This week’s Lexicon takes us to the Golden State, California. Having solved all of its problems (you know, except for people fleeing the state, rampant homelessness, uncontrolled drug abuse, a lack of leadership from the Governor on down, and more freaks than backstage at a Rick James show), they’re focusing its attention on a serious issue, a scourge on all of decent society that must be kept in check or the world as we know it will end.
That blight on humanity? The Lord Voldemort of 2026?
Nick Shirley.
Yes, that Nick Shirley.
This week, California’s Assembly passed the Stop Nick Shirley Act, a proposed law to protect potential victims of investigative journalists by expanding their existing Safe At Home Program designed to protect victims of domestic abuse. Because being interviewed about alleged fraud is totes equal to domestic abuse.
For you Leftists out there reading this, that was sarcasm.
What isn’t sarcasm is the Stop Nick Shirley Act is the kind of Lexicon topic I can sink my teeth into and enjoy!
the Stop Nick Shirley Act
What the Left thinks it means – a bill that will stop people like Shirley from harassing people in the search for clicks
What it really means – a bill that makes the Left moist in their panties, but betrays their real feelings about a free press
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again (mainly because this piece would be a lot shorter if I didn’t): I have a healthy respect for the First Amendment, both for personal reasons and as a general principle. A part of that involves freedom of the press, which is essential to a healthy society and government.
Given the current state of journalism, though, we’re as healthy as Rosie O’Donnell and Michael Moore at an all you can eat buffet at Uncle Stinky’s Food Poisoning Emporium and Sewage Treatment Center. (Their slogan: It’s technically food.)
As the mainstream media have turned into DNC Lapdog Central, people started looking for alternatives. I mean, if you heard different TV stations saying the same thing almost to the syllable, you might want to see if someone else has something different to say. Good thing every mainstream media outlet is independent and has a commitment to the truth, amirite?
For any Leftists reading this, that was also sarcasm.
What started out as a little-known and hardly talked-about website called The Drudge Report spawned new interest in the journalism game, and more than a few people jumped at the chance to dig into stories for themselves. Most of them didn’t uncover too much scandal outside of how Mrs. Wickersham is a teetotaler in public, but smokes more pot than Willie Nelson, Cheech and Chong, and Seth Rogan on 4/20 when nobody’s looking.
Then, there is Nick Shirley. Instead of finding a ganj-smoking grandma, he found fraud. A lot of fraud. Although we don’t have a firm and verified total of how much fraud yet, let’s just say it’s more than enough to go to a learning center to learn how to spell “Learning Center.”
Now, most people think uncovering fraud is a good thing. Ah, but Leftists don’t think that way, mainly because they’re guilty of it themselves, enabling it, or a little from Column A and a little from Column B. Regardless, since Shirley made Minnesota Governor and former VP candidate Tim Walz look like, well, Tim Walz, the Left has had a metaphorical hard-on to get Shirley by any means necessary.
After Minnesota, Shirley turned his sights to California, where there’s more hands out than if you cloned Shiva multiple times. Given the Governor is a guy who could have played any dickheaded jock antagonist from any 80s movie (right down to the hairstyle), finding fraud wouldn’t be that hard because, well, the Governor is one. The only problem? The Governor is as big of a dick as the aforementioned 80s movie character.
That brings us to today (please check local listings for the day in your area) and the Stop Nick Shirley Act. See, Leftists like Newsom believe independent journalists looking into taxpayer-funded fraud is a bad thing. After all, it’s his money, right?
Yeah, not quite, but try telling him that.
Since Matt Drudge became a household name in spite of the mainstream media, the Left has been trying to discredit the work being done by people more invested in finding the truth than they are. They’ve suggested requiring licenses to practice journalism. They’ve dismissed independent journalists as bloggers sitting around in their underwear pretending to be real journalists. They’ve fact-checked (or what passes for fact-checking on the Left) more salacious pieces to find “errors” and used that to discredit the entire piece.
First off, I wear clothes most of the time I pretend to be a real journalist. Do with that what you will.
Second, all of these actions and plenty more show the Left can’t stand it when someone else has a say in the flow of information because it gets harder for them to lie their asses off without anyone throwing the brown bullshit flag. Just ask anyone who had their Twitter account struck or removed because of Leftist moderators.
And with that, it reveals the Left’s commitment to freedom of the press and freedom of speech. They are fully behind both…as long as they get to control both. Which kinda defeats the purpose of free speech and freedom of the press if you really think about it (and I do because I have to do something when the Internet is down). Oh, make no mistake the Left will jump out front to defend freedom of speech and freedom of the press (or at least their fucked up versions of both), but it’s always going to be bullshit because they love power more than those pesky ole rights we have.
The Stop Nick Shirley Act is the latest example of this. While Leftists will gush over one of their own for being one of their “First Amendment protectors,” they will do everything in their power to ensure someone who is far closer to one than they’ll ever be won’t be allowed to expose fraud and bring about change. Put another way, the Left love fraud more than freedom.
Not exactly a good look there, Leftists.
And for any Leftists reading this, that was not sarcasm.
Tag: leftist lexicon
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
To say the Left isn’t taking their legal ass-whuppin coming out of Virginia well would be an understatement. Aside from whining, bitching, and moaning about how unfair it is they can’t use race as a means to gerrymander Congressional districts, they haven’t done much.
At least until recently.
The NAACP launched an initiative to get black student athletes and fans to boycott athletic programs in states where Republican redistricting efforts are in full swing. In the NAACP’s crosshairs are 8 southern states: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas. Because as we all know the best way to make a political statement is to…affect college athletics.
Don’t look at me. It doesn’t make any fucking sense to me either.
Having said that, it gives us a chance to dive deeper into the NAACP and the good work they do…okay, even I couldn’t complete that sentence without busting into laughter.
NAACP
What the Left thinks it means – an important civil rights organization focusing on helping blacks
What it really means – a dinosaur of an organization whose current mission does nothing to help blacks
The NAACP began in 1909 in response to anti-black rioting in Springfield, Illinois, that occurred in 1908. Within a matter of years, they expanded into several states and helped usher in an era of legal victories that undid discriminatory laws. Eventually, they got a bedrock victory in a little known case the kids like to call Brown v. Board of Education, ending the “separate, but equal” bullshit that came out of Plessy v. Ferguson.
Not content to win in courts, the NAACP proved to be a powerful force during the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Then, something happened.
The NAACP became, well, irrelevant. Sure, they were still visible and able to nudge politicians in their direction, but in the 1990s their star power started to fade. And it was for the same reason the SPLC started to lose some of its power recently: people started getting along. After kids growing up in the 70s and 80s learned how to treat blacks as equals, it was only a matter of time before they…started treating blacks (and other races, for that matter) as equals. That should have made the NAACP happy, right?
Nope.
Without the specter of rampant racism to draw upon for money…I mean the power to fight, the NAACP became little more than a reliable Leftist PAC. And when an organization founded on the concept of advancing blacks gets political, the mission suffers.
Take a look at the donations the NAACP made in the 2024 election cycle. There’s a pattern, but I can’t put my finger on it. Oh, well, I guess I “blue” it!
Then there’s the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. Seems they were also pretty generous to a certain party’s candidates.
In fact, looking at the past few election cycles, the last time the NAACP donated anything to Republicans since 2010, and even then it was only $205, which today would buy you half a tank of gas and a Slushie, but only a small Slushie. You might need the remaining $0.03 for something after all!
Now, you may think I’m crazy (and, believe me, I’m right there with you), but I’m thinking the NAACP might not want to advance all blacks, just the ones that they agree with politically. So in other words, black Leftists.
But that’s not all they do anymore! No, sir or ma’am (still 2 genders, kids)! They also lobby for important pieces of legislation, like…raising taxes on certain tobacco products.
Wow. Way to stick it to The Man.
This leads to an important question no one seems to be asking anymore: Thomas, where are your pants? Oh, and what has the NAACP done to advance blacks lately? Since I’ve been advised by my attorney not to talk about the former, I’ll stick with the latter.
And the answer? Not a whole fucking lot! They aren’t dealing with the day-to-day issues blacks face today, and they’re not doing much on a larger scale. They’re just…there, not really advancing anything but their personal agenda and their personal bank accounts.
They fell into the same trap the SPLC did: racism was their bread and butter, or champagne and caviar as the case may be. As long as they can rile people up and get them to believe racism was more rampant than anything related to The Mandalorian (which, if we want to not be sexist, should be The Persondalorian). But what happens when most people get along and aren’t racist?
If you’re in academia, you invent new forms of racism.
If you’re the NAACP, you’re shit outta luck.
Now, as a white man who makes Edgar Winter look like George Hamilton, it’s easy to dismiss my point of view as indicative of my internalized racism. My response is look at the vacuum in the black community needing to be filled by people with a genuine desire to elevate it. The NAACP was that for a number of decades, but it’s no longer there. What’s replaced it? Black Lives Matter, rap music culture, and a general lack of community not just within the neighborhoods, but in society as a whole.
But, hey, they’re out there fighting for higher tobacco taxes!
This latest effort to keep the NAACP relevant reeks of desperation. Trying to convince black college athletes to boycott because of the elimination of racial gerrymandering doesn’t advance anyone, let alone blacks. What they’re saying without articulating it is no blacks can ever win in white-dominated areas, so instead of trying to work with whites, you’re better off not trying. Just take your ball (or whatever other sports equipment you have) and go home.
And all based on a series of Leftist lies designed to get people upset.
Call it my wacky Gen X way of looking at the world, but I want to see everyone succeed to their fullest potential. That puts me at odds with the NAACP, and you know…I’m good with that. If you are a black collegiate athlete reading this, understand the NAACP isn’t on your side here. They’re clinging to the hope you still regard them in high enough esteem to follow them to a result that will deny you your fullest potential. I only ask you to think for yourselves and make the decision that you feel is best. Even if you don’t agree with me, I can respect your decision and the reasoning behind it.
The NAACP? They won’t do any of that. They need you more than you need them.
So, play or don’t play, boycott or boycott the boycott. The choice is up to you. Just let me know ahead of time so I can put money down on the Big 10 winning the National Championship this fall.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Remember after Barack Obama was elected President how we had entered a “post racial” period? Yeah, neither do I, but the concept was floated as proof we had gotten past the racial barriers we erected over the centuries.
Then, Obama started doing shit, and the “post racial” period was over.
Granted, I would argue we never started it, mainly because of fuckheads making everything about race. This week we got another stark reminder of this when Representative Jen Kiggans appeared on a conservative talk radio show where the host told House Minority Leader Hakeem “Not-So-Great-Value Obama” Jeffries to “get your cotton-picking hands off of Virginia.“
Now, the Left responded to this statement with the same kind of restraint and intellectual honesty we’ve come to know from them by…blaming Kiggans for making the statement (which she didn’t) and not disagreeing with the host on the spot. The reason for this is they’re fucking assholes, but the reason they gave was the term “cotton-picking” was racially coded, referring to slavery.
Hoo boy. There ain’t enough booze in the world to make that make sense, but at least we can drill down on the racially coded bit.
racially coded
What the Left thinks it means – language used to invoke historical racism
What it really means – a bullshit term to create racism where it doesn’t exist
As we’ve seen with the recent SPLC drama, the Left have a victimization fetish. And also as we’ve seen with the recent SPLC drama, they aren’t above inventing victims to advance their political and ideological needs. After all, you can’t really sell people on the idea of a racist system if nobody’s being racists, right?
That’s where racial coding comes into play. If you can convince enough people the phrases we use are somehow related to racism, you change the language and the culture. One day you could be talking about a xylophone and you suddenly become a Klansman because someone pulled the racial coding card on you.
By the way, Leftists, that isn’t a suggestion.
The point is with enough mental gymnastics to rival Nadia Comaneci you can make any turn of a phrase racially coded. That, and a lot of bullshit.
The first example I can think of (mainly because I have fewer hobbies than an Amish ham radio operator) is a gentleman who used the word “niggardly” while working as an aide to then-Washington DC Mayor Anthony Williams. Enough people got outraged over the use of this obscure word because it sounded a lot like another word that will get your ass kicked in some DC neighborhoods, and this man resigned.
And here’s the kicker: he wasn’t being racist. He could have chosen a different word to convey the same idea, but in context, it was used correctly. But because of the aforementioned word that will get your ass kicked in some DC neighborhoods, context didn’t matter. All that mattered was he was painted as a racist and that people got outraged over it for no reason.
That brings us to the cotton-picking “cotton-picking” controversy. Yes, blacks did pick cotton in the South before, during, and after the Civil War, and it wasn’t easy. Nor was it humane because slavery. You know who else picked cotton?
Poor whites.
Wait a minute…wouldn’t that fact destroy the entire “cotton-picking is racist” narrative? Why, yes. Yes it would. Or at least it should, but the Leftists won’t let it go for the same reason they latched onto “niggardly” as racist: context doesn’t help them whip up a hate mob.
And that’s what we’re seeing now. Not only are the media mischaracterizing the situation to make Kiggans look like she agreed with the racist undertones and not the idea that Jeffries should not get involved in redistricting efforts, but they’ve amplified the stupidity of the aforementioned Jeffries by letting him play the victim.
So, any day ending in, well, “day” really.
The late Rush Limbaugh loved to remind people “words mean things.” You may not have liked his politics, but only a fool would disagree at this point (which may be why Leftists are acting the way they are, but that’s not important right now). To turn an antiquated phrase like “cotton-picking” into a racist statement and grounds for resignation is the height of bullshit, yet completely expected in today’s political environment.
But before Leftists can take a victory lap over this, let me remind them your side supports a man with a literal Nazi tattoo on his chest, and you’re completely willing to let that shit slide, but a Representative who didn’t utter a phrase you’ve turned into a racist dog whistle? That’s just too damn far.
Take a seat. Preferably far away from the rest of thinking society.
The way to address this isn’t to cower in fear of being called a racist for defending Kiggans, but to point out the facts and context. Besides, at this point, the Left is going to call you racist merely for not voting like they do, so it’s not like they’re coming up with anything salacious. Drop a truth nuke on their heads and walk away. If people are so fucking stupid as to deny the truth, you don’t need to be around them or their name-calling.
The concept of anything being racially coded is so asinine it reflects more poorly on the ones who call it out than it does to the ones using the language these dumbasses call racially coded. These people need to be ignored, not only because you’ll never convince them you’re not racist, but because it annoys the shit out of them. Just remember these are the same people who hear racist dog whistles everywhere.
And since dogs are the only ones who can hear dog whistles…well, I think you know where this is going.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
You can tell we’re in the midst of Midterm Madness by all the news stories coming out about the Midterms. This week’s news came out of Virginia, where Democrats were bragging about winning a referendum vote over redistricting where they would take a 10-1 Congressional district lead over the Republicans. That is until the commonwealth’s Supreme Court rejected it on procedural grounds. See, in their hurry to try to emulate Texas, they kinda broke the rules, so the Congressional districts are staying put for now.
Now there are a couple of angles we can take to mock…I mean analyze…no, wait, I do mean mock the Left on this. I’ve already covered states rights in one form or another previously (Short Version: States have rights, too.), so I’m going to look at the other side of the equation, the will of the people.
will of the people
What the Left thinks it means – a bedrock principle of our government that is unassailable
What it really means – a principle of our government that may or may not always be the best course of action
As much as the Left likes to claim otherwise, America is not a democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic and have been since our establishment. And, no, the two aren’t synonymous. One allows people to vote for representatives in government, and the other doesn’t work in large groups like America. Guess which one I’m talking about in the latter description.
For you Leftists out there, I’m talking about democracy. And, yes, this is what democracy looks like, not a bunch of out-of-work theater kids trying to cosplay as revolutionaries while not straying too far from a WiFi signal.
Anyway, the point is we as voters have a lot of power, but it’s not absolute power. It’s like Lord Acton said, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Either that or “Care for a spot of tea?” But I’m thinking the first one fits better.
The thing about the will of the people is it can be wrong by virtue of the fact people are people. So why should it be you and I should get along so awfully? Wait, sorry. I was listening to Depeche Mode just then. What I’m getting at is the will of the people should be considered, but weighed against the possibility listening to them might turn out to be a shitty idea.
To that end, I introduce proof of this in action. As “American Idol” was in its heyday, there was a singer named Sanjaya. He was okay vocally, but not on the level of some of the other contestants. Yet, he made it all the way to 7th place by votes alone. He was popular with some show demographics and that kept him alive in the competition.
A fucking singing competition, I have to emphasize.
Personally, I have nothing against Sanjaya. He seems like a genuinely lovely person. But the fact he got as far as he did in the competition purely because fans voted for him week after week and not because he was a solid performer indicts not just “American Idol,” but the concept of the will of the people.
What happened in Virginia was the Sanjayanation of the commonwealth. They presented an idea that appealed to a lot of people, but was utter bullshit. You know, like the redistricting blue states have done to disenfranchise Republicans? But remember, this all started because of Donald Trump and Texas because fuck you that’s why.
This reveals another flaw in the idea of the will of the people always being right. What if the people were mislead into voting a certain way? I know! Who would expect politicians (many of whom have law degrees) would trick people? I was as shocked as you are when I found out.
Seriously, though, it’s not unthinkable that political types would deceive people in an attempt to sway public opinion or elections. Take the Inflation Reduction Act, for example. Although it was named for and promoted as inflation reduction (hence the name, duh), it didn’t do anything of the sort. But it did fund a lot of green energy initiatives, raise prices, and made inflation, well, inflate.
And the thing is Leftists even admit there’s a problem with misinformed voters of color. Aside from being more than a little racist, it also exposes the flaw of the will of the people when it comes to incomplete or inaccurate information.
Which brings us to the media. One of the cornerstones of a functioning government is an informed electorate. Our media used to be focused on that, but have gone into business of being PR for Leftists because, well, the media are Leftists by and large. And their coverage of events and what they allow to be said without pushback on their opinion shows reflect that. So, put simply, the media are complicit in the problems the Left know exist, but ignore when it’s their cause that needs to be forwarded.
You know, like a redistricting plan put before voters without going through the proper process?
But you won’t hear that from the media, thus making the Left’s job of claiming victory and getting stupid people to believe it easier. It also helps in the area of creating outrage. Watching Leftist meltdowns over the Virginia Supreme Court ruling has been quite enjoyable, mainly because the people melting down have no fucking clue of what the ruling actually did. And when you consider the number of media types melting down for the same reason, it’s no wonder the public isn’t as informed as it should be.
I know I’ve shit on a lot of people with this Lexicon entry, but it’s done to establish a point about the will of the people not being the bottom line of everything put up to a vote. It’s like the old saying “the customer is always right.” (Yes, I know the actual quote is up for debate, but work with me here, people!) In theory, it makes a lot of sense, but in practice (especially in the Karenverse we find ourselves in these days) it’s not always the case. There are times when the customer misinterprets the law or store policy to try to get something they’re not owed and then expect you to live up to their misinterpretation.
“Target Tori” can speak to that better than I can.
This isn’t to say I’ve lost all faith in the will of the people. Most of it, yes, but not all of it. There are still pockets of intelligent, informed, and engaged people out there who are trying to keep the country afloat. Even if we don’t agree on the political shit, I respect anyone who can make the effort to be the kind of people the Founding Fathers wanted us to be.
I love all 12 of you motherfuckers!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Another week, another series of Ls for the Left, this time on the electoral side of things. The US Supreme Court struck down a Louisiana attempt to redistrict on the basis of race by a 6-3 margin. One of the key parts of this decision revolved around the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which in part prohibits racial discrimination in voting. What the case in question (Louisiana v. Callais for those of you playing along at home) did was bring to light the use of the Voting Rights Act to carve out racially-specific districts.
The Left, being the mature and thoughtful people they be, took to the airwaves to lay out a cogent and well-reasoned response.
Nah, I’m bullshitting you. They lost their ever-loving minds.
So, what’s all the hubbub, bub, over the ruling? I’m glad you asked, otherwise I would have had to pull something out of my ass to write about this week. You know, like I do every week.
Voting Rights Act
What the Left thinks it means – an important law that’s been gutted by the Trump Supreme Court
What it really means – a law that had noble beginnings, but got warped by the Left
To put it mildly, America has been pretty shitty towards blacks over the years. And by years, I mean centuries. Even during the more progressive 1960s, we still had to overcome societal biases and realize blacks were equal to whites and should be treated as such.
Enter Lyndon B. Johnson and the Voting Rights Act. With the President’s signature, many voting rules/laws that were around since the end of the Civil War, such as literacy tests and poll taxes, designed to prevent blacks from voting. And, unlike most laws getting passed today, it actually worked. Blacks started voting in droves, becoming an important voting bloc to this day.
Where this shitshow goes off the rails is in the application of the law, namely Section 2. You know how some states have gerrymandered districts that look like a meth head drew them on an Etch-A-Sketch? Thank the Left for that. In the 1990s, Democrats had the brilliant idea that only blacks should represent blacks in Congress. And by brilliant, I mean fucking stupid and racist. Then again, these are Democrats we’re talking about here, so being stupid and racist is kinda their brand. Just ask the SPLC.
Too soon?
Although the racial gerrymandering was permitted for decades, mainly because the Left made it so anything even resembling treating everyone equally racist (yeah, I don’t get it either), there was a tiny problem with it. Namely, the 14th Amendment.
I quote Section 1:
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
There’s a lot to take in, but the Reader’s Digest condensed version is everyone is subject to equal protection under the law, and you’d better have a damn good reason to limit those protections. Although Leftists will disagree, being white isn’t a good enough reason. Neither is any attempt to get more minority representation in the halls of Congress at the expense of equality under the law.
“But what about the institutional racism of the past, you bigot?” Leftists will probably say. And my response is simple: you don’t seem to think very highly of minorities, do you? I mean, it’s not like prominent Democrats have recently tried to make themselves relatable to blacks by suggesting they’re not smart…oh, fuck, they have. To hear assholes like Chuck Schumer, Gavin Newsom, and too many others to count talk, blacks are incapable of doing anything in their own best interests, so white Leftists just have to do things in their best interests.
When it comes to Ilhan Omar and Jasmine Crockett, they might have a point.
Overall, however, blacks aren’t as helpless as the Left believes. I firmly believe America isn’t as racist as the Left wants us to think and Republicans (the most evilest raciest racists that ever racisted evilly) have shown they will vote for candidates who don’t look like them. Just look at the 2025 Virginia Gubernatorial race. Winsome Earle-Sears ran as a Republican and managed to get over 42% of the vote in a losing effort. One doesn’t do that well without at least some whites voting for you.
And who did Democrats vote for? A white woman who makes Edgar Winter look like George Hamilton.
And if you want to go back a little bit further, didn’t we have a black President a couple of times a few years ago? And it’s not like he didn’t get white votes.
So, why do Leftists insist America is too racist to elect blacks without their help? I mean, aside from the fact they’re racist dumbasses. It boils down to the same philosophy the SPLC used: they need there to be racism to justify their efforts. As long as rich white Leftists can convince people the country is one big melting pot of white supremacy, they can keep the votes and money rolling in.
That’s why they freaked out at the Supreme Court decision. They had to confront the fact their racist anti-racism attempts were actually racist racist attempts. And instead of saying, “Maybe we should rethink this whole racism thing,” they let their masks slip and showed they don’t think very much of blacks after all.
Aside from the gross misapplication of the Voting Rights Act, I still think it serves as an important reminder of why we had to pass it in the first place and to never let up in pursuit of racial equality. The USSC ruling doesn’t gut the Voting Rights Act so much as it removes a way for Leftists to skirt the issue while telling people they’re totally fighting for equal rights.
And if we can’t trust the words of people who think Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is a brilliant legal mind, who can you trust?
Leftist Lexicon Word 0f the Week
To put it mildly, it must really suck to be a Leftist these days. Sure, they have some bright spots like the Virginia fuck-up…I mean gerrymandering vote, pending the results of a legal challenge, but for every W it seems they have more Ls than Chicago’s public transit system. Prominent Leftist firebrands like Eric Swalwell and Jasmine Crockett are on their ways out of a job (at least in Congress). Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson is issuing rulings that even her fellow Leftists on the Supreme Court are disregarding as woefully unimpressive.
And now, one of the Left’s favorite organizations, the Southern Poverty Law Center, finds itself under FBI scrutiny and public ridicule for, and I wish I were making this up, alleged money laundering and paying off white supremacists to, well, be white supremacists. And all while raising funds to try to fight them.
Although there are some on the Right who come close, this is one of the dumbest fucking things the Left has done. Which, of course, means, I get to make fun of it in this week’s Lexicon!
Southern Poverty Law Center
What the Left thinks it means – a vital tool in the fight against white supremacy and race-based hatred
What it really means – an organization in search of a problem
The SPLC started in 1971 as an outgrowth of the civil rights movement of the 1960s. When not fighting for blacks to get equal footing in the world, they tracked white supremacist groups and helped raise awareness of their activities. Not a bad gig, really.
But somewhere along the way, the arguably noble origins of the SPLC gave way to Leftist hackery. Racial equality expanded to LGBTQIA+14X-25YX42 rights, migrant (i.e. illegal immigrant) rights, and propagan…I mean education. And with that expansion came the expansion of what constituted a hate group. And, surprise surprise, all of them seem to be right wing in nature!
Now, if you were a Leftist, you would say “that’s because the Right is so hateful.” And if you weren’t a fucking dumbass, you would dig a bit deeper to see just what constitutes a hate group to the SPLC.
And, contrary to popular belief, I am not a fucking dumbass.
After Moms for Liberty got added to the SPLC’s list of hate groups for being “anti-government,” I decided to look into it. Let’s just say you would have to suspend disbelief like the guy from the Crazy Glue commercials from the 1970s to believe the SPLC’s bullshit.
And I’ll be damned if the Left didn’t start looking for steel girders and a hard hat.
When you designate anything outside of your ideological bubble as hate, it’s a crap shoot. There will be some pretty hateful asshats out there, but they tend not to be the majority, just the loudest and most boorish. When I’ve had disagreements with Republicans, MAGA or otherwise, I’ve been treated with respect for the most part and we wind up having a decent conversation. Ditto with most conversations I’ve had with Democrats.
But the Far Left and the Far Right? If I can get past the foam that forms around the sides of their mouths and can foot the bill for the series of rabies shots afterwards, there’s a non-zero chance I can have a decent conversation. Pretty damn close to zero, but still non-zero.
This is the problem the SPLC faces right now. Well, that and the allegations of money laundering and payments made to the people they were allegedly trying to fight, I mean. But more to the point, they’ve let their ideological bent taint their perspective. Here’s a prime example: Turning Point USA is considered a hard right group connected to possible violence, but you know who isn’t?
Antifa.
You know, the ones who are okay with literal violence?
But I’m sure they’ll get right on it. I mean, it’s not like it took them until 2009 to label the Nation of Islam a hate group…oh, fuck, it did. And even then, the SPLC had to make sure they were connected to the “Far Right” because who knows what would happen if they actually did their job correctly, amirite?
By playing picky-choosy with what constitutes a hate group, the SPLC undermines its own credibility as a definitive and objective source. Not that it stops the Left from using their laughable reports as cudgels to “prove” hate is on the rise and only the SPLC can stop it.
Yeah, about that…
What the SPLC and the Left (but, I repeat myself) fail to understand is people do tend to get along pretty well without them. Yes, there are still hate groups out there targeting vulnerable individuals, but by and large we live in harmony. Maybe it’s the Gen Xer in me, but I don’t care what you identify as or what you look like or what you think. Just don’t be an asshole. Simple rule, and it’s kept me in good stead for decades.
But even that one simple rule is too hard for Leftists to follow, let alone comprehend. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again (mainly because I need to fill space): Leftists can never be happy. They’re always pissed off about something or depressed because they aren’t getting their way. I say this this is exactly how I was before I became a recovering Leftist.
This plays into the SPLC situation perfectly because at some point you will run out of things to get pissed off about, but instead of realizing being pissed off all the time isn’t a lucrative as you were lead to believe it was, they figured out a way to keep their doors open by quietly encouraging the activity they were publicly against. Hmmm…that reminds me of someone, an aspiring President who had a public opinion and a private opinion…I can’t put my finger on who that was, but I’m sure Bill Clinton did at one time.
Anyway, this starts a circuit. The group paid off people to “investigate” hate groups and report back. Then, the SPLC “exposes” the hate groups, thus keeping up appearances they’re still doing what they claim to be doing. This, in turn, makes gullible Leftists fork over donations to keep up the good work, which gets filtered back to the organization and used to pay off more people to “investigate” hate groups, and so on.
You know what stops that circuit? People getting along.
The thing about hate groups is they’re loud, but tiny compared to the rest of the population. There’s a reason the Westboro Baptist Church has fewer members than Lorena Bobbitt’s exes; it’s because nobody wants to associate with those assholes! That keeps them small, manageable, and easy to track. And the best part? You don’t have to steal donations to do it! Just let them play badass on their own property and crack ’em in the skulls if they get out of hand. Knowing a whole group of people is going to whup your ass if you decide to get froggy is a pretty good deterrent. At worst, you might have to spring for a few cases of beer afterwards, so it’s more cost-effective than the SPLC.
That’s not to say the SPLC is doomed. That’s for the courts to decide. But even some of the most vigorous and faithful servants have to be asking themselves “Are we the bad guys?” And the answer is yes, yes you are. Whatever good you’ve done in the past is going to be overshadowed by the bullshit you’ve perpetuated in the name of keeping the SPLC relevant and funded. Well, you might be neither after the legal process does its thing and exposes you as frauds.
But look on the bright side. You could be Eric Swalwell.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If this past week had a theme song, it would be “Another One Bites the Dust” by Queen. Not only is it a damn awesome tune, but it applies so well to soon-to-be-former Representative Eric Fartsmell…I mean Swalwell. He went from being a front-runner for Governor of California to being the punchline to the biggest political joke since Anthony “Let Me Show You My” Weiner.
With Swalwell’s well-deserved exit from the gubernatorial race, new eyes are taking a second (and maybe even a first) look at who’s in the running. And it’s given me a reason to write about it this week!
California gubernatorial race
What the Left thinks it means – a competitive race for one of the biggest states in the country
What it really means – a freak show trying to be the political equivalent of valedictorian of summer school
As of March 26th, California had 61 certified gubernatorial candidates on the ballot pending the results of the June 2nd primary where the top 2 move on to the lightning round, also known as Election Day. And you thought eliminations on “Hell’s Kitchen” were brutal!
Due to the way California does its gubernatorial race, it’s always a shitstorm, especially if it rains in San Francisco. I have to admit there’s a simplicity to their process, but sixty-fucking-one candidates? It might be easier to count up the number of people not running for Governor.
Of the 61 contenders, 24 are Democrats, which is close to 40% of the field. Because if you like your shithole state, you can keep your shithole state by electing more of the idiots that made it that way.
Now, now, that’s a little harsh on my part, so I apologize. I’m sure there are some fine people with a different ideology than your humble blogger that want to make California as good as they can. Unfortunately, they’re going to be run out of the race by standard Leftist assholes like Katie Porter, Tom Steyer, and Xavier Becerra. And if Fartsmell…I mean Swalwell hadn’t dropped out, he would have been in the running still. Good fucking luck, kids.
On the Republican side, we have 12 candidates, but the only 2 who seem to have any momentum are Steve Hilton and Chad Bianco. The former was with Fox News for a time as well as a political advisor in England, and the latter is the sheriff of Riverside County. Both have expressed support for President Donald Trump, which makes them less popular in California than having a job.
That leaves 25 candidates including a Libertarian, a member of the Peace and Freedom Party, and the rest being from that new political party, No Party Preference. That’s 23 candidates, almost as many as the Democrats.
Okay, maybe it’s me, but when you have that many candidates not wanting to align themselves with a particular party, that’s a bad fucking sign. Granted, you can’t swing a dead cat and not hit a Democrat in California, but when there are enough people who say “I’d rather be unaffiliated than be a Democrat” that’s a sign your major party is fucking up!
And if that’s not bad enough for the Democrats, Leftists are worried that…a Republican might get a chance to be Governor! And with recent polling data, they have every right to be. At this rate, Democrats may be lucky to lose, but something tells me a Democrat will get one if not both of the spots, mainly because the voters believe any Democrat will do a better job at keeping California the fucked up anti-utopia it currently is than anyone else. And considering these are the same dumbfucks who elected Eric Fartsmell…Swalwell in the first place and would have voted for him again if his sexual scandals didn’t get exposed, there is a non-zero chance a Democrat will find a way to get to the finals.
I was thinking of doing a Extremist Makeover about the California gubernatorial race, but there’s a problem: there’s no fucking way I can fix it. The only thing I can say is I’m glad I’m not a registered voter out there. Not only would I have to find the least horrible candidate, but there’s a good chance I’d get taxed for it.
If you’re in California and you’re reading this, I’m sorry. Try to find a way out soon.
_____________________________________________
Follow this blog on Mastodon or the Fediverse to receive updates directly in your feed.
Something About Everything
a Blog about Faith, Politics, Technology, and everything.
541 posts
2 followers
Fediverse Followers
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Although it’s still a fairly recent series of events, we’ve already seen some weird shit surrounding the situation in Iran. After months of saying President Donald Trump wouldn’t do anything about Iran, Leftists woke up to find the President posting on Truth Social threatening to bomb Iran into the Stone Age, which would actually be an upgrade for them. This got their collectivist panties in a bunch and tried to say the President threatened genocide, which is a war crime.
So, saying you’re going to destroy a civilization that wants us dead without actually doing it is horrible?
Anyway, while the Left was trying to get another No Kings protest march organized, the US and Iran agreed to a two-week ceasefire. Of course, the Left was overjoyed because it allowed them to resurrect one of their favorite acronyms: TACO, which stands for Trump Always Chickens Out.
So, Trump was a war criminal for threatening to attack Iran, but not that he’s not, he’s a coward?
Folks, don’t try to figure out the Left’s logic here because there isn’t any. Instead, sit back and enjoy a deep dive into a shallow concept.
TACO
What the Left thinks it means – a way to mock the President for never following through on his grandiose threats
What it really means – a half-baked concept popular only within Leftist circles
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again because otherwise this is going to be a short Lexicon entry: Leftists are masters at using language to further their goals. It doesn’t hurt that they have the bulk of the media willing to do their bidding, mind you, but you get the idea.
The concept of TACO came into being in May 2025 when Leftists started mocking President Trump for his habit of making threats and then backing down. They went so far as to offer free tacos near Republican National Committee Headquarters. As you might expect, it went over as well as Bill Cosby Appreciation Night at a NOW conference.
Just a quick safety tip: stay away from the pudding.
With the predictability of a Hannah Gadsby comedy special being unfunny, the Left recycled this bad idea to criticize his words against Iran. But unlike last time, there’s been some pushback from Democrat politicians who took a more realistic, but still critical, approach. When you lose members of your own side…
Not that it’s going to stop the usual dumbasses from making political hay out of this turn of events, mind you. The Left thinks TACO has staying power, so they’ll keep using it whenever they think it will make Trump look indecisive and/or cowardly.
It’s at this point I feel obligated to step in and give some advice to our Leftist fiends…I mean friends. Quit while you’re still behind. This TACO shit isn’t working. Oh, sure, it’s good for a laugh with your hivemind mates, but it’s not resonating with anyone else.
Not to mention, it makes no sense given how you were telling everyone Trump was going to commit genocide. If you knew he was going to chicken out, why go to the trouble of pissing yourselves in terror?
Simple. They wanted to create a no-win situation for Trump.
In the Leftist hivemind, Trump couldn’t win. If he bombed Iran as he said, he would be guilty of war crimes (according to them) and be subject to expulsion via the 25th Amendment. If he didn’t, they could say he was too much of a coward to go through with it.
Then, Trump announced a temporary ceasefire. That kinda put a kink in the Left’s Kobayashi Maru and left them looking like Kobayashi Maroons in the process. Then again, this was utterly predictable from the people who cheered when President Barack Obama gave pallets of cash to Iran with the understanding they wouldn’t use it to develop nuclear weapons, but not doing jack shit to ensure they wouldn’t. In spite of their protestations to the contrary, Leftists are dumbasses when it comes to foreign policy. And domestic policy. And economic policy. And environmental policy.
Come to think of it, are Leftists good at anything other than being utterly wrong all the time?
As it turns out, they’re great at reanimating the corpse of ideas that didn’t work the first time around. At least they believe in recycling.
The problem is TACO isn’t worth reanimating. It’s possible to criticize the President’s Iran policy (which seems to be “blow up their shit and let God sort out the oil rights”) without a) using an acronym that doesn’t move the needle, b) being devoid of any legitimate criticism, and c) making yourselves look like assholes.
It should be self-evident, but since it’s Leftists we’re dealing with here, I have to spell it out for them. Being reflexively anti-Trump isn’t a policy, let alone a winning one. Whenever you define yourself by what your opponent is doing, you’re telling potential voters “we got nothing.” You actually have to stand for something other than not liking what the other guy/gal (still 2 genders, kids) wants to do.
Let me put it this way. A dude who had a stroke has become the sanest one in your party, and you want to get rid of him. How’d that work out for you in 2024?
Considering we don’t have President Queen Kamala the Appointed, that should give you the answer.
And TACO ain’t going to make the midterms turn out any better. Although traditionally the party out of Presidency picks up seats in midterm elections, it hasn’t always been a done deal. Only at times when voters feel the President has royally screwed the pooch does that happen and in recent years, it seems voters are okay enough with the way President Trump handles things to give Republicans another shot at Congressional leadership, even though it’s been as successful as a wet t-shirt contest in Amish country.
Maybe it’s time to let TACO go. You could always switch things up and try some other food. I know! Chinese food!
Oooh. Sorry, Representative Swalwell. Too soon?
____________________________________________
Follow this blog on Mastodon or the Fediverse to receive updates directly in your feed.
Something About Everything
a Blog about Faith, Politics, Technology, and everything.
541 posts
2 followers
Fediverse Followers
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Say what you will about the man (and believe me I have), President Donald Trump has impacted the world on many levels, not the least of which being modern journalism. From the first utterance of “You’re fake news,” it was clear Trump was not going to be as cozy with the press as previous Presidents had been.
You know, when they weren’t calling Republicans Nazis, that is.
After the 2024 election, you could tell things were starting to shift. Almost a decade of parroting everything anti-Trump netted the media popularity and trust lower than that of used car salesmen. And to you used car salesmen reading this, I apologize to you for comparing you to the press.
Lately, this shift towards more balance reporting has the Leftists in the media (but, I repeat myself) fretting about “partisan hacks” taking over newsrooms, which means it gives me a chance to dive back into the muck that is modern news media. So, yay, I guess?
partisan hacks
What the Left thinks it means – conservatives skewing hard news reporting so they favor Trump and the GOP
What it really means – Leftist projection writ large
To say the media have a Leftist bias is like saying Hunter Biden kinda like drugs; accurate, but not nearly as thorough as it could be. Sure, they go out of their way to set up journalistic standards to let the world know they don’t root for one side or the other, but those standards are ignored more frequently than Hunter Biden ignores drug possession, gun, and tax laws.
Yes, I know I just used a Hunter Biden reference, but it bears repeating. Much like the fact the media lean more to the Left than a runner trying to make it back to first base to avoid a pick-off maneuver. Oh, and on a related note, the Chicago Cubs have not been mathematically eliminated from the post season as of this writing, but give it a week.
The Left’s control over the media lasted over a week and stretched into, oh, decades. You couldn’t swing a dead cat in media circles without hitting a Leftist, although I wouldn’t recommend it because it’s a dead fucking cat. Anyone to the right of Leon Trotsky was kept more in the closet than a gay agoraphobic hermit dodging an IRS audit. That meant only the Left’s position got promoted and anything outside of that was mocked as absurd because, to the ones in power, it was.
Even after conservative voices started being heard through talk radio, Fox News, and the Internet, the Left couldn’t give up the power it had amassed being the only voice in town. Soon, the powers that be decided to no longer hide the fact they were DNC stenographers with bylines, but openly embrace it. And if you thought reporting sucked before then, you were in for an unpleasant surprise, like having several root canals without anesthesia while Dylan Mulvaney recreates every episode of “Days of Girlhood” as it’s happening.
Oh, and your dentist? The Marquis de Sade.
With their grip on the narrative tighter than a little black dress made out of cling wrap, the Left made sure only their side got the prime gigs. And that, boys and girls, is how Taylor Lorenz still has a job in the media. This level of gatekeeping not only created a nearly impregnable echo chamber, but also an environment where they got to call the shots on what is considered “real journalism,” which was filtered down into journalism schools to create a never-ending pipeline of Leftist parrots wiling to squawk back the talking point of the day to fit in and maybe get invited to parties where other Leftists gathered to squawk back the talking point of the day.
It’s like Hell with a cash bar.
The problem with this, aside from having to hang out with Leftists for any length of time, is the gatekeepers strayed too far from what journalism actually is. During my lifetime on this planet, I saw the press go from the Fourth Estate questioning everything and tracking down the truth to being lapdogs for a President whose mental capacity was more diminished than Joe Biden’s. Which is really bad considering the President they were being lapdogs for was Joe Biden.
That’s why the media’s fear of “partisan hacks” taking over newsrooms and cable news outlets rings hollow to me. The partisan hacks were already there, and they lack even a scintilla of self awareness necessary to make the connection. Of course, they’ll come back and talk about journalistic integrity and standards they have to follow, but it’s all an act. If I had to choose between a room full of monkeys with typewriters and the entire MSNOW organization as to who could produce a straight news piece first, I’d go with the monkeys. Not only would they be more likely to accomplish the goal, but the room would be less covered in shit.
That’s not to say some news sources aren’t trying to right the journalistic ship. Prior to the 2024 election, the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post both declined to endorse a Presidential candidate, which pissed off a lot of Leftists, partially because they felt the newspapers should have endorsed Queen Kamala the Appointed, and partially because they realized they were still paying for a subscription to the Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post. More recently, CBS hired Bari Weiss to oversee their news division, which pissed off Leftists even more. Even the Leftist-friendly CNN made editorial changes to try to be closer to the political center, which pissed off Leftists.
Hmmm…there seems to be a pattern forming. First, Leftists getting pissed, although to be fair that’s their natural state. More important is their reaction to even a slight move towards the center (i.e. where journalism should be). This goes back to how Leftists hate to lose control of the narrative. Once you attempt to get a neutral view, the Left loses the power to get you to think the way they do. Then, you might…dare I say it…make up your own mind once you find out how full of shit the Left is!
That’s why the Left is trying so hard to get people to believe any attempt to reestablish journalistic neutrality threatens the profession as a whole. And the best way to do that? Call anyone involved a partisan hack. Well, from where I sit (in my comfy recliner in the living room as it turns out), the real partisan hacks are the ones bitching about partisan hacks taking over newsrooms. To borrow a line from “Send In the Clowns” (as perfect a song as any given the subject matter), “Don’t bother. They’re here.”
Instead of being introspective and realizing the role they’ve had in fostering a healthy distrust of the media, Leftists prefer poisoning the well, posting public temper tantrums that make most toddlers look like Solomon, and cheering when things go south. But let me put a finer point on this. The Left want you to get only one side of any story, even if that side is more out of step with reality than Jasmine Crockett on an acid trip. And they will stop at nothing to prevent you from being fully informed. Instead of doubling, tripling, and quadrupling down on their positions, maybe they should look back at what happened with Nick Sandmann when the Left decided to spin a narrative.
And I’m sure he’ll get back to you once he’s done counting the money he got from you motherfuckers.
______________________________________________
Follow this blog on Mastodon or the Fediverse to receive updates directly in your feed.
Something About Everything
a Blog about Faith, Politics, Technology, and everything.
541 posts
2 followers
Fediverse Followers
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Scandal and politics go hand in hand like Dylan Mulvaney and the world’s worst Audrey Hepburn from “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” impersonator. Some, like the Somali fraud in Minnesota, are pretty substantial. Others…well, let’s just say they’re fucking stupid and should be mocked.
This week, Secretary of War (because Secretary of Killing the Enemy and Breaking Their Shit was too long to put on a t-shirt) Pete Hegseth found himself at the center of a controversy over…and I wish I were making this up…surf and turf. Seems Pete’s been going on a spending spree to the tune of $93.4 billion, including $15.1 million on ribeyes, $2 million on Alaskan king crab, over $7.4 million a month on lobster tails, and other items ranging from Apple products to a piano.
Now, Leftists who normally wouldn’t give one-one-millionth of a shit about spending are up in arms about it! Of course, the usual suspects like Senator Adam “I’m the Love Child of a Human Woman and a Galapagos Tortoise” Schiff, Jasmine “Stacey Abrams 2.0” Crockett, and Adam “Temu Adam Schiff” Kinzinger rushed to social media to lambast the spending, calling it a waste of taxpayer funds from the Administration that gave us DOGE.
Guess which kind of scandal I’m putting Lobstergate in.
Lobstergate
What the Left thinks it means – a waste of money for extravagant luxury items
What it really means – an opportunity for the Left to take all the seats
When it comes to government spending, I’m very much like my idol and spirit animal Ron Swanson. Government is too damn big, so trimming the fat with a chainsaw seems like a good first step. Naturally, when I saw the price tag and what the money was being spent on, my first instinct was to complain. Then, my second instinct was to take a whiz because I had drunk a lot of adult beverages just an hour before.
Eventually, though, the rational side of my mind (or at least the side that can at least appear rational to the untrained eye) started looking into the specifics. I started with the steak because, well, steak. In September 2025, the Department of War spent $22 million on steak and lobster, which makes for one hell of a cookout.
Now, those who know a thing or two about financial matters might take note of the month where this money was spent. For those of you who don’t (or who are Leftists, which is pretty much the same thing), September marks the end of the fiscal year, which in government circles means spend as much as you can even if you’re not going to lose it if it isn’t spent. That adds some perspective to the Leftists’ bullshit.
And, as the MAGA Right will tell you, the steak and lobster didn’t go to Pistol-Packin’-Pete. It was given to…our military, as it has been done repeatedly in the past. Given the state of MREs (famously called Meals Refused by Ethiopians per the late great P. J. O’Rourke), I can excuse splurging on surf and turf because a famous man once said, “an army travels on its belly.”
And that man? You guessed it, Frank Stallone.
Aside from the steak and seafood, something else that caught my eye was the $98,329 grand piano. And that’s not all! Once you drill down to some of the more…bizarre expenditures, it gets harder and harder to justify.
Welcome to government accounting 101, where the budgets are made up and fiscal responsibility doesn’t matter.
And before you go off saying this reporting is from a Soros-funded think tank, I decided to take a closer look at the organization that reported on the extravagant spending under Hegseth’s watch, a little group the kids like to call Open the Books. To put it simply, they were DOGE before DOGE was a thing. Unless Uncle George has gone into funding fiscal conservative groups (which given what bullshit he’s thrown his money towards is highly unlikely), these are some of the “good guys.”
I’ve long been a proponent of reining in excessive and stupid spending, and Lobstergate has a mix of understandable yet excessive spending and drunken sailors on shore leave have more fiscal restraint spending. This is the nature of federal government for most of my life: spend now, figure it out later. Regardless of which major party holds the purse strings, we constantly find out about expensive toilet seats and promoting pineapple juice, but we never do anything about it as voters. Even when politicians tell us they want to cut spending, it never fucking happens.
A big part of this is the “spend it or lose it” mentality within the government. In order to justify spending more next year, bureaucrats and politicians find ways to spend money before the end of the fiscal year showing they really need all that extra money next year. After all, we can’t expect our fighting men and women to be at their best if we don’t spend billions of dollars on furniture, can we?
Actually, I’m pretty sure we can. Last time I checked, a credenza can’t shoot worth a shit. Maybe it’s because, well, it’s a piece of fucking furniture.
One of the things I will always go on record in criticizing with the Trump Administration is the number of unforced errors they make on the regular. This is one of them. And, yes, I know it’s business as usual in DC, but from the jump the current Trump Administration focused on cutting waste. Lobstergate doesn’t help that image and makes the President seem as two-faced as the Swamp creatures he ran against.
This almost gives the Left a W here. I say almost because they’re not much better at fiscal responsibility as Republicans have been in recent decades. In no way does it excuse the Right, but it puts their critiques into context. They’re just anti-Trump at this point, so even if he does something they approved in the past, it’s horrible.
Yeah, you’re not beating the charges of being flaming hypocrites anytime soon, kids.
And you should really take a seat. In fact, take all the seats. After the Obamacare debacle, you should never be considered credible by anyone with two working brain cells. I mean, you guys kept parroting Paul Krugman’s bullshit and he’s as reliable as Miss Cleo hooked up to a lie detector. You’re just not good at economics, and it shows.
Meanwhile, Lobstergate is more about government spending than it is about the Left/Right debate, mainly because both sides are horrible at staying within a budget, or passing one for that matter. The national debt is an ongoing concern, and reckless spending on last minute items isn’t the way to address it. Just ask anyone who racks up a huge credit card bill over the holidays.
Instead, let me propose an idea that’s worked everywhere it’s been tried: if you don’t need it, don’t spend money on it. Sure, you may lose money next fiscal year because you didn’t use up everything you received this year, but when the national debt is higher than Hunter Biden at Crack-A-Palooza, it’s more important to make the money stretch farther than to secure more money for grand pianos and Sesame Street in Iraq.
Trust the free market on this, kids. If there’s a need, it will be filled as soon as someone finds a way to make money off it. And I’m not talking Congresscritters here. If there is a demand for a good or service, government doesn’t have to step in and fill it; a smart businessperson will step up and do it. Then, he or she will have to pay taxes on that investment, so you’ll get your money, just not deposited directly into your pockets like you normally get it. Government intervention in creating demand never works out well in the end, especially when you consider most politicians and bureaucrats wouldn’t know a ROI from a DUI.
The difference? Government types get a lot more of the latter on our tax dollars than they do the former.
_______________________________________________
Follow this blog on Mastodon or the Fediverse to receive updates directly in your feed.
Something About Everything
a Blog about Faith, Politics, Technology, and everything.
541 posts
2 followers