Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As hard as it may be to believe, I try to vary my subject matter for the Leftist Lexicon because I owe it to you, the readers. I mean, there are only so many times I can say “Joe Biden fucked up” before it gets stale and you start looking for other content. That’s why I stopped paying attention to a lot of media: too much echo, if you know what I mean.

And speaking of echo chambers, public schools are being turned into one such chamber, thanks to generous involuntary donations from taxpayers like you. At least, that was until recently when several parents looked into what was being taught at their children’s schools and lodged complaints. In response, the Left started targeting such parents for ridicule and harassment for daring to exert what they’ve derisively called parents’ rights. Even though Joe Biden sucks more than a Dyson at the center of a black hole, we can put off that discussion for a while to focus on this issue.

parents’ rights

What the Left thinks it means – a movement by uneducated/uninformed parents designed to undermine public education and prevent progress

What it really means – a movement by parents who are taking an active interest in public education

I know being a public school teacher isn’t an easy job because I went to public school and I know what kind of fresh hell awaits each new school year. Combined with long hours, lack of gratitude for putting up with the little hellions parents send their way, the lack of pay, and bureaucratic bullshit, it’s a wonder there are still people willing to be teachers anym0re. And in the nearly 35 years since I graduated, things have only gotten worse. And I’m not just talking about teenage boys addicted to Axe Body Spray, either!

Something that hasn’t changed is the ideological leanings of most teachers. They tend to lean to the left more than a baseball player trying to predict when the other team is going to try to pick him off at first base. The thing is they’ve gotten bolder or less able (or willing) to hide those leanings. Hell, there are even teachers who post videos bragging about how they’re indoctrinating students into thinking like a Leftist. Just like Jeffrey Epstein, Leftists prefer younger targets.

Too soon?

For a number of decades, the Left has had free rein in this practice due in large part to a little legal term called in loco parentis, which means “In Crazy Parents” in Latin. Actually, it means “in place of a parent.” Under this concept, teachers act as parents while the students’ actual parents are off at work, at home, or in some cases heading out to get a pack of smokes and not returning even after three years. When used responsibly, it can reinforce parental and societal expectations about how to be a good citizen. When abused, it can create friction between parents and children in the name of ideological progress.

And Leftists have been treating in loco parentis like Ike treated Tina.

Now that actual parents are starting to look at what pretend parents are doing, there’s a King Kong sized monkey wrench in the Left’s plans. And in their usual intelligent and mature way, the Left decided the way to address the problem is to…go after the parents.

Because they’re that fucking brilliant. And by brilliant, I mean stupid.

But it’s all in line with Leftist thinking. There are a couple of ideas at work here. First, the Left feels everyone should be a ward of the State in one form or another. Anything the Left can make mandatory under the watchful eye of the State (i.e. them), the better it is for them, so they strive to make everything possible a function of the government. You know, like…oh I don’t know…public education.

As a result of this, it feeds into another Leftist idea: they are the smartest people in any room. That means, surprise surprise, they think they know what’s best for us. And anyone who doesn’t agree with them is automatically stupidheaded assfaces, which means the stupidheaded assfaces are fair game for ridicule, derision, and all around dickish behavior. It also opens up the Left’s playbook to rely on a logical fallacy called appeal to authority. Basically, it’s “because X said so” with X being anyone the Left thinks is an expert on the subject matter at hand. In this case, teachers.

This is where the Left gets it exactly wrong. Parents may not have the educational pedigree of a teacher, but they do still teach. In fact, for the first 3-5 years of a child’s life, it’s the parents who lay the groundwork for teachers to do their jobs. Assuming teachers will do a better job than parents is a fool’s errand because a) kids will always remember what their parents teach them, and b) a lot of today’s teachers suck ass. And unfortunately I can only vouch for about 85% of teachers taking that figuratively.

Therein lies the issue. Teachers and parents have to work together to get the best outcomes for the students. When there is friction, like, say…oh I don’t know…calling parents’ rights racist and ignorant…the end result isn’t good for anyone, least of all the students. That’s where the Left goes astray on this issue. Instead of welcoming parents as they take an active interest in their children’s education, the Left wants to keep curricula hidden behind a bureaucratic barrier so parents can’t find out what their children are learning, if anything at all.

Now, here’s where the Left’s educational plans backfire. Without transparency, Leftist parents won’t know what their children are learning and, thus, can’t supplement that learning with in-home lessons. And as with most families, what you learn in the home is often more powerful than what you learn in the classroom.

The Left can’t accept parents’ rights as legitimate because it permits people other than them to have a say in a lesson plan. When your future relies heavily on recruiting young ones, excluding the parents makes it tougher to accomplish that goal. So, great going, Leftists!

As for the parents on the forefront of the parents’ rights movement, make sure you’re ready to fight for a while. Not only will the Left not give ground easily, but if your entire fight is limited to schools not teaching one subject like CRT, you’re going to ultimately give up your children to the Leftist machine. Yes, I’m talking about making an active investment in your children beyond buying them phones and video games. Taking interest in your children’s studies helps to form bonds that transcend the classroom and you might even learn a thing or to in the process. That’s how Common Core “math” got uncovered, after all.

I know parents’ rights aren’t as sexy a topic as saying Joe Biden is a fuck-up, but they’re monumentally important nonetheless. If you believe the children are our future, it’s up to you to be a good role model and fighter for the best education they can get.

Either that or you’re listening to too much Whitney Houston.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Life is full of choices. What do you want for dinner? What car should I buy next? Ginger or Mary Ann? Well, thanks to the Left, we now have another choice.

We can have a filibuster in the US Senate, or we can have democracy.

This choice came about due to Leftists attempting to push through voting reforms, but ran into a little snag called Senate rules. To sway public opinion, Leftists are now saying we cannot preserve both democracy and the filibuster in the Senate.

Of course, there’s a bit more to the story. And by a bit, I mean a whole fucking lot.

democracy or the filibuster

What the Left thinks it means – the decision between making it easier for people to vote and retaining a Senate rule that doesn’t make sense

What it really means – a false choice between something we don’t have and something the Left doesn’t like right now

Let’s deal with the elephant in the room first: we are not a democracy and never have been. We are a constitutional republic. Granted, we’ve been using democracy and republic interchangeably, but there are clear differences that prevent the two from being synonyms. First, they’re spelled differently. Second, and probably more important, a democracy doesn’t require electing officials because the people have the power to decide the outcome of matters. A republic does.

Granted, Leftists are going to say this is a semantic difference, but it’s really not. It’s like saying a chihuahua and an elephant are the same because they’re both four-legged animals. But, as anyone who has tried to housebreak an elephant will tell you, they’re not the same. Regardless, the fact remains we don’t have a democracy, thus half of the choice is false on its face. You know, like Nancy Pelosi’s face?

The other half of the decision is a lot less technical, but no less important to understand and appreciate. The best way to describe it is a higher threshold than a simple majority and it’s usually reserved for matters of high importance. That way a crackpot majority can’t ram through self-serving laws merely by having a few more crackpots than the opposition. It’s a useful tool for the minority party in the Senate because the mere threat of one is often enough to take a piece of legislation back to the negotiating table.

Of course, that happening these days is rarer than how Dracula takes his steak. Neither major party has been able to count on having the minimum 60 votes to overcome a filibuster threat for several years now, but instead of trying to craft actual bipartisan legislation, they dig in deeper and get nothing done.

Which is fine by me, by the way.

But it’s not fine by Leftists. They have big plans to turn America into the socialist shithole like they’ve always wanted. Due to the current makeup of the Senate, Democrats have 48 seats and Republicans have 50 seats, with two Independent Senators caucusing with the Democrats. To force a tie, every Democrat and the two Independents have to vote in a bloc, thus allowing the President of the Senate (Vice President Kamala Harris in this case) to cast the deciding vote.

Enter Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, two Democrats who have gotten the ire of Leftists for…not wanting to get rid of the filibuster. Just remember, Leftists are free thinkers. Just ask them. But, as the saying goes, you get what you pay for. In this case, even free is too expensive.

Behind the rhetoric, there is some serious deception going on and the Left hopes you’ll forget all about it and support making the filibuster as obsolete as Ralph Northam’s future with the NAACP. For this next section, we’re going to assume the Left is correct about America being a democracy.

The first Senate filibuster in American history occurred in 1837, which means it has been in existence for 185 years. Also, Senate Democrats used or threatened a filibuster over 300 times under President Donald Trump. And it’s only become a threat to democracy now? Sorry, but I’m throwing the brown bullshit flag on this one. The only reason the Left wants us to think it’s a problem now is because they don’t get to use it like they did when Democrats were in the minority in the Senate.

It’s almost as if the Left aren’t trying to protect democracy so much as they’re trying to protect Democrat-acy.

Now that we’ve entertained the Left’s “America is a democracy” fantasy, we must go back and deal with the real world. One of the reasons the Left is hellbent for leather to get rid of the filibuster is because they claim Republicans will get rid of it when they’re in the majority. Even though…they didn’t. In fact, Mitch “Old Age Mutant Senator Turtle” McConnell bucked President Trump when the latter wanted the Senate to do away with it. And to date, Republicans have not attempted to eliminate the filibuster, although they did render it toothless when it came to judicial nominees. Still, a weakened filibuster under certain conditions isn’t the same as eliminating it altogether, which is what the Left wants now.

But as many a Leftist has yet to fully understand, political power is always in flux. Democrats may control the Senate now, but they may not after Election Day. The very thing they want to eliminate will become another tool to use when they’re out of power. Then, I guarantee Leftists will sing a totally different tune. How can I be so sure?

Because New York Senator Chuck “Amy’s Funnier Relative” Schumer sang that tune a few years ago when he defended the filibuster. If you doubt me, look up Senator Tom Cotton’s recent speech in the Senate where he quoted Sen. Schumer directly. The only thing consistent about the Left is their inconsistency, that’s for sure.

Although I see a need to reform the filibuster, it’s not the existential threat the Left makes it out to be. It’s a safeguard against bad decisions, of which there are plenty in Washington, DC, like the effort to get rid of it. Funny how that works, isn’t it?

There is no choice between democracy and the filibuster to be had. Since we don’t have the former, we can keep the latter with no issues.

Except for Leftists, who don’t have issues so much as subscriptions.


Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

In case you were wondering what holiday follows New Year’s this year, it’s not MLK Day; it’s 1/6 Day.

Over the past year, Leftists have made so much hay over what happened a year ago they can keep John Kerry fed for the winter. While most Americans have put 1/6 in the past, the Left made it a focal point for a good chunk of their rhetoric since it happened, whether it be calling the protesters “domestic terrorists” or lamenting how close we came to “the end of democracy.”

Eat up, Mr. Kerry. And while you’re eating, let me give you something to read.

1/6

What the Left thinks it means – an on-going threat to our country, proof at how radical the right wing has gotten

What it really means – a date that lives in infamy only because the Left keeps resuscitating it

In the grand scheme of things, 1/6 was one of those times when some of our fellow Americans acted like a drunk uncle airing dirty laundry during a family reunion (or spilling all the iced tea, if you want to maintain the reunion imagery, or spilling all the Twisted Tea, if you want to maintain the drunk uncle imagery). These knuckleheads broke some laws and deserve punishment, no question.

Then, the Left overplayed their hand. Surprising, right? They started trying to dox anyone they could find related to the 1/6 incident, even if the people they found were literally obeying the law. On top of that, the lawful and the lawless were lumped together and called domestic terrorists. Since then, the Left has stoked fears of another 1/6 happening because…well, they haven’t really figured out the reason, but they’re sure it’s real!

If you thought “Russia Russia Russia” was overplayed, you aren’t ready for “1/6 was an act of domestic terrorism” 12-inch club remix.

Here’s the funny thing (one of several related to the topic, I assure you). What most of the 1/6 protesters did is…drumroll please…protected speech. The First Amendment covers a lot of ground, but one of the parts involves protest, i.e. redressing grievances with the government. You can disagree with the reasoning behind the rally/march/Congressional invasion, at the heart of it was an attempt to get government to answer a question about the 2020 Election. Thus, it was a legitimate form of speech, an argument the Left used throughout 2019 and 2020 to cover the riots…I mean protests related to Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, and other popular Leftist causes. However, once the line between speech and illegal activity gets crossed, the First Amendment no longer applies.

Apparently the Left hasn’t gotten the memo, but now they have, they’re applying it to the 1/6 protesters. Granted, they’re applying it wrong, but hey. Meh for effort, I guess.

While this is going on within the Beltway, most of the rest of America has moved on, which is not what the Left wants. They need us to be afraid (oh, and snitch on anyone they tell us is a threat because you don’t want QAnon people in your neighborhood, right), so they need to keep the fear cranked up to eleven because, well, it’s one higher. This, in turn, has created the steady stream of misinformation combined with an unhealthy amount of paranoia. You know, like the media do with COVID? Given how they treat the unvaccinated like a leper at a buffet, they don’t even have to change the template that much. Yay, recycling! And because of this, the Left calls themselves real patriots, but I seem to see they’re wearing kilts when they do.

This is a reference to the “No True Scotsman” logical fallacy in case you didn’t know. Basically, the No True Scotsman fallacy tries to create division by stating nobody who believes X would act or think in a certain manner. The idea is to make the undesirable person and/or idea, well, undesirable. What it does, however, is create a false standard that the “undesirable” will never be able to attain because he/she will never meet the accuser’s criteria. Kobiashi Maru, anyone?

Through this intellectual and literal dishonesty, the Left has created what they consider to be the perfect trap to snatch up people who understand what happened on 1/6 and reject the Left’s reality on the matter. But just like James T. Kirk in the aforementioned Kobiashi Maru reference, there is always a way to avoid the trap. With Kirk, it was cheating. With people like us, it’s rejecting the Left’s entire argument on its face, which is really easy to do.

I’m going to repeat what I said on the topic about a year ago, so I apologize ahead of time, but there is a major point that really needs to be reiterated to put the Left on their heels. First off, calling 1/6 an insurrection is like calling Al Gore a climate expert; the Venn Diagram shows no link between the two. The purpose of an insurrection is to overthrow the existing government, and who was President on 1/6? Donald Trump. If there was an insurrection on 1/6 and the perpetrators were Trump supporters, logic dictates the insurrectionists would be trying to overthrow the man who allegedly inspired them to try to overthrow him. Either Trump is an idiot (which would make Hillary Clinton look even worse than she already does), or the Leftist narrative is wrong at best, dishonest at worst.

Let’s just say I’m betting the house on the latter.

The more lenience you can give to the Left is the protesters tried to disrupt the duties of the Electoral College in certifying Joe Biden’s election to the Presidency. At best, the worst of the disrupters caused a slight delay in the process, and the results were certified the way the Left wanted them to be. Property damage, trespassing, vandalism? All crimes that should be prosecuted, and given how quickly it’s going, we might be celebrating a 25th anniversary of 1/6 before we get done with the legal proceedings.

And justice still won’t be done.

I’m no Trump sycophant, but I have a few questions about 1/6 that the Left don’t want answered. Which, of course, means they’re questions that should be answered, if for no other reason than to get the full picture. The events of 1/6 weren’t completely lawful, but they weren’t the 9/11-times-a-gazillion the Left wants us to believe they were. Fortunately, most people have moved on, which leaves Leftists bereft of an actual reason to continue paying attention to 1/6.

Chew on that, Mr. Kerry.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

The world of football lost a great man, as former Oakland Raiders coach, NFL commentator, and namesake of a long line of football games John Madden passed away. To those who knew him (and many more who didn’t), it was heartbreaking because we grew up watching or listening to his unique voice or playing one (or in my case, many) of his games. Losing someone so well-known is bad enough, but a handful of Leftists decided to take the opportunity of Madden’s passing to criticize his role in what they felt was racism, danger to public health, and other social ills.

That’s right, kids. The Left went after football.

Now, it’s personal.

football

What the Left thinks it means – a violent sport rife with racism, social and economic inequity, and physical harm to the players

What it really means – a violent game that represents America better than the Left does

Now, for the people reading this in another country, I’m referring to American football, not the traditional football known elsewhere. Traditional football has its own set of issues, but I won’t get into them here. Mainly because I know all about football riots and I want to keep myself from being in the center of one in the near future.

Anyway, the Left attacking football isn’t exactly new. Since Colin “I Blew a Super Bowl Win and Became a Benchwarmer and All I Got Was a Lousy Netflix Special” Kaepernick turned his floundering football career into a full time racial grifting career, the Left has has its eyes on making the National Football League into the Now Fun for Leftists league, complete with safe spaces, penalties for not using the right pronouns, and scores based on how woke a team is.

For any Leftists reading this, these are not suggestions. Do not implement them. I was kidding.

Football by its very nature is violent. The purpose of the game is to score points by getting the football from one side of the field to the other while preventing the other team from doing the same. It’s Stratego with linebackers. Yet, within the violence there is artistry and intellectualism. It’s not just men pushing and clawing at other men. It’s seeing players using their minds and bodies to their utmost for the betterment of themselves and everyone else on the team. If you really think about it (and I have since I don’t have much of a social life), isn’t that America in a nutshell? When we are at our best, America utilizes its best and brightest to advance everyone.

And that’s why Leftists hate it so much.

In the hivemind of a Leftist, America is imperfect (which it is) and can only be improved through advancing Leftist ideas (which it can’t). To that end, the Left started working on football to remake it in their own image, and in some cosmetic ways they’ve succeeded. By adopting the Black Lives Matter narrative, you can’t go a weekend without seeing “End Racism” and “Black Lives Matter” on helmets, end zones, and commercials featuring current NFL stars. Although this is praised as forward-thinking, it’s never enough for the Left. Fortunately for them, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell has a spine of Silly String and is willing to bend over to Leftist demands.

This is not to say all of the proposals being brought forward suck ass, even if the NFL is slower than Joe Biden massaging a young girl’s shoulder while he sniffs her hair in bringing them to the forefront. Within the past few years, the NFL has started taking concussions more seriously, which has been one of the major criticisms of the Leftists who used Madden’s death to scold football fans. There’s still a ways to go, but it’s not like the NFL has been stagnant as it was in the past.

But it’s still not enough for Leftists.

Regarding the racial issues brought up, football isn’t about racial bean-counting. It’s about finding the best people to play the positions. Minorities and women are finding their way onto coaching staffs and even into head coaching roles. Just like the Presidency, it’s only a matter of time before people of color and women are as common as a losing season for the Detroit Lions.

But it’s still not enough for Leftists.

Is it just me, or does anyone else see a pattern forming here? Oh, yeah, it’s that Leftists aren’t ever satisfied when you capitulate to their demands.

Although the Left’s complaints about football and John Madden’s role in the devaluation of minorities seem to come from a good place, let’s not forget these are some of the same asshats who thought housing COVID patients with the elderly was a good idea. So, needless to say, I’m taking their football complaints with an asteroid of salt. I’m half-convinced one of the reasons Leftists hate football is because they think the Electoral College has a football team.

Central to this whole matter is the Left feeling like it has to take up the cause for others. If only the players had a union…oh wait! They do! And this union has taken up the causes Leftists are just now inventing…I mean discovering. The funny thing is Leftists typically love unions, but in this case they’re discounting the players’ union altogether. Considering how many union reps happen to be black…well, it doesn’t take a genius to make the connection, so I’ll explain it slowly for the Leftists so they understand.

By disregarding the efforts of blacks to make the NFL better and assuming you speak for them makes you racist. And you can’t blame me for making that connection. These are your rules, kids, not mine.

I know the NFL has screwed a lot of conservative fans with its adoption of Leftist ideology, but it may be time to come back and help it find its way again. It’s possible to tweak the existing structure to allow for improvements while telling Leftists to go pluck a duck when they start virtue signalling on behalf of wealthy blacks. (Holy Twilight Zone, Batman!) Leave the signals on the field, Leftists, and let the players play. They are doing a lot more heavy lifting than just in the weight room, and it’s time we give them the respect they deserve and the encouragement they need to make their communities stronger. Screw politics and reward good behavior.

The funniest thing about this whole John Madden non-controversy is how quickly some Leftists condemned the man without knowing a thing about what he did to address their concerns well before Leftists decided to ruin football. Madden was a big proponent of concussion protocols back in the 1990s, featured many incredible athletes in the video games bearing his name, and understood the difficulties players face. Maybe it’s because he…you know…was a fucking coach instead of a scolding Leftist douchebag that couldn’t be bothered to do a few seconds of research on Google before spouting off?

Naaaaaaaaaah!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As much as I rail on Leftists here and elsewhere, I still consider myself a fair man. I will give credit where and when it’s due, much to the chagrin of people rooting for one party or the other. As much as it pains me to say, sometimes Leftists come up with good ideas.

Of course, what I’m about to write about isn’t one of them.

Since President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better bill is DOA in the Senate (that is Debunked On Arrival) thanks to 50 Senators and West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, Leftists have been fuming. How could one man hold up such important legislation, all the while ignoring the other fifty fucking Senators? In fact, some, including Vox senior correspondent Ian Millhiser have gone so far as to suggest the Senate needs to be reformed, if not done away with completely.

So, let’s take a trip to Washington, DC, and figure out what all the yelling’s about, shall we?

US Senate

What the Left thinks it means – a body of government with archaic rules and practices that doesn’t represent America and is full of corrupt politicians

What it really means – a body of government that political focuses on theater rather than actual progress

I’m not going to go into a deep history of the Senate because a) you probably already know it, and b) I don’t want you to fall asleep. The Reader’s Digest Condensed Version is the Founding Fathers wanted to create two bodies in the Legislative Branch to address citizens’ concerns, one designed to capture most of the concerns and draft legislation, and one designed to debate the merits (or lack thereof) of the legislation the House sends its way.

So, how’s that working out in 2021? Not so well. Due to the precarious balance of power we’ve seen in the past couple of decades, neither Democrats nor Republicans have been able to establish a secure foothold over control of the Senate for more than a few years. Thus, gridlock has become the norm. And, instead of working across the aisle to find common ground, the Senate has become a rowdy elementary school playground with expense accounts.

And it’s not much nicer outside the Beltway. Just look at Joe Manchin’s Twitter mentions. Without the confines of cordiality Senators try to maintain since the Senators might need to, you know, work together, anything goes, especially online. (On a side note, is it possible to include any more commas in one sentence?) People are emboldened to Tweet first, ask questions never, which makes them look brave to the people who agree with them and assholish to the people who disagree with them. And some of that same attitude has found its way into the Senate where you’re more likely to find civility at an ANTIFA rally than within those hallowed halls.

But just like the relative that gets drunk at the family Christmas and pukes in the flower pot, the Senate is a mess, but it’s our mess so we cut it some slack. One of the ways the Left wants to fix the mess is to add more states and, thus, add more Senators. More specifically, Leftist Senators. It’s a similar approach the Left wants to apply to the US Supreme Court as a means to increase their power base. And they both have the same flaw: the next time a Republican wins, it allows him or her to reciprocate, thus undercutting the Left’s power. Of course, Leftists are the smartest people in the room, provided the room is empty and there are no single-celled organisms present, so they haven’t figured this part out yet. I remain hopeful, though, that they’ll figure it out before the turn of the millennium or before they cause real damage to the country.

Needless to say, I’m not holding my breath waiting on the latter.

To be fair, I do agree the Senate rules need some tweaking, namely with the filibuster. In the old days, Senators actually had to stand in the well of the Senate and talk the entire time, not just threaten it to get what they wanted. Think Wendy “Abortion Barbie” Davis, but without cute shoes the Left fawn over. On the down side, it would require some Senators to talk endlessly (which they do anyway), but on the plus side it would cut down on anything actually getting done. So, six of one…

Overall, though, I feel the Senate as an institution is pretty good. It’s just the people who are currently in it that’s the problem. Adding more Senators won’t fix it and will only exacerbate it. (Of course, that’s what the Left usually wants, so it’s nothing new.) What will fix it is us being a little pickier when it comes to Senate candidates. Party politics be damned. What good is a Senator who votes the party line and yet is a blithering idiot? That’s how we got in this fucking mess in the first place! Since the Senate is supposed to be the more deliberative body, we need to be electing smarter Senators.

And, yes, that requires us to be smarter, too, so we can weed out the bullshit artists and find the deep thinkers. You may disagree or even dislike them, but we could use a few more Rand Pauls and Ted Cruzes and a lot fewer Marco Rubios and Dick Durbins because the former have the brains to think through the implications of legislation while the latter are too busy doing what their respective parties say without question. While my suggestion is the harder route, it will bring the Senate back to at least some respectability and ultimately produce better results.

If you need further encouragement, let me say one thing: Senator Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. With the way things are now, it’s a realistic possibility in our lifetimes if we’re not careful.

As for the Leftists complaining about how unfair the Senate is because California and Wyoming have the same number of Senators, we already have a body that is based on population. It’s called the House of Representatives, and given the idiots that comprise it right now, we don’t need to make another one. One is bad enough, no matter what Dick Van Patten says.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

This past week was another one rich with possible Lexicon topics, but one person dominated the week, as well as Leftist twits on Twitter. I’m speaking of Elon Musk, owner of Tesla and Space-X and recent critic of Leftist ideas. It’s the latter one that has gotten him in hot water with Leftists, namely Senator Elizabeth Warren and MSNBC host Joy Reid, who recently had some not-so-kind things to say about Musk and what they think he should be doing with his billions of dollars.

Because they’re experts on spending other people’s money, apparently.

As much fun as it appears Musk is having giving the Left the business, I’m afraid the Left is more than willing to take it from him, literally. So, while he’s still in the public eye instead of the poorhouse, let’s take a look at the man who makes Leftists froth like Cujo drinking a frothy root beer float in the middle of a bubble run.

Elon Musk

What the Left thinks it means – an evil billionaire who cheats the system and doesn’t pay his fair share in taxes

What it really means – the man who built a better mousetrap, but has people beating a path to his door…to tar and feather him

People’s reactions to success are fun to observe. Some love to see others to succeed. Others hate to see it. Still others take personal offense at someone else doing better than they are and think it’s unfair. Those who fall in the latter category tend to hate the successful with a hatred that burns hotter than a million suns.

Guess which category Leftists fall into.

On paper, Elon Musk would be a billionaire Leftists should love. He’s a big advocate of alternate fuels. He produces electric cars that people want to buy because they look cooler than a Prius. A low bar, I know, but it should be underscored anyway. He takes up (or at least used to) support Leftist ideas on climate change. He’s greener than a sea-sick leprechaun.

But it’s a different kind of green the Left cares about here. He’s broken the cardinal rule of Leftist climate change advocacy: he’s figured out how to fix the problem and make money doing it. See, Leftists don’t really want to fix climate change because it makes them too much money ginning up fear, so they prolong actually doing something about it. And no matter how much eco-weinies like the Socialist Socialite whine, the recycled aluminum can keeps getting kicked down the road, well past the numerous end times that have been predicted for decades. By the way, Leftists, the estate of Dr. Harold Camping would like a word. Something about stealing their act.

Although this chaps Leftists’ hides (Musk’s success, not the Harold Camping thing), their hatred of him stems from the wealth he’s amassed by being good at what he does, Tesla truck notwithstanding. To them, anyone else who is wealthy did so through dubious means. You know, like purposely tanking the currency of a country. No, wait, that’s George Soros, a billionaire Leftists love. So, why do Leftists hate Musk again? Oh, yeah, he’s making “too much money” and took government subsidies to help Tesla get started and grow. Normally, Leftists don’t care if you take subsidies and, in fact, encourage it. But when you use subsidies and, you know, realize the Left’s ideas are nuttier than squirrel shit, then you’re a freeloader. At least that’s what Joy Reid said, in response to Sen. Warren saying Musk isn’t “paying his fair share.”

Those statements alone were enough to get Leftist Twits…er, Twitter users up in arms. In response, Musk told the world he was paying $15 billion in taxes due to him selling shares. Maybe a little TMI, especially to people who would find fault with anything he did outside of prostrating himself before Chief Running Mouth and begging for forgiveness. And even then they wouldn’t trust him. Having said that, Musk used it as the jumping off point for a serious question Reid and Warren aren’t ready for: what constitutes someone’s fair share?

That’s when Leftist number crunchers started talking about percentages rather than actual payments because the percentages make Musk look worse, thus fitting the narrative. What the Left fails to realize here is…they’ve just made the case for a flat tax rather than the current progressive tax rate. Of course, then they’ll complain about Musk paying the same percentage as lower class people, so the tax rates have to be adjusted so people who make more have to pay more.

Which just goes to show Leftists won’t be happy no matter how you try to appease them. Oh, and they suck at math.

The thing that irks the Left the most is what Musk did is perfectly legal. He accepted federal funds and pays his taxes within the current tax oppression…I mean code. In both cases, Congress made these things possible for Musk to use to his advantage, but they’re going to wash their hands of their role in this matter and simply accuse Musk of skirting the law when he’s actually following it. And it’s easy to do because it feeds into the Left’s disdain for the wealthy (except for their wealthy donors, of course) and into feelings of jealousy we all have. It’s a perfect system.

At least, until someone decides to break it.

That’s what Musk is doing here. He’s defending himself and his business practices while letting the Elizabeth Warrens and Joy Reids of the world throw accusations at him that he’s a no-good-downright-rotten-evil-rich-guy. Although Leftists will rally behind Warren and Reid, the rest of us who are paying attention see what’s happening: Leftists are throwing anything they can think of at the wall and seeing what sticks. When you boil down their objections, they have nothing substantive. Elon Musk is a man walking the walk while they talk and talk.

And for the purpose of transparency, I admit I am an Elon Musk fan, but I liked the cut of his jib before he started to be the bane of Leftists’ existences. I’ve found him to be visionary, forward-thinking, and brilliant in the way he looks at problems. The Twitter trolling he does is just the icing on the cake. Maybe someday the Left will realize what I’ve seen and come around to my point of view. Needless to say, I’m not holding my breath.

Besides, Musk is originally from South Africa, which makes him a literal African-American. And from what I’ve heard from the Left, if you hate an African-American, you’re a racist!

Don’t look at me. I didn’t make the rules!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

There are times when current events bring back policy issues from the past. This week, Roe v Wade was a hot button topic on the Left, mainly because the Left is ginning up fear that it will be repealed by the Supreme Court. On the docket there are two cases that the Left feels will do away with a woman’s right to choose if the High Court rules in a certain way, and with three Trump-era picks on the court, they’re afraid it’s going to be a slam dunk against them.

When you really think about it (and I because I don’t have a life), the Left puts a lot of weight on the Roe decision, but there are a lot of underpinnings that make it far more controversial than it is. And when  you’re dealing with anything related to abortion, anything that adds more controversy is bad.

I promise my analysis will get better in this piece.

Roe v Wade

What the Left thinks it means – a Supreme Court decision essential to ensuring women’s rights

What it really means – a poorly-crafted Supreme Court decision with tragic implications

Before we get started, I know a number of people will dismiss this piece because I’m not a woman. It’s okay because I self-identify as one. Seriously, though, it’s frightfully easy to dismiss male opinions on abortion because of who is giving them. Maybe the Left missed the memo on this, but that’s sexism. After all, it takes two to tango, as it were, and men’s voices should be heard on the subject thanks to the fact men contribute half the chromosomes to make a baby. Until science figures out how to change the dynamic, men and women have just as much of a right to speak on the subject.

Even so, you think I’m going to get a bunch of Leftists silence me? I’m just too much of a jerk to let that happen.

At the heart of the Roe decision is a medical, philosophical, theological, logical, political, and moral question: when does life begin? For Leftists, life begins when the baby comes out of the birth canal and, thus, can be used to vote for Leftist politicians. From a physiological standpoint, life begins when the zygote is formed. Oddly enough, this is one time the Left doesn’t want us to follow the science.

On a related note, I’m going to use “baby” instead of “fetus” for the reason stated above: I’m following the science. When Leftists say it’s not a baby, they’re hard pressed to tell us what it is if not a baby. A muskox? Fairy dust? A perfectly preserved 1956 Chevrolet? So far, the best the Left has been able to come up with is it’s a bundle of cells.

Which, by the way, is technically all humans. including the Pussy Hat Brigade who want to be able to terminate some bundles of cells because…reasons.

Where the Roe decision really gets off the rails more than an Amtrak train being driven by Lindsey Lohan is in the interpretation and application of English common law. Under its direction, children in the womb received life, called quickening, at the first sign of the baby moving. (Good thing they hadn’t invented Taco Bell yet!) In other words, the baby was alive before he or she was born.

Once this point is established, it creates a domino effect on multiple levels, but most importantly in this case legally. However, the lawyers who argued in favor of a woman being able to terminate a pregnancy before birth twisted the story a bit. Instead, they claimed English common law didn’t specify it, which allowed for more flexibility. After all, if the fetus isn’t considered life, it removes a lot of the personal elements from the procedure itself.

Hmmm…I wonder why the Left would lie about English common law when it would advance their political…ohhhhhh! I get it now!

And really, this is utterly predictable, like Rep. Eric Swalwell making an asshat of himself on Twitter. Out of all the things the Left loves to politicize, sexual matters are at the top because, well, they’re immature. As much as they like to pretend they’re more sophisticated than the rest of us, the truth is the Left are like horny teenage boys at a strip club. Because of this, they look at such matters simplistically. You know, for people who claim to know all about nuance, they don’t practice it that much.

This brings us back to Roe. From the Left’s perspective, getting rid of Roe is akin to taking adult women and turning them into chattel without agency or independent thought. And that’s the Left’s gimmick! If Roe gets repealed, it leaves the decision of whether to allow abortion to the states, which takes it out of the federal scope and, thus, forces Leftists to take their loopy arguments to all 50 states. Oh, and it will force them to spend more of their/our money to get what they want. Ultimately, though, it dilutes the Left’s power to affect the change they want. Instead of clinging to a bad ruling like Linus clings to his blanket, they would actually need to do the legwork to get their agenda in place nationwide, and since there are some states who don’t take a liking to abortion, they won’t be able to force compliance with the force of judicial fiat.

Which would be fine if the Left’s talking points were anywhere accurate. According to them, legal abortion is favored by a majority of people polled, but it’s rarely brought up to a public vote. Why? Because putting it up to a vote opens it up for the measure to fail, which also means the talking points would be rendered as null and void as Chris Cuomo’s CNN contract. Talk about adding insult to injury! If you think Leftists are sensitive now, just wait until they get defeated by voters! If they do what they normally do with public referendums that don’t got their way, they will run into a hurdle, namely the fact the USSC overturned Roe. Oops.

The Left has a lot at stake with the two Supreme Court cases involving Roe v Wade, so it’s not hard to imagine they’ll pull out all the stops to win. Yet, what they win has to be balanced against what’s being lost: potential Democrat voters and Leftist foot soldiers. Although there are plenty of young people filling those roles right now, at some point there will be a drop in those numbers, either through aging, changing opinions, or simply just seeing how bat-shit insane the Left has gotten.

It strikes me as funny the Left is doggedly holding onto a Supreme Court ruling that, while flawed, is the key to their destruction (in Minecraft and other places). The longer Roe remains in place, the lower their numbers will eventually get. But to right that ship, they would need to do a 180 on Roe, which they won’t do because it would mean they’ve been wrong for 40+ years and their ego can’t take it.

Even so, as pro-life as I personally am, I have to know where my limits are. I’m not going to force someone to take my position. All I can do is make my opinions known and hope they’re persuasive enough. I urge you to take a hard look at the information that’s out there on both sides regarding Roe v Wade and be willing to do what the Left doesn’t want you to do: ask questions.

And take baths. They hate that!

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As much as I rail on Leftists, there are times when I have to facepalm because Republicans do something incredibly stupid. Republican Representative Lauren Boebert was caught on video relaying a story about a time when she shared an elevator with fellow Representative Ilhan Omar and suggested the latter was a terrorist. After a few calls for Boebert to be removed from committees because of “Islamophobia”, an apology call, and Omar hanging up on Boebert, the matter seems to be exactly where it was before we entered into this nightmare story.

With the Hatfields and McCoys looking on and saying, “Glad we weren’t this bad!”

Leftists love to call for accountability when someone outside of their bubble says or does something they feel is beyond the pale. And Republicans, being Republicans, often cave to the demands, while others point out the lack of accountability on the Left’s side. Does that mean there’s another definition of accountability the Left uses that differs from ours? Why, yes, yes it does.

accountability

What the Left thinks it means – holding people responsible when they are in the wrong

What it really means – holding some people accountable when they are in the wrong

The operative word in the definitions above is “some.” Leftists are great at demanding others be held accountable for everything from an egregious violation of social mores to getting the last McRib at the drive-thru. And to be fair, the McRibs are pretty tasty, but the point is the Left are selective in their accountability demands.

Let’s take a look at the aforementioned Representative Omar. Not that long ago, she got into a bit of hot water for making disparaging remarks about Israel. Something about Israel hypnotizing the world? Well, the Left went into defense mode (because, well, they hate Israel, too), but there was enough heat that the House of Representatives attempted to pass a resolution against Ilhan. Unfortunately, Democrats controlled the House and the resolution against Ilhan became a resolution…against Islamophobia. Not only was Ilhan spared from accountability, but the issue that prompted the resolution in the first place got lost in the shuffle.

Since then, Ilhan has made other statements just as hateful towards others without consequence, and no matter how many resolutions are introduced to condemn her, the Left still circles the wagons around her and portray her as a victim. Because…punching down or something. (Don’t look at me. I don’t get it either.)

As you might expect, this is by design. The Left’s accountability duplicity comes courtesy of our old friend, Saul Alinsky. One of his Rules for Radicals is “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” This bit of rhetorical judo allows the Left to attack Republicans and conservatives for being knuckleheads without having to hold their own knuckleheads to the same standards because their standards are different. Put another way, the Left’s double standards are their standards.

And when you point it out to them, they will either deny it, attack you for figuring it out, or divert the question. As someone who grew up with actual parents, none of these tactics actually work. All they do is make you look more guilty. Then, Leftists will try to find loopholes and technicalities to try to mitigate the damage.

Which brings us to another Leftist figure, Chris “Fredo” Cuomo of CNN. Recently, transcripts came bout showing Fredo was working with his brother Andrew Cuomo behind the scenes during a time when the latter was being accused of sexual misconduct/assault. I’ve already talked about it at length on a previous blog post, but the Reader’s Digest condensed version is Leftists don’t consider what Chris did to be that bad. Now, keep that in mind while you consider how the Left created a cottage industry around President Donald Trump’s comments about grabbing cats. (Though I’m not sure why grabbing cats would be that big a deal, unless cats is a euphemism for a part of the…ohhhhhhhh!) The Left is willing to overlook another Leftist helping a Leftist try to beat back actual sexual assault allegations, but they’ve created a cottage industry out of accusing the former President of sexual assault based on a comment?

See where I’m going with this? The Left doesn’t want accountability for anyone else but the people who work against them. As long as you’re Blue until you’re blue in the face, you can skip out of being held accountable for just about anything. Granted, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial might render that null and void, but we’ll have to wait and see on that.

But I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for Leftists to embrace actual accountability anytime soon. Their threshold of accountability ends when a Leftist says “I’m sorry.” Doesn’t matter if it’s running over a neighbor’s cat or making poor decisions that lead to the deaths of tens of thousands of elderly people. Good thing that latter one would never happen because you’d have to be a real moron to do that, right? The mere fact you regret your decisions is enough.

Except if you’re a Republican. Any mistake you make will haunt you as long as the Left has anything to say about it. I’ll bet there are parts of the Left who still distrust David Brock only because he used to be a Republican. His being an utter scumbag who lies as easily as he snorts coke, though? Not a problem!

Actually, big problem. When your standards are as fluid as the Left’s are, it may be hard to nail them down, but it’s frightfully easy to pick out when those standards are double. The fact they aren’t concerned about holding their own to a higher standard is the opening by which to weaken their arguments when they hold Republicans and conservatives to a higher standard. Having said that, we shouldn’t be willing to let conservatives and Republicans slide when they do stupid stuff because that would be playing the Left’s game. And let’s face it, they have decades of being disingenuous jaglegs, so they would beat us with experience.

Even if it hurts politically, we need to hold our own accountable. Scumbags are scumbags, regardless of whether they wear a red tie or a blue tie. Even if the Left won’t be accountable, we need to be if only to stand a little bit higher and add a bit more distance between the Left and the Right. After enough time, we’ll be far enough away that any slime trails don’t get on the carpet, and let me tell you baking soda and mineral water aren’t enough to get out those stains.

Not that I know about that, mind you.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

As those who read my work on a regular basis know (and if you do read me regularly, I’m sorry), there are some politicians who are always good for a Leftist Lexicon topic. One such politician is Senator Elizabeth Warren. Now, I won’t call her Pocahontas or Fauxcahontas as others have because I want to respect her heritage while giving her all due respect. Hence, I call her Chief Running Mouth.

Anyway, Senator Warren took to Twitter to complain about gas prices rising in spite of President Joe Biden releasing 50 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Oil Reserve in an attempt to lower gas prices. Now, what did CRM blame for the rise? OPEC nations playing hardball? China and Russia conspiring? Donald Trump? Nope! She blamed…corporate greed.

When discussing economics, corporate greed is the Left’s favorite boogeyman, and it seems to catch on every time it gets used. To understand why, we have to take a closer look at the phrase and analyze the parts. That, and to help pad out this edition of the Leftist Lexicon.

corporate greed

What the Left thinks it means – one of the major road blocks to progress and economic justice

What it really means – proof the Left doesn’t understand basic economics

Economics can seem pretty complicated, but there are some core concepts that anyone who has been to a garage sale, like, ever can understand. Which means Leftists will struggle with said concepts, but I’ll try to keep it simple so they have a chance to catch up.

Contrary to popular Leftist belief, the reason for a company or corporation to exist isn’t to pay taxes, provide jobs, and ensure every employee gets paid a living wage with full benefits, maternity leave, and any other benefit. It’s…now brace yourselves…to make money. After all, if a corporation doesn’t make money, it’s either a scam, kept afloat with taxpayer funds, or defunct. Or in the case of green energy companies during the Obama Administration, all three. And without money, companies/corporations can’t provide the laundry list of what Leftists think employees should get since that money helps keep the doors open. So, it’s in a company’s best interests to be greedy.

Where the Left gets things twisted is in thinking (if you can call it that) that greed is bad. There are aspects of greed that inspire more positive aspects of the corporate world. And there’s one that Leftists are absolutely in love with that proves this point: COVID-19 vaccines. Now, Leftists will argue Johnson & Johnson, Pfiser, and Moderna went to great lengths to get the vaccines out to people who needed it out of pure altruism, but the truth is they did it so they could make money. And when Uncle Sam is willing to push your goods without you having to spend a penny to advertise it? You would have to be an idiot to decline an unlimited source of money, most of it being pure profit.

Or a certain Senator from Massachusetts, but I repeat myself.

While Leftists complain about corporate greed on Twitter using their iPhones, they are blissfully unaware of how the capitalist sausage is made and how they’ve already bought into it by virtue of the little decisions they make. Namely, what they buy. Granted, we’re subject to the same buying decisions, but remember we’re not the ones railing against corporate greed. We bought into it, while they’re selling out to it.

And here’s the kicker: Leftists really don’t oppose corporate greed when it furthers their personal goals. Take Chief Running Mouth, for example. While she attacks oil companies for allegedly gouging customers at the gas pumps and pushes for laws prohibiting Congresscritters from direct stock purchases, she and her husband have made a tidy sum on annuities, which according to the Boston Globe includes stocks and bonds. Even though they’re indirectly stockholders, they’re still stockholders, and their fortune, at least in part, is reliant upon the very corporate greed she says she opposes. Amazing how that works, isn’t it?

Oh, but it gets better! She also got campaign contributions from Apple, Google, and other big-name companies, including the ones she rails against for…wait for it…corporate greed.

And, as you might have guessed, this is by design. By creating a faceless beast in corporate America, the Left has ginned up fear and hatred of any big company who wants to make a profit. Granted, some companies abuse this notion (I’m looking right at you, Wells Fargo), but Leftists never come out and tell us how much they feel companies should be willing to give up to keep the doors open. I know they don’t have an exact figure, but I guarantee whatever it is they calculate, it will never be enough because Leftists think all money is finite. If someone gets rich off building a better mousetrap (personally, I prefer napalm, but that’s just me), they think that wealth comes at the expense of someone else, and they want people to feel they’re the ones getting screwed. Then, people like Chief Running Mouth come along and say they want to take on corporate greed and win one for the little guy.

As of this writing, that hasn’t happened yet, but the promises to do something keep mounting and getting louder. But they need to keep the con going, so they find new ways to lambast “greedy” corporations so you feel green with envy while they continue to feel green in their back pockets from all the donations they get from the companies they attack for being greedy.

So, what happens when you realize someone else getting rich doesn’t affect you? Aside from feeling a sense of relief, it ruins the Left’s con and helps you see the Left’s ignorance in economics. No, there isn’t a greedy corporation taking money that doesn’t belong to them so they can have golden toilets, but there are a ton of greedy politicians who love to be generous with your money to ensure they get golden parachutes, and Elizabeth Warren is no different. If/when she leaves the public sector, she will have done so being as bad, if not worse, than the corporate greed she rails against.

I take that back. She will definitely be worse. After all, greedy corporations at least understand how to make a buck.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

In case you’ve been living under a rock recently (and given housing prices these days, I wouldn’t blame you if you did), there was a little trial in Kenosha, Wisconsin, where Kyle Rittenhouse faced some serious charges and was ultimately acquitted. At the heart of the trial and the situation that came before it is the concept of self-defense. Others have hashed out the various details of the case itself, so I won’t go too far into it because a) they’ve done a better job than your humble correspondent could, and b) you’ve probably heard as much, if not more, about it than I have.

With the Rittenhouse case, people on all sides have been focusing on whether what he did constitutes self-defense from a legal standpoint, but not too many have looked into the political aspect of it. That’s where I come in!

self-defense

What the Left thinks it means – an antiquated and unnecessary idea used to drive gun sales to paranoid right-wingers and gun nuts

What it really means – a principle essential to personal freedom

To put it mildly, things have gotten a little weird out there in the past couple of decades. Between Leftists LARPing as World War II vets and Trump supporters acting like, well, Trump supporters, you’re likely to find yourself in the middle of a conflict that can go pear-shaped before you can say, “Hey, isn’t that a pear?” Throw in all sorts of racial, sexual, and sociological contexts and you have a melting pot on the verge of melting down.

Such was the case in Kenosha, where protestors decided to do what the Property Brothers do, just in reverse. As you might expect, property owners (some of whom could be brothers, I suppose) didn’t like the impromptu Burning Man/Woodstock 99/any weekend with Lindsey Lohan vibe in the city. And the Kenosha police? Well, they were trying to maintain order by letting the protestors run around unopposed. Put another way, Barney Fife was Rambo next to these clowns.

Enter 17 year old Kyle Rittenhouse, a young man who lived in Illinois, but worked in Kenosha. If the stories we’ve heard are true, he was asked to help protect a business in Kenosha, but he also wanted to tend to any wounded people there if needed. (Maybe it’s me, but that doesn’t sound like a bloodthirsty killer.) It wasn’t until he felt threatened by the riot…I mean protestors that he fired his rifle. And with one guy pointing a gun at him and another smacking him with a skateboard, it’s clear his life was in danger. Regardless of whether you feel he should have been there, the fact he was attacked and didn’t fire first shows he wasn’t there to get his jollies by killing people. He felt there was no other option than to shoot and he acted accordingly to protect himself in the absence of police.

And that’s why the Left lost their shit.

To the Left, anyone who isn’t one of them is a dullard and needs to have Leftists run his or her life. The minute you show even an iota of initiative to do something yourself is the minute you become dangerous to the Left. After all, if you don’t need government to do everything for you, you won’t need…them.

Thus, the Left has taken up the cause to make bureaucracy as expansive and essential as necessary so more and more of us become wards of the state. And they’ll make it happen by any means necessary, including convincing/coercing people to comply. Whether it’s an additional charge to make a payment with a credit card over the phone or demanding people jump through flaming hoops only to have the state reject a gun permit, the Left’s goal with all of that is to make sure they have their noses in our business for no legitimate reason. Just ask Glenn Beck about the hassles he endured just trying to put up a fence on his property in the Northeast.

So, when someone decides to cut out the middle-man and pass the savings directly on to, well, himself/herself, the Left loses money and power, which makes them more than a little cranky. You see, the Left believes in self-determination so long as you abide by whatever they deem appropriate. Kyle Rittenhouse didn’t, and as a result is being held up as what’s wrong with the Right, an enemy that needs no courtesy or even an obligation to get even basic facts right. He’s an “other” just as anyone else who defies the Left.

And, as a result, Rittenhouse may get Nick Sandmann rich soon. But that’s a blog post for another time.

Self-defense is the ultimate fuck-you to the Left. After all, the Left think only the police and military should have firearms. You know, the same police that are racist and the same military that is a tool of the elites? Mind-blowing hypocrisy aside, this is to a) make it harder for people to defend themselves, and b) creating a need that only government can fulfill. The only problem with that is time. Anyone who has spent any amount of time at the DMV knows the speed of government is usually inert. No matter how quickly your need is, the police will get there when they get there and not a second sooner.

Provided they come at all or aren’t hamstrung by politicians. Anyone want to turn your community into San Francisco East? I’m gonna go out on a limb and say you don’t, but it’s the way the Left wants us to live: where the law-abiding are always the victims of the lawless. If you take up arms to protect yourself from being a victim, the Left can’t take it.

And that’s why you should do it, if you want to.

Really, it’s not a good reason why, but it’s certainly attractive. The best reason is because you have a right to be secure in your person, and if the government or its agents can’t or won’t respect that right, you shouldn’t be shamed into submission. If we take nothing else from the Kyle Rittenhouse situation, it’s that the best way to not be a victim is to understand what power you have and to never let anyone take it from you.

Oh, and that Leftists suck at keeping track of the facts of a criminal case before spewing ignorance.