Tag: jd vance

Show Trials

In some jurisdictions there are criminal charges pending against President-Elect Donald Trump. And in New York a sentencing hearing is on permanent pause following Trump’s election victory. All of these have one thing in common, they are all politically motivated show trials and attacks from the Left.

If any of these charges were against a Democratic Party member, they would be dismissed on various grounds. Even if these charges were against a common citizen the charges would be dismissed. And no trial would ever take place.

So now the Left is confused on what to do. Their anointed candidate lost the popular and Electoral College votes. And somehow Trump has won a trifecta. All their plans have come crashing down.

Here is how I think this is going to work out. Some of the pending charges will be dropped. There will be some elected prosecutors who will be fearful of losing their jobs if they insist on trying President Trump. Not to mention the potential for political backlash. So they will drop the charges and sweep it under the rug.

Thus, some will just go away. Others however, the Left may hold on to these. There is a mid-term election in 2 years. And the balance of power could shift in Congress. This is the hope of the Left and I bet some will run on that idea too.

The Left’s hope lies in getting control of the both the House and Senate in the 2026 mid-term elections. Then they will impeach President Trump for a 3rd time on more trumped-up charges. And with the help of the Senate, remove him from office.

Then they could sentence him for 37 felony convictions. And hold very speedy trials to convict him on other charges that have been waiting in the wings as well. And they wouldn’t stop there of course.

JD Vance would become the 48th President once Trump was removed from office. And the Left would immediately attack him as well. He too would face impeachment and be removed from office. An effective coup would take place here and only the fools would not see it. And then, whomever would be the Democratic Speaker of the House would become the 49th President of the United States to finish out the 2 remaining years of Trump’s original term.

But if that nightmare scenario happens. There would be no end to the Democratic Left’s term. The Republic would end. Thus we must win the mid-term elections in 2026. And again unite in 2028 to elect JD Vance as the 48th President. We have proven it can be done. And we must.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As Election Day looms over our heads like the Sword of Damocles, Queen Kamala the Appointed is trying to shore up as many voters as she can to try to deny Donald Trump. Let’s just say it hasn’t gone well. Even captain of the Exxon Valdez Joseph Hazelwood is saying the Harris/Walz campaign is a disaster.

And speaking of reaches for humorous intent, there’s a group called White Dudes for Harris who recently put out a…well, one of the dumbfuckiest ads I’ve ever had the misfortune of seeing. And it only cost $10 million! Not to be out dumbfucked, some genius decided to put professional actors in an ad about how real men support Queen Kamala the Appointed.

Someone get Bath and Body Works on the horn. I think I may have found who okayed their snowflake candle packaging!

Either way, I find it interesting the Left is suddenly interested in masculinity as a positive attribute. Usually, Leftists hate all men, even the ones who agree with them in an attempt to get a laid…not that I know anything about that, mind you. Meanwhile, we have a Lexicon entry to get to!

masculinity

What the Left thinks it means – the way a man acts, talks, dresses, and so forth

What it really means – a subject about which Leftists know nothing, which isn’t that different from any other subject when you think about it

One of the things I like best about my life is I remember what things were like before the shit hit the fan. Back in my day, men were men and women were men and everybody was really confused. Seriously, though, we may have any number of men as role models each representing a different facet of the male experience (think Tom Selleck and Boy George), and people were okay with it.

Except for Leftists.

Somewhere between the second and third wave of feminism, men became an appendix with a credit line: fun for a while, but ultimately useless. Soon, the only way a man could get anywhere near a woman without being called a rapist was for the man to completely reject his masculinity, and even then you weren’t safe from scrutiny. Being a guy in the late 80s and throughout the 90s was a minefield of potential bad mistakes. And I’m not just talking about the 3 AM hookups…not that I know anything about that, mind you.

This attitude found its way into politics. (The man-hating, not the 3 AM hookups.) You couldn’t swing a dead cat (and, really, why would you) without hitting a horndog male politician who got caught in a sexual situation because, well, men. But even when that aforementioned cat hit that aforementioned horndog, there had to be exceptions for politicians who acted poorly, but supported the right politics.

And the biggest example of the eternal Hall Pass was Slick Willie himself, Bill Clinton. Leftists went from hating white male politicians to wanting to service the Commander In Briefs just for protecting abortion rights. To the Left, Clinton was the epitome of masculinity, genital warts and all.

As funny as it was to see Leftists throw away their self-imposed standards to back a man who only used them for his own satisfaction (and also to win elections), it gave me insight into just how the Left feels about masculinity.

They don’t know what the fuck it is, but they’re damn sure going to try to define it.

And as you might expect, they’re doing a shitty job of it. When they’re not saying gender is a spectrum or is a social construct, they’re saying men can have periods, have babies, and can even redefine womanhood. And you thought outsourcing jobs was bad!

Yet, in spite of their attempts to remake men into Dylan Mulvaney clones, not every guy wants to get rid of masculinity. They’re happy doing guy shit, like working on cars, hunting, and so forth. So how do Leftists try to win over these potential voters? You guessed it, by talking down to them like they were idiots. Granted, depending on where you go the odds might be in their favor, but from a political standpoint, it’s a losing strategy.

Just as Queen Kamala the Appointed found out. When she saw her numbers among white male voters sink lower than an earthworm’s cock ring, someone had the brilliant idea of trying to appeal to male voters by…hosting a White Dudes For Harris Zoom call with Leftist white dudes! Sign me up for that!

For any Leftists out there reading this, that was sarcasm.

The Harris/Walz campaign has leaned heavily into what they think masculinity should be. And their lapdogs in the media are helping. Reuters devoted time and energy to painting Tim Walz as an evolved man (all while trying to appear to be a normal guy working on his truck and hunting). Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff is being fawned over for redefining masculinity. (His first wife could not be reached for comment.)

And the whipped cream on top of this shit sundae (or any day for that matter) is the term Leftists have created to describe the Walz/Emhoff model of masculinity: nontoxic masculinity. I’ll save you a click: it’s basically being a man that would make Richard Simmons look like Chuck Norris.

That opens up a whole new Costco-sized can of worms that loops back to the point I made earlier about how little Leftists understand men. The Left have defined toxic masculinity as a series of negative traits like dominance and emotional distance that are typically seen as preferred masculine traits. Apparently, the people behind this concept have never been married. (PS, I love you, honey! Please stop watching “Deadly Wives.”)

Although there is some merit to not exhibiting the more negative elements of masculinity, there’s a lot more under the surface that complicates things. For one, men are different than women. I know. It shocked me, too. But even I have to repeat this fact to the Left (who are soooooo much smarter than us, by the way) because of how little the Left knows about masculinity.

Some of the traits attributed to toxic masculinity are hard-wired into the male experience. Back in the old days (affectionately known as my childhood), men didn’t have time to process emotions because they were too busy trying to survive. Men were (and still are) hunters and gatherers at heart. If they fail to come through in providing for their families, there are negative implications. Granted, these days those implications may be limited to having to spend the night on the old musty futon in the basement, but the principle is the same. Men are seen as providers, and with that comes a lot of responsibility and psychological baggage.

And the Left thinks putting a flannel shirt on a guy who doesn’t know a fuel pump from a pumpkin spice latte is better.

Here’s the thing. Masculinity, much like Queen Kamala the Appointed’s policy positions, is vague, can cover a lot of ground, and is often contradictory depending on the day. As a result, trying to redefine it to fit a current political need is pointless. And extremely comical, as the most recent “I’m a man supporting Kamala Harris” ad was.

What made this ad so funny was in how superficial the men were in it. The more I thought about it, the more it reminded me of something. Then, it hit me.

The guys in the ad…were the modern day Village People. The cowboy, the gym bro, the farmer, all stereotypical male archetypes. And the old guy could easily pass as a biker! All they needed was a cop and a sailor and they could go on tour. Maybe they could open for man-turned-pretend-woman Dylan Mulvaney, who could sing his rendition of a song from “The Book of Mormon” called “Man Up.”

Trust me, Leftists. That tour will bring out tens and tens of fans.

The other comparison I can make involves a talk radio network I affectionately call Err America. Billed as the liberal alternative to talk radio, they did their best to copy the success Rush Limbaugh and others experienced. And they failed, mainly for the same reason the Harris/Walz campaign is failing with men: they went with the stereotype instead of finding the deeper context that would have made them at least somewhat credible as an alternative.

So, that’s where we are with the Leftist view of masculinity. In their attempts to attract male voters, they have exposed a glaring weakness in their philosophy about it, and they are getting slammed for it. And rightly so.

Plus, it’s hypocritical (and, therefore, utterly mockworthy) for the Left to say gender is whatever you want it to be while at the same time extolling the virtues of what they think are real men…who just happen to want Queen Kamala the Appointed to be President. The whole concept of masculinity doesn’t revolve around what box you check on your ballot in November. It’s goes a lot deeper, and the Left clearly doesn’t want to take the time to figure it out. As a result, their “outreach” becomes a comical attempt at pandering that is all show and no go.

But I’m sure the Left would never try that backwards approach with people of different races…or genders…or sexual orientations…or religions…

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Every modern political campaign these days is fraught with scandal. The severity of the scandal depends on a number of factors, not the least of which being how the politician at the center of it reacts.

This year, the Vice Presidential candidates (or at least the one on the ticket that actually got votes at the convention) are battling over stolen valor. As the son of someone who served (and as someone who isn’t a complete asshole…although the jury’s still out on that one), I take this matter pretty seriously. And that’s why I try to do my homework so I’m not throwing out an accusation that I can’t back up, thus not looking like a complete asshole in that case.

There is a lot more behind stolen valor than the words themselves, and in today’s hyper-political environment, it’s especially important to be accurate.

But since the person responsible for accuracy is on vacation, it’s my job.

stolen valor

What the Left thinks it means – an unfounded accusation made against Tim Walz that makes JD Vance look stupid

What it really means – taking credit for unearned military achievements

When dealing with military matters, I try to look for authoritative sources. And I’m going to guess a website chronicling the Medal of Honor and other military honors might just fit the bill.

HomeofHeroes.com describes stolen valor thus:

“Stolen Valor” is a term applied to the phenomenon of people falsely claiming military awards or medals they did not earn, service they did not perform, Prisoner of War experiences that never happened, and other tales of military actions that exist only in their minds.

So, no matter your rank in Call of Duty, you aren’t really a military expert, nor should you talk to anyone outside of your gaming group about your rank. And given some of the video gamers I’ve known, their rank isn’t just a military term.

Regardless, the description above jibes with something I’ve experienced personally. Those who served don’t tend to talk about it very much, while those who didn’t or served lighter duty than Al Gore can’t stop talking about it. Those who practice stolen valor are usually trying to pull a scam, whether it be for a discount on a breakfast meal, bang a hot and dumb sexual conquest, or a few pity dollars along the roadway. Those who get away with it tend to keep pushing it until the time they’re exposed as frauds.

Which brings us to politics.

The war of words between JD Vance and Tim Walz began when Vance accused Walz of stolen valor. Since then, Walz has rhetorically fired back, stating Vance shouldn’t denigrate anyone’s service record, let alone his.

Now for the $64,000 Question: is Walz guilty of stolen valor? (It was either that or “Where are your pants, sir?”)

Wellll…that’s a really good question (the stolen valor one, not the pants one). A lot depends on who you ask. Leftists, of course, say Walz is innocent and that Vance served less time than Walz did. The Right, on the other hand, noted Walz claimed a rank he hadn’t really earned and made a claim he experienced war during a speech about the need for gun control.

The thing is…both sides are right to a point. Although Walz isn’t trying to scam people out of anything but votes, he did claim a rank he didn’t earn. And although he did that, it’s questionable whether it rises to the level of stolen valor. As such, I think Vance and Donald Trump should drop this line of attack sooner rather than later since they don’t have a Delorean and a flux capacitor. Also, it gives Walz a chance to appear to be a victim of “right wing attacks” which will make Trump/Vance look dishonest and mean by comparison.

Of course, the media lead us to believe they are already, so…it’s a wash, I guess?

This is one of the pitfalls of politicizing stolen valor: if you’re wrong, you’re likely fucked. Furthermore, it takes something serious and reduces it to a talking point. Republicans will continue to say Walz is guilty of stolen valor, Leftists will continue to dismiss the allegation and point to Trump’s less-than-existent military career. And in the end, nobody’s really going to be convinced or do the digging into the allegations to find the truth.

Well, except for me, and my excuse is I don’t have hobbies, so take that for what it’s worth.

There is one upside to this, for me at least. Leftists, who have spent decades decrying war and violence, now have a Vice Presidential candidate who thumps his chest with pride for…being involved in war. Granted, the most action Walz saw was a really big squirt gun fight, but the point stands. Maybe they’re too caught up in the joy the Harris/Walz campaign is bringing to the race (at least, that’s what the media keep telling us).

Joy overdose or not, the Left’s hypocrisy here is worth pointing out. And by “pointing out” I mean “mock mercilessly.” You want peace in Palestine, but back a veteran in the #2 slot of the ticket? If you can make that make sense without invoking “Orange Man Bad,” give it a go. Just know I will be laughing at your futility.

Regardless of how you feel about Walz’s retirement or Vance’s service, the point is they both signed up for something I couldn’t do because I was young and stupid. They served this country willingly, and for that they both have my deepest respect. The rest of the shit they’ve done, though…that’s fair game.

Before I close this out and await the slings and arrows of outrageous Internet comments, I do have to call out Walz for his response to Vance’s accusations of stolen valor. No matter how much you try to frame it as maligning your military service, the fact is it wasn’t that much of a slight, and certainly not so much of a slight that it required a response more than a so-what. By showing it bothers you, you have given Trump/Vance a means to needle you and make you look defensive.

You know, the way you made them look defensive when you called them “weird”?

And given the fact the head of your ticket is more vacant than a We Can’t Afford a Roof Inn during rainy season, you’re taking the focus away from the her. Then again, if I had a record like Kamala Harris’s, I’d be embarrassed to show my face in public, too. Nevertheless, your response gave the accusation oxygen, which allows people from all sides to weigh in on the topic.

Including some of the folks you served with.

Maybe you can get some tips from John “Swift Boat, Not Swift Thinker” Kerry about that. Provided, of course, you can sit through a James Taylor set.

Meanwhile, I urge my conservative brethren and sistren to knock off the stolen valor claims against Tim Walz. They’re not helping. Besides, I’m sure if you look hard enough, you can find way worse shit with which to rhetorically batter him.


The Joy Offensive

Since Kamala Harris picked Governor Tim Walz to be her running mate for the 2024 Presidential election (all without dealing with the silly little detail of getting actual delegates through the primary process), the Left and the media (but I repeat myself) have been working overtime to fluff up the ticket like it was on a porn set. Not that I know anything about that, mind you…

The result has been glowing reviews, lots of money being raised, and social media abuzz with talk of joy surrounding the ticket. Polls that showed Harris less popular than an STD have flipped, leaving the Trump/Vance ticket to scratch their heads in amazement. Either that or they need Head and Shoulders. Regardless, it’s the political equivalent of Lazarus being raised from the dead.

On the surface, it’s a mystery. How could a Vice President known more for word salads and failed initiatives than success get the upper hand on a former President known more for word salads and odd initiatives, but still can count successes on both hands? It starts with the framing of the Harris/Walz ticket. And for that, we can thank the Walzster. He had the bright idea of calling the Trump/Vance ticket “weird” which caught on like wildfire. Then again, TikTok videos catch on like wildfire, too, so it’s not exactly a high bar.

If you missed my tepid take on the “weird” controversy, I got your hookup. Although I have panned the notion, I can’t argue with the results. It’s become a Leftist squawking point and a clear point of irritation for Trump/Vance, which takes attention away from the issues, thanks in part to the media.

But that’s only the first part of the equation. Although Trump and Vance have been refuting the allegations they are “weird,” Harris/Walz have taken a step into another phase of the campaign: reimagining their ticket as the ticket of joy. Since being chosen, Walz has been seen as more of a father or grandfather figure, and Harris has been emphasizing how she represents hope and joy.

Hmmm…hope as a campaign platform. Nah, it would never work!

Harris has also tapped into the youth culture by adopting a “brat summer” approach. For those of you who don’t know what that means, be glad you’re uninformed because it’s just as stupid as it sounds. But, again, the results speak for themselves at least for now. Whether the young people inspired by the Harris/Walz joy offensive get inspired to vote is still in question, but I’m sure there’s a Kinko’s in Washington, DC, already working on printing up prefilled ballots for Harris/Walz.

So with all this joy and positivity going around, there can’t be a down side, can there? As your resident cynical curmudgeon, I can say there is, and it’s pretty easy to spot if you’re paying attention.

Which means Leftists are completely in the dark about it.

The first thing to point out about the joy offensive is it’s based on nothing. No policy statements, no real interviews or press conferences, not even an updated campaign website with policy positions (but more than a few ways you can donate to the campaign). Which, if you really think about it, is pretty on-brand for Kamala Harris, but that’s not important right now.

Now, compare the joy the Harris/Walz/media narrative spins to what’s actually going on right now. If you listen to the squawking heads like perpetually-wrong-but-never-in-doubt Paul Krugman, everything is fine and you’re just too dumb to realize it. (And, yes, that’s really what they’re suggesting/saying.) Yet, if you go to where the people really are, things aren’t good. Inflation is higher than Willie Nelson in Amsterdam on 4/20, goods and services are more expensive, and you need a third mortgage to get a tank of gas, mainly because you used your second mortgage to get groceries for the week. No amount of joy is going to make any of this go away, but by God, Harris/Walz is gonna try!

And there’s a good chance they may succeed, at least for now. But try paying your mortgage with joy. Just let me know what happens after the foreclosure sale.

The great irony of this approach is it’s policies like the ones Harris/Walz have advocated that has caused the pain. Appealing to people’s desire to be happy is designed to get people to ignore that little fact. Who cares if Harris was the Border Czar in spite of the media saying otherwise? Who cares if Walz made it okay to take away parents’ children if they didn’t want to mutilate the children if little Timmy feels like little Tammy for a hot minute? Who cares if the COVID lockdowns caused more problems than they allegedly solved? Just be happy, dammit!

I can’t deny there are times when we need diversions from the flaming dumpster fire that is America 2024. Video games, movies, writing semi-well-received blogs with marginal humor, those are all ways to tune out the world and plug in to your inner peace. Your mileage may vary, but the point’s the same. We shouldn’t expect politicians to provide us joy. Unless, of course, your joy comes from spending billions of dollars you don’t have on stuff that doesn’t work. That’s retail therapy on steroids, kids.

More to the point, if you think government has the ability to bring you the joy you seek in life, you’ve already succumbed to the trap. The more a government can “give” you, the less likely you are to find it yourselves. And that’s by design. Leftists believe Big Daddy Government is the sole provider of all things good, nice, and, well, joyous. The more Leftists get you to believe that, the more likely you are to support them, which helps them perpetuate their power and money bases.

And the less likely anything really positive will get done. After all, government isn’t in the problem-solving businesses because a problem solved is a revenue and power source lost. But as long as they get you to believe the Left will fix things if given enough time, money, and power, they don’t care!

I’ll be interested to see how long the Harris/Walz joy offensive will work and if it will evolve or get tossed aside once Trump/Vance start landing rhetorical punches. At some point, Harris/Walz is going to have to stop talking about joy and start talking about policy, and that time is coming soon. With a matter of weeks left before Election Day, the joy offensive is going to have to give way to substance.

And no amount of joy can hold back the hands of time.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Political attacks have been around since, well, pretty much since this country was founded. Whether you’re accusing your opponent of being a practicing homo sapien who consorts with thespians or the press of being nattering nabobs of negativity, the slings and arrows of outrageous soundbites are the country’s second favorite past time, with the first being wanting to speak to the manager.

This election cycle is no different. But this time, the big negative statement making the rounds is…”weird.” Donald Trump is weird. JD Vance is weird. Republicans are weird. Even Barron Trump is weird.

I didn’t say it was a good negative statement.

weird

What the Left thinks it means – an effective political slam that accurately describes the Right

What it really means – a lame-ass insult that is designed to create a false dichotemy

Recently, I got into a brief political discussion on Facebook (because I’m not cool enough to get on real social media) regarding Vice President and presumptive Presidential usurper…I mean candidate Kamala Harris being less possible than an STD. The Leftist who responded to me tried to convince me otherwise because she raised a bunch of money and got a bunch of people to register to vote. After I countered it with facts, she replied “You live in an alternate universe.”

And to Leftists, I do. And most likely, you do, too.

This is because the Left has it in their collectivist heads they are the normal ones. Of course, this flies in the face of, well, normality, but what do you expect from a group who thinks there are 948 genders, men can get pregnant, and they are protecting democracy from fascism by being fascists?

Although it’s fun to mock the idea of the Left shitting on the weird, there’s actually a purpose behind it. By painting the Right as weird, they are subtly trying to paint themselves (and consequentially their viewpoints) as normal. And they’re serious about it, if the 6’8″ man in high heels and gaudy makeup who wants to be called Loretta G. Hotpants is any indication. To the Left, the weird shit is their normal and they want everyone to agree…or else!

Yep. Totes normal.

The problem is what the Left is trying to pass off as normal really isn’t. And I’m not saying this as someone who mocks the Left with the regularity of someone on a Metamucil and Colon Blow diet. All politics and humorous asides, well, aside, the Left is into some really freaky shit and it’s getting harder to lay a guilt trip on us for not dancing to their tune. At some point, you freak out the normies to the point they say “Enough.” Or “Get the fuck away from me!” You know, whichever.

Guess what, Leftists. You’ve reached that point and gone well beyond it. And no matter how you try to dress it up as normal, it ain’t.

That’s why the move to paint the Right as weird isn’t going to work. Yes, there are things Donald Trump, JD Vance, and others say that make me cringe, but more often than not, they represent what most Americans believe. Read that again. Americans, not just Republicans.

In case you Leftists are confused, let me spell it out for you. If you freak out normies, you tend not to win their votes, no matter how much you try to convince them the other side is the weird one. How do you plan to save democracy if you can’t win more votes?

I mean aside from fabricating more votes than humanly possible, that is.

But that would be election denial, and we can’t have that. It’s not like I’m Stacey Abrams, after all…

To their credit, the Trump/Vance campaign is striking back at being called weird by pointing out the obvious. Although it does have the potential to come off as deflection, which is what the Left wants us to believe is happening, it doesn’t completely work on that level. I mean, it’s hard to call the Trump/Vance ticket weird when your side looks like freak show rejects, but if you think you can pull it off, go for it.

Where I think the Trump/Vance campaign could handle the “weird” label better is with a tactic Trump has used in the past: savage mockery. Point out how juvenile the label is. Come out and say, “Is that the best you can do? I’ve been insulted better by worse people.” (And, Mr. Trump, if you wish to use that line, call me and we can work out a deal. I might even throw in a few more pointed zingers since I think I’m pretty good at them.)

And that’s really all you need to do. Leftists hate to be mocked, and taking their “weird” declarations with all the seriousness of a dedication in a coloring book would stick in their craws like nothing else. Or make it a two-fer and ask them if they’ve exhausted their “fascist” budget for the campaign and have to resort to weak-sauce shit that went out of fashion in elementary school. And, believe me, calling Trump/Vance “weird” is the mixed-drink-at-a-really-cheap-strip-club of political insults. It’s the mayonnaise of digs. It’s unremarkable, grating, and generally underwhelming.

Or, to put it another way, it’s the Kamala Harris of negative campaign messages.