Did you know we were close to World War III? According to the Left, the US attacking Iran’s nuclear sites (which I’m sure were just making glow-in-the-dark snocones) got us involved in a war, one that our Democrat and “Independent” Congresscritters swore up and down was unconstitutional and their fellow Leftists called a war crime. Even Tucker Carlson said the bombing would get us into World War III.
Well, if this was World War III, it was the Rachel Zegler’s Snow White of World Wars.
But that’s not going to stop the Left from bringing it up as often as they can. So, that means we get a chance to point and laugh!
World War III
What the Left thinks it means – an escalation of tensions leading to a war involving and/or affecting the entire world
What it really means – a scare tactic the Left uses whenever a Republican does anything militarily
As much as I hate to admit this, I’m old enough to remember when World War III was a real possibility, or at least it seemed like it to my young mind full of Saturday morning cartoons, popular music, video arcades, and copious amounts of Mountain Dew. The Cold War made nuclear annihilation a real threat, stoked in no small part by movies like “The Day After.” Ronald Reagan even joked about bombing the Soviet Union, which freaked out a lot of people.
Then…it didn’t happen.
All that handwringing, worry, and over-the-top bullshit turned out to be nothing more than a game of Chicken, only with a greater possibility of nuclear fallout. The Berlin Wall fell like a balsa wood shed in a Cat 5 hurricane. The Soviet Bear became closer to teddy than Kodiak. And the talk of World War III could finally be put to rest.
At least until it could be brought up again at a politically expedient time, like when Donald Trump took military action.
And, you’ll be surprised to know this isn’t without purpose. The Left has been trying to paint Trump as the next Hitler. You know, like they did with George W. Bush and Mitt Romney. When you invoke this kind of imagery, it brings up memories of Nazis marching, Adolf Hitler shouting with an audience in rapt attention hanging on his every word, and…wait for it…World War II.
In fact, these days there’s a whole cottage industry around making Trump into Hitler 2.0 by any lies…I mean means necessary. Trump has a military parade to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the US Army? Hitler! Trump pushes for stricter enforcement of immigration laws? Hitler! Trump wears a red tie that hangs down lower than a well-hung midget’s dick? Totes Hitler, guys!
With this in mind, Leftists jumped on the “World War III is coming” bandwagon. And just like Err America, the current leadership of the DNC, and Angel Reese’s field goal percentage, it turned out to be very disappointing. Our bombing in Iran blew shit up, which is kinda the point of bombing in the first place. Iran’s nuclear program took a major hit (figuratively and literally), possibly hindering their ability to develop nuclear weapons.
And Leftists were left trying to make Iran, a country that stands for everything they say they’re against, look sympathetic. You know, kids, sometimes our Leftist friends emphasize the wrong half of the term “useful idiots.”
Even if you think the actions Trump took were questionable, it’s clear what he did was Constitutional, thanks to a little thing the boys in the lab call the War Powers Resolution of 1973. Without going too far into the weeds, this law gives the President the authority to initiate military action without a formal declaration of war by Congress. All the President has to do is let Congress know within 48 hours and get approval for continued military action if things go beyond 60 days.
Contrary to what Jasmine Crockett. Jamie Raskin, and Tim Kaine want us to believe, Trump acted legally and Constitutionally. Not that that’s going to stop them from proclaiming him guilty of impeachable offenses, mind you. And there’s no requirement for any President to give Congress a heads-up before military action is initiated.
Given the track record of some of the Congresscritters with regards to security (I’m looking at you, Eric “Fang Fang’s Bitch” Swalwell), I’m not sure letting them know before the planes get fueled up is the best idea.
Similarly, it’s not a good idea to give into the fear of World War III without taking the time to understand the dynamics of any potential flashpoint. Since we’re here, let’s take the Iran bombing as an example. The intelligence community (which has members dumber than two bags of hammers) said for years Iran didn’t have nuclear aspirations, only to have to come back years later and say “well, maybe they are, but it’s not for weapons.” Yet, there were enough weird coincidences that would lead someone without his or her head up his/her ass to conclude maybe Iran was trying to develop nuclear weapons. To stop that from happening and having them launch nukes on Israel (one of our allies, by the way), Trump decided to roll the dice and bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities.
And shit got blown up real good.
So, is Iran going to strike back at America? That’s hard to say, mainly because it’s hard to fathom in a traditional sense. Our military has enough technology and firepower to blow Iran into the Stone Age, which might be a cultural upgrade at this point. If they were to try to retaliate, it’s going to be on a completely different battlefield with more underhanded tactics.
So, how do you feel about those open borders now, Leftists?
There’s a possibility other countries might join Iran, but then it becomes a cost-benefit analysis more than military strategy. What would be the upside to helping Iran? Aside from sitting on more oil than a triple pepperoni pizza at a nerd’s sleepover, there isn’t much Iran can provide to help their allies. That means the risk is greater than the reward. And do you know why?
Because Trump is fucking crazy.
Or at least he knows how to act crazy when it counts. All it would take for Trump to wake up on the wrong side of the Presidential bed and he could turn Iran and a good chunk of the Middle East into the world’s largest glass sculpture. We could call it “FAFO.”
To elevate the Iran bombing to the level of the bombing of Pearl Harbor or the burning of the Reichstag is an exaggeration that would make Tommy Flanagan look like George Washington. We aren’t any closer to World War III by bombing Iran than if we sat on our hands and pretended Iran wasn’t developing nukes to be used at some point and it’s folly to think otherwise.
Granted, I still have some questions about the circumstances, even though it’s hard to argue against the final result. Having said that, I’m not going to practice my duck and cover skills over it. I’m saving my anxiety for something far more important.
Watching reruns of the Battle of the Network Stars.
Tag: donald trump
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Last weekend (check local listings for the date and time in your area), Leftists from around the world gathered for the No Kings Day protest to take a stand against…kings, apparently. The Elvis Presley estate, LeBron James, and two California professional sports teams were hardest hit.
I considered covering this in last week’s Lexicon, but I a) wanted to see how it turned out, and b) had more interesting shit to do. Now that it’s been a week or so (check local listings for the date and time in your area), I think I can definitively talk at length about the No Kings Day protests.
Or at least make fun of it.
No Kings Day
What the Left thinks it means – a day of mass protests against Donald Trump and his authoritarian regime
What it really means – a protest that’s more Astro Turf than grassroots
When you really think about it (and I have because my social calendar is blanker than Jasmine Crockett’s face while she works on a one piece jigsaw puzzle), it takes quite a bit of logistical planning to pull off any mass gathering short of a riot. Almost everything from a political rally to an office picnic requires a coordinated effort to take care of the details and potential snags that go into putting on the best event possible. It takes a level of competence and planning sometimes bordering on the Herculean.
Well, that excludes Leftists.
Actually, that’s not entirely true. In spite of their intellectual limitations, they’ve managed to put together a network of organizations whose job it is to promote and fund Leftist causes. And the list of partners for the event is a laundry list of known Leftist groups, which isn’t surprising given how the No Kings Day protests are connected to another series of “grassroots” protests put on by the 50501 Movement. From what I’ve been able to gather in my research, the movement’s main goal is to fight back against Executive Branch overreach.
Of course, they had to wait until President Brick Tamland and Queen Kamala the Appointed were out of power to worry about it because…Orange Man Bad, I guess?
As much as I’d like to say, “Welcome to the pro-small government team,” the fact is they’re still big government types. They just don’t want someone else to have the power big government possesses. After all, some of the big brains behind the 50501 Movement are connected to…Bernie Sanders, a man who never met a socialist idea he couldn’t make money off of.
And thanks to the mild success of the earlier protests, we had No Kings Day, which told the world Leftists were firmly against…something we don’t have in America.
Yes. It’s that fucking stupid.
Listen, I appreciate people gathering peacefully and expressing themselves because the same First Amendment that covers my weekly blog full of bad jokes and obscure references that would make Dennis Miller say, “Hey, buddy, that’s way too far out there” (See?) also covers people with whom I vehemently disagree. Having said that, it doesn’t speak well of the movement or the message when it makes no sense outside of your ideological bubble. For a movement to really get traction, you have to attract more than your rabid fan base.
And that’s where No Kings Day falls apart. Yes, it was well-attended and the media did their part to make it look and sound successful, with attendance estimated between 4 and 6 million people. Not too shabby. Now, consider Queen Kamala the Appointed got a shade over 75 million votes in the 2024 election. If each vote represented one person (which might be a stretch given Chicago’s voting history), a vast majority of the people who voted for Queen Kamala stayed home.
Oops.
Not exactly the rousing success the Left wants us to believe it was, numbers-wise. And it doesn’t exactly move the needle, policy-wise. Right now, the Left is united by only one thing: seething hatred for all things Trump. Beyond that, they have the Underpants Gnome’s business plan for a political strategy. Even if the No Kings crowds were larger than anything Donald Trump has ever put together outside of an election, it still doesn’t matter because Trump is still President. It’s kinda hard to flex on crowd sizes with a man with access to the Nuclear Football.
And it bears repeating (mainly because I have to get this through the Left’s thick skulls), Trump isn’t acting like a king, dictator, authoritarian, or anything else the Left claims he is, or at the very least he’s no more authoritarian, dictatorial, or kingly than previous Presidents. Not to mention, he was elected twice. Last time I checked, kings don’t get elected. They’re born into the role.
You know, just like the Bush Family. (Sorry, Jeb.)
The thing to remember in all of this hue and cry is Trump is acting in his official capacity as President, and the same can be said of the people he’s appointed. Sending the Marines and National Guard into California to deal with anti-ICE rioting…I mean protesting? In the President’s wheelhouse. Renaming military bases? Under the Department of Defense’s job description. Cutting wasteful spending? Should have been done by Congress, but DOGE was a repurposed department previously created by President Barack Obama, thus it’s allowed.
Unless, of course, you’re going to call President Obama a king, tyrant, etc., and I get the feeling you’re not going to because…Orange Man Bad.
Aside from their abject hypocrisy in the face of authoritarian rule, the No Kings and 50501 Movement have something else in common: they share funding from our good friend Uncle George Soros. And before you Leftists say “But the Koch Brothers,” it should be pointed out the Koch Brothers aren’t in the business of creating groups to invent “grassroots” organizations like Georgie Porgie Pudding and Treason is. And compared to the TEA Party movement, the Soros-backed movements are utter failures on the level of Angel Reese making layups.
To be fair, No Kings did have some positive news coming out of it. That was until the killings connected to it, even tangentially. That’s a good way to curtail any momentum. That, and the fact each protest this year has gone off with all the impact of a popcorn fart in foam rubber. Trump and the Administration have commented, shrugged their shoulders, and kept doing what they were going to do in the first place.
Great fucking job, Leftists.
And guess what? The 50501 Movement is holding more protests. Because what do you after a protest where nothing happens? Do it again and again!
Let me give you Leftists a piece of advice. Take a shower. And beyond that, you have to understand the more protests you hold funded by the same groups only wastes their money and makes you look like dicks. Far be it from me to stop you if you want to look like dicks, mind you, but I at least wanted to warn you in case you missed it. Besides, you’ve done a fantastic job looking like dicks before now.
Right now, the No Kings Day protests and the 50501 Movement protests are pretty much a non-issue anymore. The fact I had other shit to do rather than cover them when they happened should tell you something, namely that they’re too dumb to be taken seriously. Or in my case, comically. When they start pulling in bigger numbers and have a more coherent and non-exclusionary message, then maybe I’ll take them seriously.
And that’s very heavy on the maybe.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
There’s a popular saying on the Right: the Left can’t meme. Mainly because…they can’t meme. Hey, there’s actual science behind it, so we have to Trust the Science, right?
This week, I was introduced to another example of this, that being the Left’s latest attempt to get one over on President Donald Trump. In an attempt to draw attention to the tariff situation, they created an acronym, TACO, which stands for “Trump Always Chickens Out.” And when one Leftist comes up with an idea, it’s a surprise, but it also gets spread around as the funniest thing ever.
So, let’s just say this week’s Lexicon has me hungry for Mexican food.
TACO
What the Left thinks it means – a clever acronym that shows Trump always backs down from his tariff threats
What it really means – a damn stupid acronym that failed to make a meaningful impact
To understand TACO, we must understand the underlying issue, that being tariffs. As I’ve written previously, tariffs can be used as a negotiation tactic, which is what President Trump has tried to do. Sometimes it’s worked, sometimes it hasn’t. Overall, we’re still making our way through the uncertain waters post-Tariff-A-Palooza.
One of the problems the Trump Administration faces is the President flip-flops on the matter more than John Kerry cooking pancakes at an IHOP working straight commission. That has given the Left ammunition (which is funny considering they hate guns, but love violence) to mock the President. Hence, the idea Trump always chickens out when it comes to making tariffs more than empty threats.
Unfortunately for the Left, that idea is based on a lie. There have been some notable successes that extend beyond merely funding the government, not the least of which being former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigning.
You’re welcome, Canada.
Meanwhile, the Left thinks TACO is not only a factual statement, but a winning strategy. They went so far as to rent a taco truck to give away tacos in front of the Republican National Committee headquarters in Washington, DC. Now, I’m not one to pass up free food, but apparently I’m in the minority in our nation’s capital because that taco truck stunt resulted in the truck leaving early and Leftists getting mocked on social media.
And now, they’re getting mocked in a blog post. I’m sure they’ll recover somehow.
The truth of the matter is it was a fucking stupid idea to begin with, and it’s only getting worse with the Left a) defending the message, and b) doubling down on it. It did have one success, that being making Trump mad. Great work, kids. You’ve really shown us. Now what will do you for an encore? Come up with another lame acronym that spells out something stupid at a total own of the Orange Man?
Scratch that. It was stupid the first time, and the law of diminishing returns is a thing.
There is another Leftist assumption at work here. Due to their warped (and Jasmine Crockett-level stupid) perception of Trump’s immigration policies, the Left thinks Trump hates Hispanic people. At least, that’s what they keep saying over and over again because, well, unoriginal thinkers. The truth is a little muddier than that. Yes, Trump has called out Mexico repeatedly, but there’s some context the Left doesn’t want you to consider.
Leftists are pro-illegal immigration. Full fucking stop.
As simple as this is, I still feel an explanation is in order. The Left’s approach to immigration relates directly to their ability to gain and retain power. If a tighter border benefits them, they’ll support it, but more often than not, a border looser than the morals at an all you can eat brothel (and I’m not talking about an endless buffet, kids) works in their favor. To them, immigrants are a means to an end. However, not everybody who crosses our border is looking for a better life and an honest day’s work.
Hence, the Left plays on our emotions by painting all immigrants as just poor people who need our help. And if a few bad apples come across, that’s acceptable because the majority aren’t bad people.
Laken Riley was unavailable for comment.
There’s a vast difference between following the existing process to come to America and the shitshow the Left has allowed to happen, but opposing illegal immigration isn’t hate in and of itself. By conflating legal immigrants with illegal immigrants, the Left has created a ready-made excuse for any Tomas, Ricardo, and Julio who sneaks into the country. And with that excuse comes benefits ranging from luxury hotel rooms to culturally-sensitive food.
So, naturally, the Left wants people to think anyone who doesn’t appreciate the largesse extended to people who jumped the line must hate all Hispanics.
Now, what does this have to do with TACO? I may be off in left field on this, but I don’t think the acronym was a coincidence. Leftists understand how Trump acts emotionally (mainly because they trigger him), so they find ways to get under his skin to get the emotional outbursts they want. And what better way to reinforce their opinion that Trump hates Hispanics than to get him to react negatively to the TACO acronym?
Then again, these are the same idiots who thought online influencers could help Queen Kamala the Appointed become President, so it might just be a coincidence after all.
Regardless, the way the Left was pushing TACO made it seem as inorganic as a fast food burger made from microplastics and AstroTurf. They were like stand up comedians who knew a joke bombed, but would go back to the joke time and time again hoping the second, third, or even the four-hundred-ninety-eighth time would make the audience laugh.
Basically, like my blog posts, but on stage.
By trying to make TACO a thing, the Left wound up making it…well, nothing, really. It lacked the core of any online movement, social media fad, or viral YouTube video: it has to at least feel real, if not completely accidental. That’s how you get actual reach in the online space. You can’t create an audience out of thin air. These days, you have to buy it.
Seriously, though, the best the Left could hope for with TACO was it would make their sycophants…I mean followers giggle and share it with their network, comprised of, you guessed it, other Leftists! Mission accomplished, dudes/dudettes/other derivations of the word “dude” that apply.
And now, it’s become a punchline not even two weeks into it. It’s so bad Vice President JD Vance called you “the lamest opposition in American history.” And it’s hard to argue against that, really. If this is the Left’s A game, it’s coming off more like an Meh game. And it only gets worse when you consider you’ve just made JD Vance look like a mature, serious-minded adult. This shit is going to backfire on you come 2028 when Vance throws his hat into the ring against…whatever Frankenstein’s monster ticket you’ll come up with to oppose him.
Might as well get used to saying “President Vance” for 8 years, kids.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In the aftermath of the electoral fiasco that was the 2024 election, Leftists have been trying to figure out why they lost so many male voters to the Evil Orange Man. And after some soul-searching and thoughtful consideration, they’ve devised a plan to win them back.
Just kidding! They’re spending $20 million on a program called SAM, which stands for Speaking with American Men. This is a departure from their usual approach, which is BAM: Browbeating All Men. While we see how the Left will fuck this up, let’s take a look at it.
Speaking with American Men
What the Left thinks it means – an effort to attract more male voters to Democrat politicians and movements
What it really means – an Astro Turf movement to try to correct a problem the Left caused
The genesis of this idea came from the same place all great political movements start: luxury hotels. So far, the big brain ideas the Left has come up with are:
– using the online space to appeal to younger men
– study the phrasing used to attract young men in these spaces
– buy advertisements in video games
Wow. It’s a wonder Leftists even have to campaign with brilliant ideas like these, amirite? But at least they’ve figured out what men are, so there’s that.
As anyone who has seen the cratering user numbers of Mastodon can tell you, the online world is incredibly fickle. One day you’re getting millions of interactions with each and every post, and the next you’re lucky to show up in the algorithm. (For the uninitiated, algorithm is what the former Vice President thinks he has when he’s dancing.)
Trying to get people to pay attention to something in this space is tricky. Yes, it’s incredibly easy to get people to act like jackasses on TikTok, but that’s because it’s fucking TikTok. But for every overnight dance craze that loses its popularity before you’re done chewing a stick of Fruit Stripe gum, there are many more that fail to do anything more than make the subject being filmed look like a jackass.
Like Leftists using TikTok to make political commentary.
Being able to get users to pay attention to anything on social media takes more than a strategy and a pretty or handsome face speaking words. It takes a message worth spreading that goes beyond a particular audience. It’s 0ne thing to go viral on BlueSky, which is a highly-moderated Leftist echo chamber to rival the Grand Canyon, and to go viral on the Social Media Platform Formerly Known as Twitter, which used to be a Leftist echo chamber until Elon Musk bought it and…well, we’re still trying to figure out what he did with it, but whatever it was it stopped being a Leftist echo chamber.
And it’s not a matter of the size of the platform, either. Naturally, you’re going to get a longer reach on a platform that has become a daily habit for most people. Leftist social media “influencer” Harry Sisson is on X, TikTok, and Instagram and his posts garner a lot of attention, but it’s all to parrot Leftist squawking points without any intellectual depth. So, naturally, he’s on the right social media platforms for his intellectual prowess. But is Sisson the right person to attract young male voters? Not unless they identify as teenage girls.
In fact, the Left has been trying to find the “white guy whisperer” for a few months now, and they’ve assembled quite the motley crew (and not the musical kind). Here are some of the people who have stepped up or have been pushed into the role.
– Tim Walz, Governor of Minnesota and former Vice Presidential candidate under Queen Kamala the Appointed
– Doug Emhoff, the Second Gentleman under Queen Kamala the Appointed
– David Hogg, gun control activist and possibly former vice DNC chair
– Olivia Julianna, female Democrat social media “influencer”
Wow. With a line-up like that, the only missing piece is Naomi Wolf, who was hired to help Al Gore with his masculinity.
And for any Leftists reading this, I was joking.
The issues the Left have communicating with men have one thing in common: they’re all self-inflicted. The most obvious one is their attitude towards men in general: they fucking suck! Thanks in part to third wave feminism and a healthy disdain for the founding of this country, Leftists have found nothing good in the male of the species. And, speaking as a male, they may have a point. The stereotypical man in Leftist circles is a frat bro, one stage above Cro Magnon but with better cars. They’re uncultured, uneducated, probably drunk, and definitely backwards, but they’re the ones who hold all the power.
Which pretty much describes my opinion of most Congresscritters, but I’m sure that’s purely coincidental.
And when Leftists find someone who doesn’t align with them, they move into harangue-you-into-submission mode. They will shrilly preach about what you’re doing wrong in their eyes, why that makes you worse than literally Hitler, and call you all sorts of names. So, it’s really a mystery why Democrats keep losing the male vote…
Again, Leftists, I’m kidding.
What isn’t a joking matter is the culmination of all of that browbeating and general bitching about men. With male support of Democrats going further south than the border wall, it’s clear the current Leftist model doesn’t work anymore. Men are tired of being told we suck, especially when the majority of us don’t. Even Leftist men are often into causes to get pussy.
Spoiler Alert, guys: It never works. They’ll never fuck you, but they’ll float the idea just enough to keep you from leaving. And there’s nothing you can say or do that will be enough to remove that Rock of Gibraltar-sized block from their shoulders.
Check that. There is one thing: going full Dylan Mulvaney.
And you never want to go full Dylan Mulvaney.
And here’s the funny thing (because it’s about time there’s something funny in this piece). Men really aren’t that complicated. We like simple things, like meat, grilling, and grilling meat. Oh, there’s also booze and women. And maybe fast cars or motorcycles. Oh, and there’s sports.
Come to think of it, men might be more complicated than I think.
Seriously, though, at the heart of every man is four chambers. But aside from that, there’s a need to feel competent at the basics of life. Back in prehistoric times, men were the hunters and gatherers, thus they were the providers. Even though we’ve come a long way since then, the need to provide is hard-wired into men’s psyches. The American Dream was built on that same idea, only with two car garages and white picket fences instead of trying not to be devoured by giant lizards and avoiding tar pits.
In other words, when I was a wee lad.
Leftists overcomplicate this concept (as they often do because to them being confusing is a sign of super-duper intelligence), so they completely miss the answer to their male voting problem. Instead of nagging us to vote for Democrats because reasons, give us a reasoned argument. Or at the very least don’t sound like a harpy when you talk to us. You should have learned that lesson in 2016 after watching Hillary Clinton lose, but apparently you haven’t.
And here’s a fun fact! Many men didn’t vote for Hillary Clinton or Kamala Harris because they’re sexist and racist. It’s because they didn’t like them. And you know why we like someone like Tulsi Gabbard? Because she’s fucking hot!
No, wait, that’s not it. It’s because she doesn’t come at men like we’re the enemy. Her tone and demeanor are much more inviting and she’s more open to having a conversation even if we don’t see eye to eye. You could have a beer with her while grilling steaks and have a great time.
Try imagining Hillary or Kamala in that scenario. Even if you put it in the best AI out there, it would come back and say, “Seriously, what the fuck, Dave?”
While Leftists continue to try to attract men to their causes, they’re going to be met with more failure than Walter Mondale in 1984 until they come to terms with their misandry. Swearing more and studying how men speak will only take you so far, but to me they come off like the “How Do You Do Fellow Kids” meme. If you want to get men back in your political corner, be real.
And from what I’ve seen and heard so far, Speaking with American Men is about as real as William Shatner’s hair.
The 86 Crowd
Those who are threatening the President of the United States with their 86 posts should all be charged, arrested, and sent to prison for 5-10 years. This is not a joke. It is not funny.
Just as in President Trump’s first administration where a comedian posted a fake severed head. This is a willful desire by people to commit murder or have someone commit murder, and assassinate a sitting president. It is not humorous. And it should never be posted in in jest.
Post it. And I will do what I must. Including unfollow, unfriend, and block you for all time on my Social Media accounts. I will also report it. And I hope you will go to prison.
This behavior must end. It crosses the line. And I am done with it.
The War of 8020
One of the most attractive elements of Leftist thought is how they take up for the underdogs. Even when it seems impossible, Leftists will side with the less fortunate in their attempts to defeat The Man. But I never would have thought they would actively try to become the underdogs.
It’s hard for me to pinpoint exactly when Leftists went nuttier than squirrel shit, but it was between the 2022 midterms and the 2024 Presidential election, probably when they realized Donald Trump was not only going to be the Republican nominee, but that he had a good chance of defeating President Brick Tamland. To be fair, a cardboard cut-out of Trump could have beaten the President and been far more articulate in doing so, but the point is the same. Somehow Trump broke the Left to the point they would protest breathing if Trump said, “I love oxygen. Oxygen is the greatest thing.”
And I know you read that in his voice.
Regardless of what the sensible action would be, Leftists have decided to take the under in almost every hot button issue today. When it comes to trans women in biological female spaces, they went with the trans women, no matter how creepy they were. Illegal immigrants who just happened to be connected to gangs? They sided with the illegal gang members. Government waste? Pile it on, buddy!
Spoiler Alert: It’s shit like this that cost you the 2024 Presidential election.
Many people have attempted to figure out why the Left takes the losing side of issues lately with various conclusions, ranging from not wanting to give Trump a W to Leftists being utter dumbasses. And to be honest I keep going back and forth between these two extremes (although they’re probably both right). Personally, I think it’s because of how partisan the country is right now.
Not that long ago, Democrats and Republicans could disagree on how things got done, but could find common ground on issues that would benefit the entire country, like defeating the Soviet Union. Once the Soviets fell, we no longer had an outward enemy, so we turned our sights inward and found new enemies. Since then, we got consumed by the Left and the Right fighting like the US and Soviets, only without the possibility of Mutually Assured Destruction.
Nowadays, MAD would be getting off easy. With the rise of Internet and social media culture, both sides are looking for ways to “own” the other side. And this is one reason Trump is so popular among the Right: he is a master of owning the Left. The problem for the Left is they don’t have anybody who can do the same to the Right. Oh, they think they have people, but they suck at it, and if they’re being honest with themselves (which is a stretch, I know), they would admit it.
Since they can’t due to not wanting to give even a micron to Trump, they’re stuck being the party of Jesse Helms, who was notorious for often being the sole “No” vote on bills. Oh, and being racist pricks.
Hence, the reason Leftists are running for every unpopular position with the American people. (The not wanting to give Trump even a micron bit, not the being racist pricks bit.) As a result, Democrats are getting as popular as STDs in a brothel. So, how are they trying to right…or left the ship?
Swearing a lot more.
And I’m not even fucking kidding.
As someone who occasionally peppers his posts with adult language, I can appreciate a good cuss word and, when done correctly, it can add impact to a statement. The way the Left has been doing it, though, is like seeing your grandma curse: it’s unexpected and even a little off-putting. Even when some of the more junior members of Congress do it, it doesn’t feel natural to me. If anything, it feels more like a political calculation that came out of a focus group rather than any genuine emotion.
And what’s worse than the potty mouths on the Left is the fact they keep doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on their unpopular positions because…well, I’m still trying to figure that out. One thing that comes to mind is the Left’s desire to be on “the right side of history.” As noble as that sounds, it’s bullshit that falls apart under its own weight when balanced with another saying, “History is written by the victors.” For the Left’s version of history to be the right one, they have to win.
Granted, with some issues like civil rights and gay marriage, they ultimately won, but only after a prolonged struggle where public opinion shifted to adopt the Left’s position. In a world of TikTok and entitlement, though, that window shrinks significantly leaving only two options: shame the opposition into supporting the cause, or abandoning it when it gets nowhere.
Take the recent kerfluffle over the Equal Rights Amendment caused when President Brick Tamland and Vice President Kamala the Appointed tried to get it “ratified” by saying “it’s ratified.” All it took for the Left to adopt the squawking point was for the aforementioned political figureheads to put it out there. Of course, these same idiots didn’t bother to bring it up for the decades since the ERA failed to be ratified through the existing process. If it were such an important issue, the Left would have made it a cornerstone issue. And it’s not like they haven’t had control of Congress and the White House since the 80s. They had their chance, and they decided it wasn’t important enough to fight for.
So, ladies, how do you feel about voting for Leftists now?
This is going to be a major problem for Leftists going forward. The more they let themselves get played into supporting causes on the losing end of the polls just to spite Trump, the more potential voters they’re going to give away, and no amount of demanding those voters support Leftist candidates because reasons is going to change that. At some point, the political leadership will have to set aside their swearing and figure this out or else it’s going to be the year 8020 before they get a whiff of the White House again.
Not that I have a problem with that, mind you…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
In my 55 years of kicking around this ball of rock and water we call Planet Earth, I’ve seen some pretty amazing things. The first Space Shuttle flight. The Berlin Wall coming down. Internet porn…not that I know anything about that, mind you. But this past week, I saw something that caused me to almost swallow my face.
Leftists finally found asylum seekers they didn’t support.
President Donald Trump granted refugee status to white South Africans who were fleeing racial oppression at the hands of their government. So far a whopping 59 white South Africans came to America. And, predictably, the Left lost its collectivist shit over it trying to explain it away through cries of “racism” in lieu of “wolf” and whataboutism to the extent my Bullshit-O-Meter overloaded.
At the heart of this controversy is our asylum process. To put it mildly, it’s more fucked up than having Hunter Biden as an accountability buddy/crack dealer. So, naturally, it’s worth exploring further.
asylum
What the Left thinks it means – a means for oppressed people to come to America and seek a better life
What it really means – a process that needs a serious overhaul
To say our immigration policy is more fucked up than Sybil on LSD is an understatement, but we do try to set forth a semblance of a policy. In some cases, a situation is so dangerous or dire that we have to make exceptions to the normal immigration rules. That’s where the asylum process comes into play. Although it’s been abused…I mean used as a catch-all by previous Administrations that will remain nameless (but it rhymes with Slow Mindin’), there are certain criteria that have to be met before it can be granted. And even then, there’s the wonderful world of bureaucracy to deal with, which makes the process even more frustrating and/or dangerous.
This is where the Left gets things wrong when it comes to asylum. As much as “no one is above the law” has become a mantra when it comes to President Donald Trump, the Left believes the law can and should be circumvented for every Tomas, Ricardo, and Jaime that arrives at our southern border without even trying to seek asylum. Although it’s amazing elected officials are ignorant of the laws on the books and the concept that breaking these laws is a crime, it did lead to one of the most epic takedowns in Congressional history.
Oh, and a tip for the gamblers out there. If you ever bet on the number of fucks Tom Homan gives, always bet the under.
This brings us to the current situation involving the white South Africans. President Trump called what they experienced as a “genocide,” which is a gross overstatement and unnecessary given the conditions already in place. However, there are details that can move that needle one way or the other.
It started with a little thing the kids call apartheid. For almost 50 years, white South Africans treated the black population as second-class citizens at best. This was a bad idea, not just because it was racist and stupid, but because the whites were and still are vastly outnumbered. This practice got the boot in the 1990s due in no small part to Nelson Mandela.
Then, something predictable happened: the oppressed became the oppressors. Once black South Africans got into power, the urge to flip the script was too great, and the white South Africans found themselves on the wrong side of the apartheid stick.
Where things get really funky (and not in a Parliament Funkadelic way) is the passage of a law where white South African farmers had to give up portions of their land without compensation because racial justice or something. Even if you think it’s okay given how much property white South African farmers own, the civil libertarian in me (and hopefully in you) says that’s not right. If you own something and any entity takes it from you, you are due compensation of some kind, whether it be monetary, legal, or legislative.
Now, remember the criteria for asylum I referenced and linked earlier? One of them involves persecution or possible persecution on the basis of…race. And, surprise surprise, white South Africans have a pretty good case for that based on the aforementioned land law.
Oh, and there’s the “Kill the Boer. Kill the Farmer.” song popularized by anti-apartheid groups and more recently by Julius Malema, a political leader in South Africa. While Leftists swing between “it’s not about white genocide” and “it could be construed as being in favor of white genocide,” the simplest explanation is…fuck yeah it’s about white genocide, and only fucking dipshits would say it wasn’t!
Oddly enough, the Leftists who think it’s not about white genocide are the same people who take Donald Trump literally whenever he says anything even slightly controversial in a joking manner.
Regardless, the white South Africans have a legitimate case for asylum, so why is the Left complaining if following the law is so important to them? You know, aside from being hypocritical asshats. Fortunately for us, they’ve tipped their hands early and often. It’s all about racism. Sure, Leftists say it’s Trump being racist because he’s allowing white South Africans to get asylum, but it’s the other way around; Leftists want to deny them entry because of their skin color.
Simple enough, but there’s another reason related to the race issue. Leftists have tried to turn racism from hatred of another race (which it is) into hatred of another race with the inclusion of power (which is bullshit). Without going too far into the weeds, let’s just say the Left’s revised version of racism does more to create minority victims than actual racism does, which makes it racist by definition. Funny how that works out, isn’t it?
Why do I mention this? For one, it pads out the Lexicon entry a bit. But more to the point, the situation with the white South Africans puts the Left’s definition of racism on its head. They may own the vast majority of the land, but that in and of itself isn’t power. The power in South Africa is clearly on the side of the black population, so the Left’s dynamic doesn’t work. But since they can’t admit that, they pretend a) it doesn’t exist, b) it’s totes different because reasons, or c) Orange Man Bad!
The problem, of course, is the law itself. Racial persecution is clearly written and is hard to argue against in this case, but dammit the Left is going to try!
Which is why I think we need to overhaul the asylum process when we’re overhauling our immigration system. To the Left’s credit, they are correct that economic issues are a valid reason to consider offering asylum to others, especially if we want to be seen as a land of opportunity. The question becomes where do we draw the line. The way we’ve done it recently is not sustainable and creates a dangerous strain on our social safety net. If we demand these potential asylees bring something worthwhile to the table (i.e. marketable skills, a good work ethic, etc.), we run the risk of looking heartless or driven solely by materialism.
Beyond that, the current asylum process can take years. There’s tons of paperwork, red tape, and contradictory practices to overcome. So, we’re left with the challenge of streamlining the process while keeping as many relevant avenues to asylum open without stretching ourselves too thin.
Good luck with that.
Seriously, the best way I can figure out how to tick all of these boxes is to create a system to separate the different types of asylee claims to maximize the speed at which they can be processed. And with specialization, it’s going to create a stronger knowledge base overall. Instead of having to have 100 people looking at the full gamut of cases, you can have 10 people working on economic asylum requests, another 10 working on racial asylum claims, and so on. Through that process, the groups of 10 are going to gain an intimate understanding of that particular process. Then, if you have a case that covers more than one asylee area, they can be called in to offer their expert opinions.
With everything electronic these days, doing a background check and filling out paperwork can be quicker and easier. It shouldn’t take cutting down a forest for a mountain of paperwork to come here under dire circumstances. There are other reasons to cut down a forest, after all. (Just kidding, environmentalists!) And we can hire some of the Sallie Mae folks to do the background checks, which will guarantee the asylees can be found.
And finally, and this is the hardest part, we need to approach each claim the same: with a healthy mix of optimism and skepticism. Not every asylum claim is truthful, but we can’t assume they’re all fraudulent. It’s going to take some research and knowledge of world events to pick out the bad actors from the legitimately needy.
That eliminates TikTokers.
But it opens the door for people like me who are curious, compassionate, and cynical. In fact, Gen X is gonna be flush with job opportunities for decades to come, so win-win baby!
As far as the white South Africans, welcome to America, where most people will welcome you and those who don’t claim to be all about diversity. Ignore the latter and you’ll be fine. Most of us do, and those who don’t are getting something out of it, like content for a mildly successful weekly blog series written by a handsome, well hung, and incredibly sexy man.
And since you haven’t found that one yet, read mine!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Have you ever spent a ton of money on something you barely use and then wonder why you’re still spending money on it? Lately, the Trump Administration has been wondering about that in the area of public broadcasting. Thanks to a recent Executive Order, National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting Service may find their funding cut due to allegations of bias. Of course they deny it (using the same terminology, I might add), which leads us to the inevitable question: why do Republicans want to kill Big Bird?
Or, better yet, the inevitable Leftist Lexicon entry.
public broadcasting
What the Left thinks it means – a valuable service that provides balanced and factual reporting
What it really means – taxpayer-funded propaganda favoring the Left
Both NPR and PBS are under the umbrella of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, a private non-profit. They describe themselves as:
the steward of the federal government’s investment in public broadcasting and the largest single source of funding for public radio, television, and related online and mobile services.
In other words, they handle the money once they get it from us. And with an operating budget of $545 million for Fiscal Year 2025, that’s ain’t petty cash. So, what are we getting for this investment?
That depends on who you ask. If you ask the heads of NPR and PBS (or their squawking heads), they’re providing a valuable service to society, the economy, and education. To someone who used to work there, it’s become a Leftist mouthpiece, which has negatively affected the public’s trust in it. To me, a consumer of what public broadcasting has put forth over the years, it’s a mixed bag.
Remember Slobodan Milosevic? Not only is it one hell of a Scrabble score, but he was the former leader of Kosovo, accused of ethnic cleansing. As it turns out, I first heard his name while listening to NPR’s “All Things Considered,” and at the time I thought their coverage was pretty balanced. Then, when Leftists decided ethnic cleansing was bad, that coverage changed and Milosevic became Public Enemy #1. Well, #2 after Rush Limbaugh.
I bring that up to a) show off the big brain on Thomas, and b) give you an idea of the subtle biases that was already involved in NPR’s reporting. The Left doesn’t come right out and say “We’re biased as fuck and we don’t care.” At least, outside of MSNBC, and they’re not really a news channel as much as a way for Al Sharpton to keep getting a steady paycheck. Their bias comes through through less obvious means. A turn of a phrase here, a descriptive word there, and before you know it, you’re being indoctrinated.
Just ask Bernard Goldberg.
Where PBS and NPR get more cover than the traditional media is in the idea they just present facts. Welllll…that’s subject to debate. Sometimes they present facts, and other times they suppress them, like they did with the Hunter Biden laptop story. Their now-infamous statement about why they didn’t cover it?
We don’t want to waste our time on stories that are not really stories, and we don’t want to waste the listeners’ and readers’ time on stories that are just pure distractions.
Yeah, because who would want to hear about what’s on the laptop of the President’s addict son during a Presidential election? That would be like…oh, I don’t know…covering when the Bush twins got busted for fake IDs when their dad was President.
Oh, wait…
Setting the bias aside for the time being, there is a serious question on the table: should we be funding public broadcasting using federal tax dollars? The artist in me says we should because it provides viewpoints and entertainment people might not get otherwise. Like reruns of “Are You Being Served?” or “The Red Green Show.” The capitalist in me says we shouldn’t because PBS and NPR should be able to stand or fall on its own merits like any other media outlet. Like reruns of “Are You Being Served?” or “The Red Green Show.”
Where I come down on the question is…kinda both options? I appreciate the fact public broadcasting exists and, when the product is closer to the lofty goals of the CPB, it’s pretty fucking good. When the product is tainted by biases, the image of public broadcasting suffers.
Although it would be easier to find a time when Adam Schiff hasn’t made himself look like a dumbass, I don’t think it’s impossible for public broadcasting to change its fortunes without costing taxpayers a fortune in the process. The first step (which is always the hardest, especially if you’re drunk) is to remove any pretense of moral and intellectual superiority. You may think you’re providing pure wisdom from the gods themselves, but you’re really just college radio and public access TV stations with a trust fund. Get off the Shetland Pony you call a high horse and just talk to us like we’re fellow human beings.
And while we’re here, let’s figure out a way to reduce dependence on donations and federal funding by spinning off popular intellectual properties. Take “Sesame Street,” for example. The nonprofit behind it struck a deal with HBO to run new episodes exclusively with those same episodes being shown on PBS after a few months. Now that this deal has reached its end, there’s a possibility of Disney buying it. And considering Disney already owns the Muppets, it’s not that much of a stretch.
Imagine being able to do that with other public broadcasting properties. Yes, I understand doing so would be hard for some people to take because they think selling a property is selling out. On the other hand, it’s really no different than what the CPB already does with different foundations and companies picking up the tab for programming. And, you might actually be able to get free of the federal influence, which will give you more freedom to thrive.
Unless, of course, you want to keep donating the GDP of small island nations to get a crappy tote bag. At least with a more capitalist approach, you might be able to get a crappy tote bag for a lot less.
Meanwhile, public broadcasting could use a few more encouraging voices to help them navigate the possibility of being without federal funding. When PBS and NPR do well, tell them and, if you’re so inclined, toss them a few bucks. When they fuck up, call them out and offer constructive feedback. They may not take it, but at least you tried in a way that doesn’t come off as automatically anti-public broadcasting.
When you really think about it (and I do because the Interwebs went out at Casa de Tomas recently), public broadcasting provides us with all sorts of programming that appeals to different audiences. And, aside from the amount we kick in unintentionally via taxes, it’s free-ish. You can do a lot worse than watching a nature documentary, period dramas, British sitcoms, and the occasional Doctor Who episode.
And given what DOGE has found so far, we’ve spent money on a lot worse.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
The Leftist world was all atwitter (or if you prefer all aX) recently with the story of Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a poor illegal alien soul who was deported back to his home country of El Salvador, allegedly without due process. Without going too far into the weeds, let’s just say you’re more likely to catch Bernie Sanders flying on a private plane than you are to understanding the ins-and-outs of this case.
Wait. Scratch that.
So, to borrow a phrase from hack comedians, what’s the deal with deportation? It’s a complicated issue that deserves sober thinking to understand the gravitas of the subject. But since I’m already a few beers into this, you’ll have to put up with me.
deportation
What the Left thinks it means – a practice that needs to be done by the book, no matter how long it takes
What it really means – the legal consequence for illegal immigration
Contrary to what Rep. Jasmine Crockett says, illegal immigration is a crime. The law in question is the Immigration and Nationality Act which, along with other laws and regulations, provides direction for the immigration and deportation processes. Seems everything should be in order, right?
Not so much.
Much like Disney with negative reviews of “Snow White,” our political class loves to ignore the laws on the books when they’re inconvenient. And let’s just say the immigration laws are mighty inconvenient to the Left. After all, that’s the use of following immigration laws if they prevent you from ensuring Democrat control? You know, aside from those laws being the fucking laws.
That’s not to say Leftists don’t follow the laws all the time. In fact, one area where they demand the laws be followed to the letter is in…you guessed it, Frank Stallone. Actually, it’s deportation, which is really convenient considering it’s our topic for this Lexicon entry. After allowing people to enter the country through our southern border like wine moms going to a Taylor Swift concert, it’s funny to watch Leftists be such sticklers to the letter of the law.
And by “funny,” I mean calculated.
I know I’ve mentioned our good friend Saul Alinsky so often I could be his agent, but one of his Rules for Radicals applies here: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” Since Republicans believe in the rule of law (unless they find the laws inconvenient for political gain), the Left knows it has them in a box when it comes to immigration. If we have to follow the laws when it comes to stopping illegal immigration, we have to follow the laws when it comes to deportation.
And that’s where Constitutional law comes into play. The US Supreme Court previously ruled all aliens are entitled to due process under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. So, that means regardless of the way they come into the country, they get their day in court.
A noble gesture in theory, but a burden in current practice, thanks to a little thing the Leftist kids like to call the Cloward-Piven Strategy. In short, this strategy is designed to achieve Leftist goals related to poverty by forcing the system to get overwhelmed. And guess how that gets accomplished: illegal immigration.
“But wait, Thomas. Wouldn’t illegal immigrants be ineligible for federal benefits?” you might ask. Or “Are you aware you’re not wearing pants?” The answer to the former is they should be, but thanks to loopholes in the law and soft-hearted and soft-brained politicians (I’m looking at you, Gavin Newsom), they gain access.
So, what does this have to do with deportation? By having to follow due process and the delays caused by so many illegal immigrants being processed over the past few years, the strain to the social safety net continues unabated.
That is, until President Trump got back into the Oval Office and decided to start enforcing immigration law. In the first six weeks, the Trump Administration deported 27,772 illegal immigrants, which is a step in the right direction. Where I think they’ve gone wrong is through fast-tracking the process. Yes, I know this plays into the Cloward-Piven and Alinsky playbooks, but it’s necessary to ensure the Left has no room to bitch. Not that it will stop them, mind you…
Nor will it stop the Left from lying. With the Kilmar Abrego Garcia case alone, we’ve seen attempts from the Left to paint him as an innocent victim denied due process and attempts from the Right to paint him as a gang-banger terrorist who has been legally deported back to his home country of El Salvador. Well, the truth is a bit murkier than these extremes are letting on.
First off, Kilmar Abrego Garcia freely admits he entered the country illegally, but has received a court order preventing him from being deported back to El Salvador out of fear of being attacked by a rival gang. So, not only have we confirmed he’s a member of a gang (MS-13 to be exactly, and I ain’t talking about Microsoft) and that he’s not supposed to be here, but he’s already had due process. But he also has a court order that should have protected him from deportation, as well as a questionable designation as a terrorist.
That means…well, a whole lotta shit, to be honest. If we deport him, we run afoul of the legal process. If we don’t deport him, he will still be affiliated with MS-13 which could put us in mortal danger.
Congratulations. We’re now in Kobayashi Maru territory.
The only way forward is being transparent, follow the law, and, oh yeah, stem the flow of illegal immigration to give the system time to catch up. And guess what the Trump Administration is doing? They’re cracking down, and that’s resulted in reduced encounters at the US/Mexico border. It’s a start, but there’s still a lot more to do.
First of all, let’s stop treating gang members like terrorists. Not only does it set a bad precedent for future Presidents, but it gives Leftists ammunition to call the deportation process into question. And, let’s face it, it’s not exactly the swiftest nor the clearest process in government. Plus, it elevates gang members, which only feeds their egos and gives them enough bravado to commit bigger, more audacious crimes. That, in turn, may cause other gangs to try to play catch-up, making the gang problem even worse.
Second, as much as the Trump Administration wants to rush through the deportation process to get results, we have to play it by the book. It won’t stop Leftists from lying or making gang-bangers look sympathetic figures, but it cuts the due process complaint they have off at the knees. And at the very least, it will make Leftists look like Cotton Hill, which will never fail to make me laugh.
Lastly, it’s long past time we overhaul our immigration and deportation policies. And that requires taking a hard look at our border policies. We can’t keep letting anyone with a sob story (and without paperwork) walk in unexamined while others jump through bureaucratic flaming hoops to gain legal entry. As draconian as Leftists think Trump’s border enforcement may be, it’s working. That gives us time to get our house in order.
If you really think about it (and I have because I’m as boring as an Amish rave), the deportation issues we’re seeing now are an outgrowth from the immigration issue. The more illegal immigrants come into the country, the more deportation orders have to be made once they’re caught. Of course, Leftists will continue to push for sanctuary cities and sanctuary states because, well, they don’t have to deal with the aftermath since they live more in the suburbs than where the illegal immigrants are.
So, let me float this idea, one that I’ve modified from Governors Ron Desantis and Greg Abbott. While they flew illegal immigrants to sanctuary cities and states, I want to send them to the residences of those who insist on being sanctuary cities and states. Preferably, to the houses of those politicians who made those things possible. Maybe that will drive home the point that illegal immigration isn’t something we should encourage.
Or, at the very least, we can point and laugh as we give Leftists exactly what they said they wanted.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Since Donald Trump was reelected, people have kept an eye on the economy since that was one of the areas he ran on. After all, President Brick Tamland’s economy was one of the world’s biggest dumpster fires (in spite of Leftists saying everything was fine like Kevin Bacon in “Animal House”). So, naturally, we were curious what Trump could to to put out the fire.
And apparently, he’s big on tariffs.
Tariffs are a touchy subject because there are so many people talking about them, but very few who understand them. So, just like social media on any day ending with “day.” Since there are so many armchair economists spouting off, I might as well give it a go.
tariffs
What the Left thinks it means – an indirect tax on goods and services that will hurt everyone
What it really means – an economic bargaining chip if things are done right
Since I’m only an armchair economist, the good folks at Investopedia have a pretty good explanation of what tariffs are and how they can impact us. For the purposes of this sketch, tariffs are additional taxes levied on imports designed to get the exporting countries to cut us a deal. This is what I mean when I say they’re an economic bargaining chip.
The problem comes when the country whose goods are getting slapped with tariffs doesn’t want to play ball. That can lead to economic and diplomatic strife if both sides continue to jack up tariffs like they’re a tub of popcorn and a small pop at a movie theater. Anything larger than a small pop requires a credit check.
The way the Left sees tariffs is correct, but only to a point. Yes, tariffs can cause prices to rise, but it’s not a guarantee. However, it does cause shitty memes.
If you’re not into clicking links, let me describe the meme. The title is “How Tariffs Work” and it pictures Donald Trump pissing into a fan and getting hit in the face with his own piss. Cute? Maybe. Funny? Possibly. Accurate? Wellllll…not so much.
The meme’s assumption (provided I don’t get smacked by Chris for stealing his “In the Meme Time” bit) is tariffs will always backfire, especially when it comes to Trump. But what happens if they don’t? The cartoon doesn’t even consider that possibility, which shows at best a surface understanding of basic economics.
Which means Leftists aren’t prepared to talk about the companies who have already decided not to test Trump on tariffs and made arrangements to avoid or lessen their impact. Their squawking points only go as far as “things are going to be more expensive.”
You know, like things under President Brick Tamland?
But there is one element the Left keeps overlooking when complaining about tariffs: Trump is pushing for reciprocal tariffs. Basically, it’s a tit-for-tat move. The higher the tariffs on us, the higher Trump will set the tariffs on them. And needless to say, we’ve been on the wrong end of the tariff game with a lot of countries. We will have to see what this will do because I’m not sure anyone knows what will happen.
Especially not the Left.
When it comes to economics, Leftists are as smart as Eric Swalwell among female Chinese spies. They know a few terms and can bullshit their way through a discussion (provided it’s shorter than a ferret’s attention span after a quadruple espresso laced with truck stop speed), but when it comes to actual knowledge, they are lacking. Want proof? One of the Left’s favorite economists is Paul Krugman, a man whose accuracy percentage looks like the ERA of a really good pitcher.
The reason for this is simple: Leftists don’t get economics. Remember, Leftists thrive on emotion, and you just can’t fee-fee your way to a good economy. There are hard and fast rules, concrete numbers, and historical data to contend with, which make it harder for Leftists to digest. That’s why they tend to make emotional appeals when they talk about economic issues. Once you accept them as valid, they take the high ground.
Which explains the Left’s approach to the tariff issue. They want people to believe only the worst of outcomes awaits us, just like they do with any Republican or conservative idea. DOGE is intrusive. Closing the Department of Education will make students dumber (to which I say how could you tell the difference). And tariffs are totally bad.
Which is why other countries have tariffs on our shit. Because tariffs are bad, m’kay?
I think the Left’s objection to Trump’s tariffs stems from a belief America deserves to have to pay more for foreign goods because we have it so good here. To them, America is wealthy, so we can afford to pay jacked up costs (except when it comes to shit like healthcare, student loans, the cost of living, etc.). Although we are still one of the prime movers of the global economy, we should be more frugal in what we buy and from where. As the song says, “You’d better shop around.”
Either that or, “Do do do do do do do do do do do do do do do.” I always get those two songs mixed up.
Anyway, I’m going to take a wait-and-see approach to Trump’s tariffs. It’s way too early to dismiss them as a failure or a success, but try telling either extreme that in their rush to be right. If Trump can make good on his promise, all the better. If not, he’s going to have to do some fast talking to get himself out of this mess, which will give Leftists plenty of fodder for the 2026 midterm elections. It’s a pretty big gamble, so let’s see if we hit the jackpot or don’t have a pot to piss in.
Oh, and Leftists? Can you learn how to meme, for the love of Pete?