink my teeth into intellectually. The lack of such a reason leads me to believe there isn’t a good reason to do it, so we’re left with appeals to emotion to pick up the slack. It works well for a while, but once the emotions die down, we’re still lacking a reason.
What’s worse is most people don’t see the issue. After all, we just had the Johnny Depp/Amber Heard trial and that was super-important! I mean, the legal implications may last for at least a week, maybe two!
The problem is this makes us look fickle in foreign affairs. It doesn’t seem to matter if Ukraine loses a significant number of people in this conflict because we’ve moved onto the next super-important issue (even if we haven’t updated our Twitter accounts yet). This turns the conflict into the geopolitical equivalent of a TikTok dance craze, which does a great disservice to the people we allegedly support.
Here’s where the shit really hits the fan. Our gradual disinterest in what’s going on in Ukraine helps Vladimir Putin because it gives him the belief we will lose our taste for war if he just waits us out. And the sad thing is he’s right. American attention spans are shorter than an ant’s inseam and we get attracted by a new shiny object/issue on the regular.
That’s right, kids. America has ADD.
In matters of pop culture, this isn’t a big deal, but on the battlefield it’s deadly. If we insist on fighting Russia via proxy, we need an explanation, and by my calculation, it’s overdue by, oh, 100 days. If there isn’t one better than “Ukraine Good, Russia Bad” or “because freedom,” then we need to rethink our strategy and justifications for getting involved. There have been too many wars in recent history that have ended badly because we didn’t have a real reason to get involved and were too stubborn to admit it.
So, let’s have it, so we can have it out once and for all. And let’s make it sooner rather than later in case there’s a new dance craze on TikTok.
Another Gun Grab Attempt
Here we are again. Another debate on the 2nd Amendment and gun ownership.
I have stated this many times before and I will state it again and again. The 2nd Amendment was written to ensure that We the People could take up arms and defend ourselves against the 2 greatest evils in the world. Our fellowman and the government.
The 2nd Amendment wasn’t to ensure one could go hunting. The Founding Fathers just got back from fighting a war against their government. The weapons owned by the citizens were at least the same if not better than the weapons issued to soldiers.
Time and time again our government has enacted laws on all levels; local, state, and Federal that violate the Constitution of the United States when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
This right has been infringed on time after time. And more infringements will not stop any form of mass shootings. Criminals by definition break laws. Infringements only help criminals and take away the rights of law abiding people who want to protect themselves and their families from harm.
Some may ask if I think a citizen of the United States should be able to own a fully automatic machine gun, or a combat jet fighter, a cannon, a battleship, or even an intercontinental ballistic missile. The answer is yes. We the People, should be able to have exactly what the government has for weapons. If you can afford it. Have it.
In a previous post I broke down the 2nd Amendment for those ignorant of history and language. I’m not going to say it again here, but I will link it so you can read it again.
If we take a look at mass shootings. We will find several things to be true. In most cases they all take place in “gun free zones”. Were only a posted sign keeps out weapons. No one who is going to kill innocent people is ever going to obey that signage.
Also in almost every case, the shooter turns out to be some kind of radical Leftist nutjob. A shooter is never a Bible-believing Christian or Republican.
And oddly the number of mass shootings tends to increase whenever the Democratic Party is in the White House or has control of Congress. Almost a conspiracy to try to create emotions in the public to infringe more on the 2nd Amendment.
The recent mass shooting in Texas is a horrible tragedy and loss of life that could have been prevented. Not by enacting more infringement laws against gun owners. But by taking an active roll in protecting our children and our fellow citizens. Our thoughts and prayers go out to the survivors and their families.
Schools need to be gun active zones. Teachers and other staff need to be armed and trained to effectively use a firearm in the case of a shooter entering school grounds.
Police and other protective agencies need to be properly trained to deal with a mass shooter as well. In the Texas case, the police did NOTHING for 40 to 45 minutes. Instead of going in and removing the threat.
These two minor changes could have saved the lives that were lost. Only the gunman would have been killed. Again, any death is a tragic loss of life but it would have saved many more.
Recently there was a mass shooting in West Virginia too. A gunman opened fire at a birthday party. In this case, a woman had a firearm with her and was trained to use it. And she did. She shot and killed the gunman saving countless lives in the process.
This is the very thing that we need to do. We cannot wait for the police to decide to act 40-45 minutes. This happened at Sandy Hook as well. And children lost their lives.
We need to end gun free zones. Enact Constitutional Carry in all States, since the Constitution already allows it. Find teachers and other staff in schools who would like to receive training in arms. And then arm them.
Then when a deranged madman comes on the school grounds to harm children and others. They are met with deadly force. Children are safe and learn that guns are an important life saving tool in the right hands.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
With all of the heavy subjects this week, I decided to inject a bit of actual comedy into this week’s Lexicon. (Finally!) British comedian and now-infrequent awards show how Ricky Gervais has a new special on Netflix that has garnered a lot of attention from Leftists…for all the “wrong” reasons. Leftists attacked Gervais for making jokes about trans people and mentioned one of their favorite new defenses against comedy, “punching down.”
I watched the special because I was curious (and I think Gervais is genuinely funny) and I can confirm he didn’t punch any children or midgets. Then, I thought about it and realized Leftists mean something completely different. No less stupid, but different.
punching down
What the Left thinks it means – when a privileged person mocks or hurts a less-privileged person
What it really means – Leftists choosing which sacred cows aren’t to be made fun of
In a statement what will surprise no one, Leftists have an inflated sense of self-worth, especially in the area of comedy. In recent years, they’ve managed to change comedy from telling jokes to making social statements where jokes may or may not be used. And more often than not, they don’t (unless they steal jokes like Amy Schumer). With a good number of comedians aligning with the Left, Leftists think they are the only truly funny people out there.
Which brings us to the new rules they’ve adopted and expect all other comedians to follow. One of these rules is not to punch down, meaning not to joke about people less fortunate or powerful than you are. On the surface, it makes sense in a weird way. We don’t want to intentionally hurt people who may lack the ability to come back on equal footing because we’re at least trying to look like good people.
The problem is, as Steve Martin so eloquently put it on one of his albums, comedy is not pretty. A lot of comedy involves some element of pain, discomfort, or disruption. That’s why the Marquis de Sade was the hottest stand-up comedian of his day. (True story…I guess.) Even jokes that involve questioning the reason a chicken crosses a road require one party’s life to be interrupted to try to answer said question. And don’t get me started on the perverse nature of knock-knock jokes!
The Left’s demands to punch up instead of punch down shows how little they actually know about comedy. Comedy is the great equalizer because everyone can be the butt of a joke. Elon Musk, a homeless person, it doesn’t matter. To set up an arbitrary limit on who can be joked about is to remove that equality and limit the potential comedic targets. That limits the jokes that can be told. After a while, you will run out of jokes that pass Leftist muster, which leads to the jokes becoming stale and predictable like an episode of “Two and a Half Men.”
But then there’s the comedic conundrum that is “Will & Grace.” This is one of the Left’s favorite sitcoms because of its inclusion and representation of gay characters. I watched a couple of episodes back during its original run and came away wondering why it was such a beloved show on the Left. The comedy, such as it was, seemed obsessed with the gay lifestyle instead of, you know, being funny. And when one of the secondary foils of the show is an over-the-top exaggeration of a gay man and his humor revolves solely around him being gay, I guess I fail to see how this is positive and funny. But apparently it didn’t punch down, so yay, I guess?
On the flip side, there’s “Married With Children.” Throughout its run, the show offended everyone at some point (except for sick freaks like me, apparently) and kept punching up, down, sideways, and all around. Even as controversy raged, there were no fucks given and they continued to be equal opportunity offenders. The same can be said for “South Park,” “Beavis and Butthead,” and a handful of other successful shows. Why did these shows survive and flourish?
Because they understood what was funny and didn’t try to limit the jokes to avoid offending people without senses of humor.
The whole concept of punching up or punching down is absurd, and not in a humorous way. Comedy does have the ability to open minds and change opinions. If it weren’t for comedians like George Carlin and Dennis Miller, I wouldn’t be the man I am today, for better or worse. But the best lessons come from times when you learn without even knowing it because you were having too much fun. Granted, I wouldn’t want to try to learn nuclear physics by watching “Wheel of Fortune” but the point remains the same. We don’t need to be beat over the head with a message to get it.
That’s where Leftist comedy always fails. Well, that and the fact they’re rarely intentionally funny. For Leftists, the message is everything, so it becomes the focal point of any comedy at the expense of any actual comedy. It’s the difference between Dave Chappelle and Hannah Gadsby. Chappelle’s comedy has a message (one that Leftists love to distort for the purposes of getting outraged) while Gadsby’s comedy is only about the message Even when Chappelle bombs, he still has a process to either rework it into something better or dump the bit altogether. Gadsby doesn’t have that option. Plus, you wouldn’t know if she bombed because the sound of crickets in the audience drowns out any laughter.
The funny (strange, not haha) about the concept of not punching down is how fragile the Left thinks some groups are. Granted, these are the same morons who tell us “jokes are violence” and “words are violence,” but this is beyond even that level of what-the-actual-fuck-ism. If someone telling a joke at your expense or at the expense of your group identity causes you emotional or psychic damage, it may not be because the joke is mean-spirited; it may be because you have deeper issues than someone telling a joke, and you’re going to need someone more specialized than Patch Adams to address them.
Going a step further, Leftists feel that every minority group is oppressed and only they can speak for the oppressed. This is especially true of white Leftists, I’ve found. They have savior complexes that would put Superman to shame. But in doing so, they’ve stolen the groups’ voice and used it for their own selfish purposes: to make them look better. That’s a gut punch down, if you ask me!
Then, there’s the other major problem, that being not all members of the group may feel the same way or take offense. There have been a number of gay and trans people openly supporting Gervais’ special, saying it was funny and…non-offensive! How will Leftists respond? The way they always do: ignoring or belittling the people who disagree with them. Now, if words are violence and Leftists mock gay and trans people who liked the Gervais special, wouldn’t that be a hate crime? You make the call!
Either way, it’s not worth the time to worry about whether a comedian is punching up or down because all it does is limit comedy to the point of banality. Laugh at what you want, don’t laugh at what you don’t, and remember to keep a healthy perspective. Even when a comedian hits a group you identify with, it’s not personal, and you have to admit even Republicans and conservatives do things worthy of being mocked openly. I do it, but when the Left keeps serving up mock-worthy topics like punching up, it’s hard to pass up!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Conspiracy theories abound these days. Although most of them hold as much water as the new Uggs thermos, some of them have a basis in truth.
Recently, the idea of replacement theory became a Leftist talking point, as some Republicans have shown at least passing support for the idea. The Left pounced on this, calling the idea a conspiracy theory believed only by right-wing nuts. Since I’m allergic to those kinds of nuts, I figured I’d delve further into the subject.
replacement theory
What the Left thinks it means – a racist right-wing conspiracy theory that states whites are slowly being phased out by non-whites
What it really means – what the Left actually wants to do with whites other than themselves
Leftists have a love-hate relationship with whites, namely they love to hate them. And based on their version of history, who wouldn’t? Whites were responsible for slavery in America, misogyny, homophobia, toxic masculinity, environmental catastrophes, and, worst of all, voting Republicans into the White House. Having that much guilt on a person’s soul makes one more amenable to the idea that whites shouldn’t be involved in things anymore.
Well, at least if they weren’t Leftists. Then, they’ll be there in the background to make things work great because…well, I’m still trying to figure that part out, but the sentiment is there. And really, isn’t that what really counts?
Anyway, it cannot be overstated how the Left originated the concept and worked to bring it into practice. The really scary thing is how easily it’s been incorporated into other Leftist policy points without us knowing it.
Replacement theory states whites are slowly being replaced by non-whites through a series of factors, including decreasing white birth rates and illegal immigration taking jobs whites could do. And what has the Left been advocating? Open immigration, women waiting to have children until after they’ve succeeded in business, easy access to abortion, prohibiting law enforcement from checking on papers from suspected illegal immigrants, demanding more minority hires, just to name a few.
But remember, replacement theory is just a right-wing conspiracy with no basis in fact.
And thanks to the recent shooting in Buffalo, replacement theory has been brought front and center. The shooter’s manifesto mentioned replacement theory, so that gave the Left all the opportunity they needed to paint him as a right wing fanatic and to dismiss replacement theory as right wing nonsense. Of course, the shooter was a self-professed eco-fascist national socialist who took advantage of New York’s strict gun control laws to pick a target that fit his racist agenda. Of course, Leftists don’t want us to focus on those little details, only that replacement theory was referenced and the Left says it’s right wing in nature.
Thus, Leftists use one of their favorite tactics to avoid responsibility for their actions, projection. And let’s just say the Left uses more projection than an IMAX theater here and in other areas. While the Left attacks Tucker Carlson, Donald Trump, and other favorite right wing whipping boys, the truth is far harder for them to swallow. So, instead of recognizing they’re wrong or that they had a hand in the problem, the Left blames others not even involved with the shooting for radicalizing the shooter. Mighty nice of them, don’t ya think?
Meanwhile, we still have to deal with the reality of replacement theory instead of passing it off as a partisan conspiracy theory. For that, we need to stand up to the racism of the Left, in large part due to the slings and arrows of outrageous Leftist name-calling. They will call you racist, white supremacist, Republican, MAGAt, or any number of disparaging names designed to minimize your effectiveness. Yes, they will sting emotionally and won’t match what you truly believe, but the best way to counteract that is to stand firm and remained unfazed by the Left’s attacks. It will confuse them and make them escalate to the point of insanity. Then, you win.
And that will hurt Leftists more than any arguments you can make against their accusations.
In the meantime, we need to curb the Left’s desire to marginalize whites, and one of the ways is simple: start fucking and having babies. Not just to reverse the declining white birth rates, but to freak out Leftists. Then, the next step is to become irreplaceable. I don’t mean sabotage others, but rather learn new skills that will apply to the modern workplace and society as a whole. And if the Left gives you pushback, tell them you identify as a minority and let them freak out even more!
And if that’s not enough to motivate you, nothing will!
My 2022 Commencement Address
Greetings, friends! Once again, no one has asked me to give a commencement address (probably because of all the f-bombs from last year’s address). However, that didn’t stop me from writing one for this year on the off chance no one with the power to schedule speakers decides to go back more than 1 year.
Members of the Class of 2022, you’re probably wondering why I called you all here today. Let me start by saying it’s an honor to speak to you, and I’m not just saying that because I’m the last person standing between you and walking across this stage getting your diplomas. I’m no math major, but I know there are more of you than there is of me. As I don’t want to be overrun by angry students, I’ll keep my comments brief.
The past couple of years has taught us the value of being flexible in the face of adversity, and let’s face it, we’re pretty much in a constant state of utter fuckery these days. Under the circumstances, we are hard-wired to look for possible solutions, which is admirable, but also might make things worse. That’s why it’s important to think before you act.
Granted, you’re at a time in your life when you think you know everything. As someone who felt that way when I was your age, let me tell you the truth. You don’t know shit. It’s only through life, knowledge, and the occasional alcoholic beverage (except White Claw, which is this generation’s version of Zima) that we figure out how much we don’t know. For example, I’ll bet most of you haven’t even heard of Zima, so you wouldn’t know how much is sucked, thus you wouldn’t know how much White Claw sucks. It was only through trial and error America was able to find out Zima was flat Sprite made alcoholic and it was eventually phased out of production…until recently.
There’s an old saying, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Originally, I thought my junior high history teacher made it up to advise us of what summer school would be like, but it’s actually a bit older than that. In short, it means we need to look back sometimes to avoid future mistakes, mainly because the mistakes we make today tend to have roots in the past. Every so often we’ll see something “new” come along that is merely a repackaging of an idea that sucked before.
For example, let’s look at democratic socialism. On the surface, it seems like a good idea, a fusion that allows for people to vote for what’s best for the rest of the country. Sounds great, doesn’t it? Well, here’s the catch: we’ve tried both democracy and socialism separately and they didn’t turn out so good. If we combine the two, it will be two dark fates that fail great together.
Even if you don’t want to go into history to find a reason to object to democratic socialism, a little critical thinking will do the trick. After all, if we’re allowed to vote in socialism under it, would we be allowed to vote it out again? I’ve asked that same question and haven’t gotten a response yet, but after a few years and a few more drinks, I think I’ve figured out why: it’s because answering it would expose its proponents’ commitment to more socialism than more democracy. Now, I could be wrong, and if I am, I’ll eat my hat. Then again, it might be the only thing I’ll have to eat, but I’m a man of my word.
After that last section, you may thing I’m some right wing curmudgeon pooh-poohing anything that would move this country forward. Nothing could be further from the truth. I’m far more libertarian than I look and sound. Basically, I want everyone to live their lives to their fullest and achieve what they want, so long as it doesn’t harm innocents or demands my sanction. In short, just leave me alone and don’t demand I foot the bill for what you want to do. I can be persuaded, but I don’t take kindly to being told I have to agree or else I’ll be subjected to horrible things like…being called names on the Internet.
Believe me, it’s not that big a deal. I’ve been called all sorts of names in my day and I’m still here. That’s because age also brings perspective. Does someone calling me a racist, homophobe, etc. really affect my life? Not really, because I know who I am. And that’s something that comes through life experiences, especially for all of you right now. Even a year on your own can change your minds. Be open to those changes and let them happen. Then, challenge them on regular bases to see whether those lessons still hold true and whether your beliefs match those lessons.
One other thing and then I’ll leave. In all of these changes you’ll experience, there is one belief to always hold dear to your hearts: don’t eat convenience store sushi, especially if it’s in the clearance area. But if that’s not inspiring enough, remember to be kind. It doesn’t take much, costs less, and means a lot.
Congratulations, Class of 2022!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
After last week’s Lexicon entry about abortion, I wanted to do something in a lighter vein.
So, we’re talking about the filibuster. I know! I’m as excited as you are!
Actually, we do have to go back to the abortion debate for a little while because it plays a role in the discussion, and we have Senator Elizabeth “Chief Running Mouth” Warren to thank for it. See, the Senate tried to make the abortion protections laid out in Roe v. Wade federal law last week in the form of The Women’s Health Protection Act, but it ran into a little snag: it didn’t have enough votes to bypass a potential filibuster (which is absurd as we’ll find out later). As a result, Chief Running Mouth took to the media to renew her call to eliminate the filibuster.
Hoo boy. We’re going to need Mayflower to help us unpack all of the wrong here.
filibuster
What the Left thinks it means – an antiquated unconstitutional Senate rule that threatens democracy
What it really means – a Senate rule that Leftists will rue eliminating if they get their way
Time for a quick civics lesson. Although we tend to work on a majority rule model here in America, there are some exceptions designed to prevent the majority from totally steamrolling the minority. One such tool is the filibuster, which is when the minority can cobble together at least 60 votes to prevent a bill from going forward. Even the threat of a filibuster can be enough to change how a bill is written or presented.
In today’s hyper-partisan world, that happens less often than David Duke gets invited to the NAACP Spirit Awards.
Since Democrats hold a numerical majority thanks to Vice President Kamala Harris, they don’t necessarily feel they need to reach across the aisle to get things done, which puts their current opposition to the filibuster into perspective. It also puts their previous use of the filibuster into perspective, since they love to use it when they’re in the minority. If it wasn’t for double standards, Leftists would have no standards at all.
Leftists by their very nature are control freaks (in addition to being other kinds of freaks). They feel they have to rule completely because anything else gives opponents the ability to disagree with them. With enough naysayers, Leftists can’t get done what they want, which is a sin in their eyes akin to killing puppies, destroying the planet, and worst of all…not being a Leftist!
This desire for control has been at the core of a lot of defeats for Senate Democrats, including The Women’s Health Protection Act. Instead of reading the room and coming up with a bill that would get Republican votes, Leftists tried to ram through a bill banking on Republicans to surrender out of fear of public opinion. Wellll…that didn’t happen, and one Democrat Senator, Joe Manchin, sided with the Republicans to make the vote to move forward with the bill 51-49. And it shouldn’t be overlooked it was the Senate Democrats who forced the vote. Talk about a self-own! On the plus side for Leftists, Senator Kyrsten Sinema voted with the Democrats, so she might be able to get back on their Winter Solstice card lists.
But the failure wasn’t because Senate Democrats fucked up! It was that damn filibuster! And it’s about time to we got rid of that unconstitutional rule that prevents progress!
Not so much.
First, let’s deal with the constitutionality argument. Although it’s true the filibuster doesn’t appear in the Constitution, there is this passage from Article I Section 5 that would apply here:
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings…
This has been interpreted to mean the House of Representatives and Senate can make their own rules, which means the filibuster is constitutional. You would think someone who taught law might be able to figure that out, but we’re dealing with Elizabeth Warren here. She’s as sharp as a Nerf ball, as anyone who understands her missives on economics an attest.
Or as anyone who understands what a majority is can attest, for that matter. The filibuster literally had very little to do with the failure because, and let me spell it out for the good Senator and any other Leftists who are reading this…the votes weren’t there. You had a threshold and failed to meet it. Those were the rules in place at the time, and you lost. Until you change the Senate rules or amend the Constitution to remove the filibuster as a means of ending debate or altering legislation, those are the rules you have to live by.
Of course, nothing can stop you from bitching about it, even if we didn’t have a First Amendment in place. But can you at least bitch about it intelligently? A tall order, I know, but could you do it for your Uncle Thomas? Please?
Although it’s fashionable to shit on the filibuster, it does serve an important role, even today. Just because one party or the other has a majority doesn’t mean that party is right. The fact the filibuster exists in the Senate is a feature, not a flaw, because the Founding Fathers established the Senate as a more deliberative body. If you want bills written up on the fickle whims of the public, you go to the House. If you want substantive discussions, you go to the Senate.
Well, nobody’s perfect, not even the Founding Fathers.
Even though the filibuster isn’t working well today, it still provides a necessary release valve for impulsive legislation not well thought out and poorly presented. You know, like The Women’s Health Protection Act? (On a side note, how does this bill protect women’s health when statistically the most babies aborted would be female? But I’m not a biologist, so there’s that.)
So, before you Leftists throw out the unborn baby with the bathwater, consider this. Senate Republicans have resisted calls to do away with the filibuster when they’ve been in the minority because they understand it still has value, even when the previous President believed otherwise.
That’s right, Leftists. You now are on the same side as Donald Trump.
As the meme says, congratulations. You just played yourself.