Election years can be wilder than a Motley Crue after party with Charlie Sheen, Willie Nelson, and Lindsay Lohan. This year’s election, though, makes that scenario look like a Mormon church picnic combined with an IBM leadership forum. From the Left cheering the legal process preventing presumed Republican candidate Donald Trump from campaigning (and having it backfire on them in ways they have yet to fathom) to telling people the flaming shitstorm of an economy brought to you by Bidenomics isn’t really that bad, we are seeing a lot of chicanery before the first ballot is cast.
Or before the first 5 billion ballots for Biden can be fabricated by Leftist groups, as the case may be.
In recent decades, there’s been a concern that non-residents are allowed to vot, a concern that’s been raised this year as well. And Leftists, using all the logic and knowledge at their disposal, have said “Nuh-uh!” So, what is the truth of the matter? Well, let’s just say the Left doth protest too much.
non-resident voting
What the Left thinks it means – a conspiracy theory dreamed up by Republicans to stir up anger and fear of immigrants
What it really means – something the Left has been allowing to happen because it helps them
There are a number of criteria that must be met in order to vote in most elections, as dictated by the federal government. And in case you don’t want to open the link yourself, the one at the very top is…you must be a citizen to vote. Of course, Leftists are quick to point out it’s already illegal for non-residents to vote in state and federal elections, so we don’t need more laws.
Remember these are the same assholes who believe more gun laws are needed to protect people after every shooting.
Anyway, I do have to give the Left credit. They are correct non-residents can’t vote in state or federal elections. However, they are allowed to vote in local elections in some places. So, if they’re only voting in local elections, what’s the harm?
Because it’s only a matter of time before Leftists start demanding non-residents be allowed to vote in state and federal elections because “they live here, too.” Normally, this might fall under the slippery slope fallacy (and, to be honest, it still might), but when you consider this sort of thing has happened more than a couple of times in my lifetime, I’m going to call bullshit on anyone saying it’s a fallacy in this case. Remember, it wasn’t that long ago Leftists went from gays just wanting to be treated like everyone else to gays being allowed to dictate how other people live under fear of public humiliation.
Because tolerance, you bigot!
The push to allow non-residents to vote is similar to another movement Leftists have tried to advance, that being allowing felons to vote once they’re out of prison. Most states have a restriction on felons voting until their sentences are complete or after a probation period, but in Maine, Vermont, and the District of Columbia, felons never lose their right to vote. Granted, the most hardened criminals in Vermont are maple syrup traffickers, but the point is still there. What was once a “no voting ever again” sentence has been turned into a “well, maybe we will let you vote again if you promise to be good boys and girls, m’kay.”
And we’re not supposed to think this will happen with non-residents why exactly? Oh, yeah, because we’re not supposed to notice this shit.
Just like we’re not supposed to notice how state and local agencies aren’t exactly following the laws on the books. Recently, a South Caroline Medicare office gave a non-resident a packet which included…a voter registration form. Leftists will be quick to point out getting the form doesn’t mean the non-resident was going to register to vote or even vote. Then, why would the packet include it automatically? Granted, it could be an oversight or the way the bureaucracy runs because Lord knows they can’t be allowed to make exceptions.
Then, there’s California’s “Motor Voter” Law. For those of you unfamiliar with it because you have lives outside the Interwebs, this law allows people to register to vote when they get a driver’s license. It’s super convenient…and also a good way to get non-residents registered to vote without so much as a first glance, let alone a second one. And with California being a sanctuary state (meaning they won’t check for citizenship if a non-resident is caught after a crime or in general), that means there is no check on whether non-residents are voting in more than local elections.
And if you think I’m picking on California, I am, but it’s not just a problem there. In our nation’s capitol, it’s estimated there are over 42,000 non-citizens eligible to vote in city elections as of 2021, thanks to a bill passed by the DC City Council. Granted, it’s unlikely these non-residents could sway the elections in a district where the choices are Democrat or other Democrat, but it has a symbolic significance.
After all, if the area where we house most of our degenerates, idiots, and psychopaths allows non-residents to vote (but enough about the DC Mayor’s office), it’s only a matter of time before Leftists make the case more communities should be open to the idea.
Sure, if you want to make Mos Eisley look like an Amish village.
It’s at this point I get to introduce a concept Leftists don’t get yet: a law is only as effective as its ability and/or desire to be enforced. When there’s a vested interest in a law not being enforced, it gets easier to overlook criminals, which makes it a lot easier to break the law with impunity. Just ask Californians. The good ones, not those who complain major companies are leaving California after being looted on the regular. And when no one’s enforcing the law…more people will be tempted to break the law.
Funny how that works, isn’t it?
There is an argument to be made for non-residents being allowed to vote in local and school board elections, but it will require a commitment to enforce the laws on the books. Since that’s not going to happen thanks to Leftists, that argument is a non-starter with me. Not because the Leftists are shitheads, but because it sullies the election process.
And because Leftists are shitheads.
Allowing non-residents to vote for anything more than what new Lays potato chip flavor should be produced is a recipe for disaster and many Donald Trump Truth Social posts about election interference. And the sad part is he’s right, albeit with a lot of exaggeration. When we can’t even verify the people casting votes in an election are eligible under federal law, it makes our elections less secure than a crack rock near Hunter Biden. When you consider the number of votes separating Donald Trump and President Brick Tamland in 2020 in Arizona, Georgia, and Wisconsin, even 15,000 illegally cast votes can make the difference between a winner and a loser.
Or a decent economy and a flaming shitshow of an economy.
Unless you like having to take out a third mortgage to buy a carton of milk, maybe you might want to take non-residents voting a lot more seriously.
Tag: election 2020
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
This week was a big one for our friends at Fox News. Sure, the Left loves to talk about the Dominion defamation lawsuit against the network, but the Fox hate was cranked up to 12 (because 11 just won’t do) because of Tucker Carlson showing previously unreleased security footage from January 6th. You know, that insurrection that simultaneously could have destroyed the nation and was run by dumb Trump supporters?
Well, since both Leftists and, well, other Leftists are losing their collectivist shit over the footage, I figured it was time to take a look at the little cable network that could…bitch slap CNN and MSNBC into oblivion.
Fox News
What the Left thinks it means – a radical right wing network that lies to the country, thus becoming a national security threat
What it really means – a right-leaning network that represents everything the Left fears/hates
Fox News Channel began in 1996 from humble beginnings. Well, as humble as can be while being funded by a wealthy Australian. Anyway, Fox News was established as an alternative to the media, who lean so far left they walk at a 5 degree angle perpendicular to the ground, and it proved to be very successful. No longer did we have Leftist talking heads telling us what and how to think about the events of the day. Now, we had “fair and balanced” news.
Kinda.
It’s hard to overcome personal biases in the media, but Fox News at least tried to do it for a long time, and they still do. But try to convince a Leftist raised on Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann of that. They’ll continue to say Fox News isn’t really news because of all the lies they tell.
Seriously? Have you fucknuckles looked in the mirror lately?
Where the Left gets things twisted is a common blind spot for people: separating news from opinion. To the Left, the two are inseparable as they believe their opinions are facts. Granted, the Right does this as well, but in their defense people on the Right can be persuaded with facts most of the time. Their ego isn’t tied to being correct. The Left’s is.
But actual reporting has little to do with ego. The journalism of even the past 50 years has gone from hitting the pavement to hitting up a Leftist politician on Twitter to get a quote for a story that’s pretty much plug-and-play. Just add a quote or two, make Republicans look bad, and you’re done.
Fox News’ actual reporting isn’t anything like that from what I’ve seen. For one, they get blocked by Twitter Leftists. But more importantly the reporters on staff do amazing work. Even former Fox News contributors like Catherine Herridge found work after leaving it because of her reputation as a strong, driven reporter. And if you look at the body of her work, you’ll find a common theme: report the facts without emotional attachments. She’s like a female Data.
This blurring of lines between news and opinion actually makes the rest of the media look bad, mainly because they assume Fox News does what they do, only with more of a conservative bent. Of course, Leftists think…excuse me…AHAAAHAAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAHAAAAAA!
So, where was I? Oh, yes, Leftist media.
Being anything to the right of the Socialist Socialite makes you incredible to Leftists, and not in a good way. Once you get branded as a conservative, Leftists no longer consider you to be human, let alone credible. Just ask Matt Taibbi, a reporter that used to work for Leftist rag Rolling Stone and is now reporter-non-grata for his role in the Twitter Files.
Yet, this is lazy thinking. Dismissing a source solely because of political leanings is silly. You need to take the time and really look at the body of work before you determine how badly they suck. Then, you can dismiss them.
In the case of Fox News, I can’t completely dismiss them for having no credibility. Their news side is consistently running circles around the competition by being good at their jobs. It’s the commentary side that ultimately hurts the network. Sure, they have solid contributors like Brit Hume, Greg Gutfeld, Tammy Bruce, and Tulsi Gabbard, people whose opinions aren’t hidden and even-handed.
Then, there’s the hard pro-Trump side like Laura Ingraham and Sean Hannity, neither of one I can stand because they just find ways to say the same things over and over again night after night. If I wanted to hear Trump talking points, I would go right to the source, not filtered through people whose opinions I care less about than the insane homeless man I see on my way to work. Although the homeless guy did give me some great stock tips…
Regardless, Fox News is doing something right because they continue to dominate the cable news ratings. Granted, ratings doesn’t always mean quality. I’m looking right at you “Friends.” You owe me 3 years of my life back watching Ross and Rachel. And no number of times singing “Smelly Cat” will make up for it.
Yet, Fox News has enough crossover appeal that it gets people on the Left and the Right to watch. This link is from 2019, so the numbers may have changed, but the fact Fox News continues to dominate month after month, year after year, makes it harder to dismiss the network as niche. Even with the Dominion lawsuit looming over them, it just doesn’t matter.
And that’s what pisses off Leftists the most. No matter what they do, no matter how many boycotts or hashtags they come up with, Fox News keeps chugging along, making CNN and MSNBC fight for the scraps. Or scrap for the scraps, if you prefer (and I do).
Of course, the Left can’t let that happen, so they’re doing what they can to attack Fox News. Hence, the accusations they’re a threat to national security and lie all the time. And hence the reason they have to lie about what Fox News is.
A lot of the “Fox News is a national security threat” bullshit arose in the aftermath of January 6th, a dark day in our history where…let me check my notes…a bunch of people attended a rally in Washington, DC, to protest an election they felt was stolen and some asshats decided to be destructive dicks. Apparently, protesting the results of a contested election is a national security threat to the Left.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries? Please pick up the white courtesy phone. You may be a national security threat.
Where Fox News comes into the picture is related to the Dominion lawsuit in that the network is alleged to have lied to its viewers about the 2020 Presidential election being stolen, which prompted the January 6th “insurrection,” which as we’ve been told is worse than 9/11, Pearl Harbor, and another “Scary Movie” sequel…combined.
I won’t dispute Fox News had a hand in the “stolen election” narrative. What I do dispute is that they knowingly lied. I didn’t vote for Trump or Puddin’ Head Joe, so I don’t really have a dog in the hunt, but I can’t completely dismiss the idea there was some funky shit going down at the polls. Polling places running out of ballots, allegations of renewed counting after most of the vote counters had left, and other irregularities became the coin of the Trump realm. I can’t say every accusation of election irregularities could be substantiated with facts, but there were enough to make me question whether the results we got on Election Day 2020 were real or Memorex. And, me being the curious boy I am, I want to get to the bottom of it.
And apparently Fox News did, too. When the rest of the media dismissed the possibility of election fraud out of hand (while saying the 2016 election was fundamentally flawed because of Russia, Russia, Russia), Fox News became the contrarian and started to look at what happened with a critical eye.
You know, like reporters are supposed to do?
But is this questioning a threat to national security? In a word. In two words, fuck no. In three words, fuckity fuck no. In four words…well, let’s just say there’s a lot more variations of “fuck” used.
The First Amendment says Congress cannot pass laws prohibiting the redress of grievances against the government. If a rally about possible election fraud isn’t a redress of grievances, I don’t know what is. At the very least, the January 6 protestors had a Constitutional right to do what they did. Once they breached the rules of decorum to commit criminal acts, that protection goes the way of Kamala Harris’ Presidential hopes in 2024.
On top of that, the concept of January 6th being a “riot” or an “insurrection” is being undone by the security footage being shown. Most of the people at the rally stayed outside, and those who gained access to the Capitol mostly…took a tour, some with the help of the Capitol Police on duty that day.
But wait a minute! Wouldn’t that prove the Left’s narrative about January 6th is full of shit? Why, yes…yes it would! But they can’t just say “The real reason we lied about January 6th is because we got scared by a bunch of non-violent Americans who disagree with us” because it would go over as well as giving David Duke an NAACP Image Award.
And not to put too fine a point on this, but who was President on January 6, 2021? That would be Donald Trump, not Puddin’ Head Joe. There was no transfer of power, no transition (except maybe for some members of the Biden Administration), and no attempt to overthrow the government. For January 6th to be an actual insurrection, the protestors/”rioters” would have to be seeking to overthrow…the man they supported for President in 2020. Fox News broadcasting security footage doesn’t make the lack of logic behind the “insurrection” go away, nor is it nearly as horrible as the Left wants to make it out to be. The only real threat with releasing the security footage isn’t to national security, but to the security of the Leftist narrative.
Now, for the lying. Not on my part, but to the allegations Fox News misinforms its viewers. Let’s just say any major media outlet that pushed even one-tenth of the stories about Russiagate being real should take all the seats. Much of what passes for reporting these days revolves around lying, whether it be omitting context, fabricating stories to advance a narrative, or spinning events to make one side look better than the other. In fact, most of the “reporters” today should get an additional pay for being the DNC’s steno pool.
Fox News is no different, except for the DNC steno pool bit. They do exactly what the rest of the media do, only for the Right instead of the Left. That’s not meant as an excuse, but rather an observation built over 35 years of studying the media both formally and informally. It’s hypocritical for the Left to hold Fox News to a higher standard than they hold themselves, but it’s par for the Alinsky course. Not that you’d ever get an actual admission of dishonesty from the Left, mind you. They’re still clinging to the “very fine people on both sides” lie as though it were a security blanket.
So, is Fox News as bad as its critics say it is? Yes, and no. They are a product of the current media environment and are guilty of at least some of the sins attributed to it. Overall, they’re no better or worse than any other media outlet, and much of the criticism levied against it is the result of partisan hyperbole. Having said that, Fox News has a lot of room to improve. Don’t fall back on reciting RNC/Donald Trump talking points and go back to reporting that lives up to the “fair and balanced” standard.
Oh, and fire Geraldo Rivera. He’s as useful as tits on Michael Moore.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
It started in Maricopa County, Arizona. Republicans who suspected there might have been election irregularities in the 2020 election requested and eventually got an audit of the ballots. In the relatively short time since then, they have uncovered dealings shadier than a Nigerian Prince trying to give away his fortune via email. Then, other states started to join in the fun and Audit-A-Mania was running wild.
So wild that Colorado Secretary of State Jena “Don’t Call Me Clark” Griswold issued rules concerning audits, specifically calling out what she called “fraudits.” This echoes a Leftist sentiment getting a lot of traction these days: the audits are being done under less-than-honest means and with questionable justification.
Which means it’s a prime target for a deep dive, courtesy of the Leftist Lexicon!
fraudit
What the Left thinks it means – fraudulent audit requests from Republicans and Trump supporters designed to undermine election security
What it really means – an attempt to rewrite recent history without having to explain why their opinions have changed since 2016
Remember 2016? Why, it’s like it was five years ago…
Seriously, after the 2016 election, Leftists were up in arms about Russian collusion allegedly swaying the vote for Donald Trump. They swore up and down (both figuratively and literally) Trump was not the legitimate President of the United States and our elections were “hacked.” Sure, they could have easily figured out Hillary Clinton wasn’t a good Presidential candidate from, oh, looking back at her 2008 campaign when she crashed and burned like the Hindenburg, but no. They went with the “Trump cheated” line.
To be fair, there were irregularities in the 2016 election from both sides. Instead of using that fact to build bipartisan support for better election security, Leftists spent time and energy bitching about it and pushing a narrative they had to trump up (if you’ll pardon the pun) evidence to make quasi-believable.
And they even fucked that up.
Four years later, the same people who said our elections were fundamentally flawed when Donald Trump won now say the elections were secure and everything was fine. Yet, what changed? Nothing. In fact, most of the proposed changes to current election law have come from the Republicans with Democrats throwing in a couple of proposals that ultimately don’t deal with election security, but does have a lot to do with creating less transparency and more voters…for Democrats.
The thing is the audits put a speed bump in that process because the Left has to not only push its current agenda, but spend time and energy trying to convince people the audits are a bad idea. After all, if the audits are successful, it might get more people to look at the 2020 election as legit illegitimate. But there’s another reason, one that involves everybody’s favorite Leftist bad guy, Uncle George Soros.
After the 2000 election, Leftists were upset (as they are now), so some of them put their heads together and came up with the idea to put ideological allies into Secretary of State offices across the country. Why? Because the Secretary of State is usually the person who certifies the votes in statewide elections.
Including Presidential elections.
This effort called the Secretary of State Project received a lot of support from various Leftists. And who was one of the founding members? Uncle George himself. And who managed to wrangle up some sweet campaign cash from the Soros family?
Jena Griswold. The Colorado Secretary of State who is trying to make the case audits aren’t legit.
And the funny thing? She ran on a platform that allegedly eschewed billionaires trying to affect the outcome of elections. I’ll take “People Who Live in Glass Houses” for $800, Alex.
The big fear for Leftists, beyond not being able to hide their cheating, is people finding out about how Uncle George has been quietly pulling the strings behind the scenes for close to 20 years and possibly affecting elections. The minute an audit uncovers discrepancies, the sooner the plot gets foiled and the more likely Leftist candidates get stomped in elections because they can’t control how the votes are counted. And that, kids, puts a crimp in their ability to cheat.
Thus, the attempts to discredit the audits. If you can dismiss the validity of the need for the audits, you control the narrative and keep the status quo, which the Left has plans in place to bend even further under the guise of protecting democracy. More on that at a later time, but know the Left’s idea of protecting democracy is closer to protecting Democrats. As long as you vote for Democrats, Leftists have no problem counting your vote, even if you’re deceased and have 5 ballots sent to a single address.
However, calling the audits fraudulent only works if there isn’t a legitimate reason for them and they’re being requested to disrupt proceedings after the election. From what we’ve seen out of Maricopa County so far, I’d be hard-pressed to call them fraudulent. We’re not talking about a handful of votes impacted here; we’re dealing with thousands of votes, which can be enough to swing an election to a candidate.
Although it’s unlikely Donald Trump will be able to completely change the outcome of the 2020 election, it’s still worth the effort to ensure what we saw on Election Night is what actually happened and if it isn’t, it may be enough to inspire voters to come out in numbers large enough to overcome Leftist attempts to rig elections.
Which is what the Left has been pushing since the 2016 election, by the way.
Nobody said the Left were masters of long-term strategizing.