It started in Maricopa County, Arizona. Republicans who suspected there might have been election irregularities in the 2020 election requested and eventually got an audit of the ballots. In the relatively short time since then, they have uncovered dealings shadier than a Nigerian Prince trying to give away his fortune via email. Then, other states started to join in the fun and Audit-A-Mania was running wild.
So wild that Colorado Secretary of State Jena “Don’t Call Me Clark” Griswold issued rules concerning audits, specifically calling out what she called “fraudits.” This echoes a Leftist sentiment getting a lot of traction these days: the audits are being done under less-than-honest means and with questionable justification.
Which means it’s a prime target for a deep dive, courtesy of the Leftist Lexicon!
fraudit
What the Left thinks it means – fraudulent audit requests from Republicans and Trump supporters designed to undermine election security
What it really means – an attempt to rewrite recent history without having to explain why their opinions have changed since 2016
Remember 2016? Why, it’s like it was five years ago…
Seriously, after the 2016 election, Leftists were up in arms about Russian collusion allegedly swaying the vote for Donald Trump. They swore up and down (both figuratively and literally) Trump was not the legitimate President of the United States and our elections were “hacked.” Sure, they could have easily figured out Hillary Clinton wasn’t a good Presidential candidate from, oh, looking back at her 2008 campaign when she crashed and burned like the Hindenburg, but no. They went with the “Trump cheated” line.
To be fair, there were irregularities in the 2016 election from both sides. Instead of using that fact to build bipartisan support for better election security, Leftists spent time and energy bitching about it and pushing a narrative they had to trump up (if you’ll pardon the pun) evidence to make quasi-believable.
And they even fucked that up.
Four years later, the same people who said our elections were fundamentally flawed when Donald Trump won now say the elections were secure and everything was fine. Yet, what changed? Nothing. In fact, most of the proposed changes to current election law have come from the Republicans with Democrats throwing in a couple of proposals that ultimately don’t deal with election security, but does have a lot to do with creating less transparency and more voters…for Democrats.
The thing is the audits put a speed bump in that process because the Left has to not only push its current agenda, but spend time and energy trying to convince people the audits are a bad idea. After all, if the audits are successful, it might get more people to look at the 2020 election as legit illegitimate. But there’s another reason, one that involves everybody’s favorite Leftist bad guy, Uncle George Soros.
After the 2000 election, Leftists were upset (as they are now), so some of them put their heads together and came up with the idea to put ideological allies into Secretary of State offices across the country. Why? Because the Secretary of State is usually the person who certifies the votes in statewide elections.
Including Presidential elections.
This effort called the Secretary of State Project received a lot of support from various Leftists. And who was one of the founding members? Uncle George himself. And who managed to wrangle up some sweet campaign cash from the Soros family?
Jena Griswold. The Colorado Secretary of State who is trying to make the case audits aren’t legit.
And the funny thing? She ran on a platform that allegedly eschewed billionaires trying to affect the outcome of elections. I’ll take “People Who Live in Glass Houses” for $800, Alex.
The big fear for Leftists, beyond not being able to hide their cheating, is people finding out about how Uncle George has been quietly pulling the strings behind the scenes for close to 20 years and possibly affecting elections. The minute an audit uncovers discrepancies, the sooner the plot gets foiled and the more likely Leftist candidates get stomped in elections because they can’t control how the votes are counted. And that, kids, puts a crimp in their ability to cheat.
Thus, the attempts to discredit the audits. If you can dismiss the validity of the need for the audits, you control the narrative and keep the status quo, which the Left has plans in place to bend even further under the guise of protecting democracy. More on that at a later time, but know the Left’s idea of protecting democracy is closer to protecting Democrats. As long as you vote for Democrats, Leftists have no problem counting your vote, even if you’re deceased and have 5 ballots sent to a single address.
However, calling the audits fraudulent only works if there isn’t a legitimate reason for them and they’re being requested to disrupt proceedings after the election. From what we’ve seen out of Maricopa County so far, I’d be hard-pressed to call them fraudulent. We’re not talking about a handful of votes impacted here; we’re dealing with thousands of votes, which can be enough to swing an election to a candidate.
Although it’s unlikely Donald Trump will be able to completely change the outcome of the 2020 election, it’s still worth the effort to ensure what we saw on Election Night is what actually happened and if it isn’t, it may be enough to inspire voters to come out in numbers large enough to overcome Leftist attempts to rig elections.
Which is what the Left has been pushing since the 2016 election, by the way.
Nobody said the Left were masters of long-term strategizing.
Tag: leftist lexicon
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If there’s one thing Leftists love to do more than spending other people’s money, it’s playing with the English language. With the advent of “cancel culture,” the Left got caught off-guard a bit, but have since rolled out a new term to describe people getting rightly called out for bad behavior, either in the past or right now. Enter Hunter Biden and a couple of emails where he used a word that can be construed as negative towards blacks. Oh, and did I mention Hunter is white?
While we wait on the Left to try to walk out of the rhetorical minefield they’ve created, let’s take a closer look at this revamp of cancel culture.
consequence culture
What the Left thinks it means – holding people accountable for bad words and actions
What it really means – cancel culture with no time limit
Although it’s nice to see the Left embracing consequences for bad actions, as opposed to trying to federally subsidize them, let’s not fool ourselves. The Left believes in consequences…for everybody else. And they are the only ones who can determine what constitutes an offense and how severe it is. But the best part? They are the only ones who can determine if someone is forgiven. That’s a pretty sweet gig if you can get it, and if it has a good dental plan.
So, where does the consequence part of consequence culture come into play? If you’re a conservative or even a libertarian like me, it always applies. Even if your only crime is not being as Leftist as the hivemind, you can be a target. Just ask Ellie Kemper. She was crowned Queen of Love and Beauty at a debutante ball in 1999 connected to the Veiled Prophet Organization. As a result, she was attacked last week on social media for participating because the group had “an unquestionably racist, sexist, and elitist past,” according to Ms. Kemper’s apology.
Here’s the issue. By the time she was part of the pageant, the group had integrated. Gone were the days of white supremacy and/or exclusivity. Ms. Kemper was punished because she won a pageant from the wrong group at a time when that group had become more racially diverse. Why they chose Ms. Kemper to attack is beyond me, but then again most Leftist thinking is beyond me these days.
So, why does Hunter “I Prefer Coke to Pepsi” Biden get a pass for being a racist and Ellie Kemper get lambasted for not being one? Well, we’d better call Saul. Alinsky, that is. In his book Rules for Radicals, Alinsky gave us 13 rules that the Left continue to use. Without going into a diatribe on all 13, the basic ideas come down to how to hurt your political enemies while ensuring your allies don’t get bored with your agenda.
One of these rules in particular strikes me as apropos in the aforementioned instances: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.” For the purposes of this sketch, the enemy is anyone who isn’t a hardcore Leftist. The key to this rule’s effectiveness comes down to appearances. If the Left wants you to think it has the power to hurt you personally, professionally, or monetarily, they will project an air of invincibility and popularity in the public circle. An example of this is their “right side of history” bullshit.
The obvious weakness with that argument, as well as their use of the Left’s version of The Art of War, is its reliance on illusion. Once you pull the curtain back and see who Oz really is, their strategy goes the way of disco. After that, the Left will only have the power you let them have. And with their ANTIFA and BLM squads LARPing as revolutionaries, the only card they have left in their deck is threat of violence. Then, it becomes a value decision: are you willing to ruin your life and the lives of your family members to hold a particular point of view?
That’s where the Left’s concept of consequence comes into play. Their goal is to silence the opposition by any means necessary. Knuckle under or be brought to heel. Of course, you could always pull a David Brock and become a rabid Leftist. Then, you can have all the coke binges, illegal firearms, and criminal activity you want. The Left will go out of their way to ensure you are protected from those mean ole conservatives! I believe the Mob has something similar. I believe it’s called…protection?
Wait. Is that what is at the heart of consequence culture? Why, yes! Yes it is! With a little help from Uncle Saul, the Left has perfected the art of the shakedown to the point Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton may want to take notes, and not C-notes for a change.
But remember what I said earlier about this approach’s fatal flaw. As long as the Left has to deceive to make their point, they are never going to argue from a position of power unless we give it to them. On top of that, the more they play fast and loose with who is eligible to be held accountable, the harder it becomes for them to argue in good faith. These two strikes alone are enough to undercut the Left, but the third strike come from us. The Left needs us to act emotionally so it plays to their strengths, but they will get thrown off if your reaction doesn’t match their expectations. Their overconfidence becomes their Achilles heel because it limits their ability to see other options besides the ones they assume will be the ones we will take. Deprive them of their actual strength and deny them the power they want you to think they have, and they are weaker than Logan Paul’s fight game.
Then, really surprise them by holding them accountable to the rules they set up for everyone else because…well…consequence culture.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Technology can be a two-edged sword at times. Whether it’s email or Twitter or Twitch, there will be a time when your past will come back to haunt you.
Just ask Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Over the past few days, a Freedom of Information Act request unleashed a torrent of emails to and from the sainted Dr. Fauci showing a less-than-flattering side to the good…ish doctor. The Left has rallied around him, even to the point of blaming those who are reporting on the emails for the controversy. Hmmm…is that gas I smell?
Either that, or it’s the smell of yet another Leftist Lexicon entry!
the Fauci emails
What the Left thinks it means – emails hyped by right wing media to discredit Dr. Fauci and his leadership
What it really means – emails that prove Dr. Fauci is not only fallible, but may be as bad as some have claimed he is
The self-professed “Party of Science” elevated Dr. Fauci to the point that anyone who questioned him was ignorant of the science, a right wing wacko, or both (because there is no difference between the two groups in their hivemind). With the emails being released, however, the Left is no longer talking about the science, but is talking at length about how the emails aren’t anything contradictory, hypocritical, or even newsworthy. And the Left is digging in using this defense.
You know who else benefited from this kind of digging in? Bill Clinton, post-Lewinski, if you know what I mean.
This is pretty standard for the Left when it comes to Leftists or Democrats found to be utter scumbags. Deny the allegations until the coverage gets too hard to ignore, then pretend like nothing’s wrong and it’s old news. For most Leftists, this works too well. Remember Hunter Biden’s laptop? I guarantee the Left does…and simultaneously doesn’t.
With Dr. Fauci, however, it’s a little harder to cover up, mainly because of the Left acting like Dr. Fauci’s hype men…uh, women…uh, non-binary individuals. Anyway, the point is the Left pushed all their chips in on Dr. Fauci early on and built a narrative around that act. Granted, it was done primarily to spite President Donald Trump, but the motivations don’t negate the action itself. You own this one, Leftists.
Not that you’ll recognize the problem you created with your Fauci worship. One of the Left’s greatest faults is they can never admit when they are wrong no matter what. Remember President Trump’s “very fine people” comment? There are Leftists who still believe he called the white supremacists “very fine people” in spite of the volumes of context and actual text that they get sent whenever the topic arises. I’m not a Trump fan by any stretch, but even I will defend him on this point. He never said what the Left accused him of saying, but that memo either never got to the Leftist drones, or it did but it was already shredded into a fine powder by the time it got to them. Either way, their reality may not be on speaking terms with actual reality.
At the heart of the Left’s defense of the Fauci emails is this very concept. I’m not going to spend a lot of time on specific items because a) so many others have already done it, b) it wouldn’t affect my opinion, and c) my family wants to see me at some point. However, I will say what I’ve seen so far has shown Fauci to be interested in his personal star rising, giving orders to others to figure out what to do, and pawning off “lesser” tasks related to COVID-19 research to others. In other words, Dr. Fauci became Joe Biden in a lab coat.
Even now, I sense Leftists are already penning missives about how wrong I am and/or how I’m a brainwashed anti-science Trump lover with the same number of teeth as IQ points. And that’s if they’re being kind. Meanwhile, the actual emails reflect a man swept up in a wave of popularity, but in over his head. If we’re supposed to “Follow the Science,” that implies the science is worth following. Even the most hardcore Fauci fan who is being honest with himself or herself or themselves has to be concerned by his words and attitude during a global pandemic. He couldn’t be bothered with some of the mundane details because he was so busy…going on TV shows to impress upon the viewing public he was in control and knew what was going on.
After his flip-flops on whether masks did anything, that’s when Faucimania died for me, and it should have been the jumping off point for the science-minded folks out there. The fact it wasn’t for so many, including the “Party of Science,” signifies how much the Left have invested in making Fauci untouchable and how scared people were of the multiple question marks COVID-19 created, which made it easier for the Left to manipulate people into believing Fauci. Fear can be a great motivator, but it requires rational thought to go on vacation to be truly effective.
Let’s just say a lot of people’s rational thought found a great deal on AirBNB and stayed away for, oh, over a year. Eventually, though, it will start coming back, and the Fauci emails will be foremost on our minds for a while because the discrepancies between his acts and words are hard to ignore. Not to mention, they make it harder to take his suggestions seriously. Then again, after he said to wear multiple masks after saying masks didn’t work, only to say he lied so there wouldn’t be a run on masks, most people paying attention tapped out.
Which leaves Leftists to carry Fauci’s water, which they are more than willing to do because to drop out now would mean admitting they were wrong. The Fonz was more willing to admit being wrong than the Left are. At this point, the Left has forgotten “Follow the Science” in favor of “Follow the Scientist.” Namely, the now-discredited Anthony Fauci. And it’s starting to look like the tide is turning against him, now that Big Tech is allowing people to mention the idea that COVID-19 was manmade or originated in a lab without getting the ban hammer. The looser those restrictions get, the bigger the trouble the Fauci emails become.
Now, if only they could do something about that Nigerian prince who keeps emailing me…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
Since the events of January 6th, the Left has demanded there be a commission set up to review what happened, not unlike the 9/11 Commission. Let me save you a few million bucks: some stupid people did stupid and illegal things, and the Left hyperventilated over it. Yet, that hasn’t stopped House Democrats from passing a bill that would set up the January 6th Commission. Instead, the Senate stopped it.
It seems like when there’s a major event like 9/11 or 1/6, the Left wants to set up commissions to “get to the bottom of it” with the hopes the findings can be used to prevent future events. Sometimes they’ll jazz it up by calling them “blue ribbon commissions,” but the principle, at least in theory, is the same. Yet, in practice…well, we’ll get to that after the obligatory Lexicon opening.
commission
What the Left thinks it means – a bipartisan group designed to look over the facts of a matter and devise proposals to prevent the matter from happening again
What it really means – an excuse to spend money to get utterly worthless results
My statement in the first paragraph about what happened 1/6 is only partially a joke, which is a higher percentage than my actual jokes, but not as big of a joke as the concept of a 1/6 Commission is. At this point, the events have been analyzed, reanalyzed, put through the various ideological spin cycles, and turned into everything but a Ken Burns documentary series on PBS. There might even be a Broadway musical, t-shirt, or sneaker deal in the process. And all with the same purpose: to squeeze out even more milk from the milked-dry cash cow that was the “insurrection.”
As much as I say more power to ‘em for trying it, the issue comes down to the use of tax dollars towards what is at this point a foregone conclusion. Nothing any commission, bipartisan or otherwise, could come up with would be shocking new information, and the suggestions they could come up with would either be common sense or an appeal for more money and bigger government. You want to know how I know this?
Check out the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission. They were about as useless as Auto Tune for Yoko Ono, only much more painful to consider.
This goes back to one of my hard and fast universal truths of life: Government isn’t in the problem-solving business. This opens up a whole slew of follow-up questions, the primary one being why we need a commission to look into anything. It’s really pretty simple: the report becomes a cudgel to use against a particular person or political ideology. With the 9/11 Commission, it was George W. Bush (even though the original warnings he was supposed to act on were more vague than a Michael Bay storyline). And with a 1/6 Commission, the target would be Donald Trump because he helps them raise money indirectly.
There is a secondary reason I’m not even sure the Left recognizes. With both houses of Congress and the White House under Democrat control, Leftists should be able to get pretty much anything they want done. All they have to do is vote along party lines and it’s pretty much a done deal. Yet, if you’ve been paying attention (and I know you have), they can’t even organize a one-car accident, let alone advance an ideological agenda. What better way to avoid having to answer questions about why the Leftist agenda has stalled worse than a Yugo in a flood than to attack a common enemy in Trump? And because Democrats hold the White House and Congress, they can initiate whatever actions they feel are necessary to take the heat off them…I mean to hold Trump accountable.
The strategy in play here works in the long term as well. To put it mildly, the Democrats are skittish about 2022 when Republicans stand to gain seats as conventional political wisdom goes. Then again, conventional political wisdom never predicted we’d be saying President Donald Trump, but that’s neither here nor there. Commissions, like the 9/11 and the proposed 1/6 ones, tend not to move that fast. They make the sloth from “Zootopia” look like the Road Runner on energy drinks. In short, this means it’s a sure bet any commission set up for the January 6th “insurrection” will take a while to start, let alone conclude, which would easily take it into 2022 and beyond where Leftists can run against Trump instead of against their actual opponents. This could easily bleed over into the 2024 Presidential election, given the glacial nature of these commissions.
The problem the Left faces here is one of their own creation. Imagine that! One of their favorite talking points about 1/6 is how everything was caught on video so we could see what happened. Yet, out of that knowledge comes…the need for a commission to look into what happened? As most Leftist ideas do, this runs smackdab in the face of logic. Why would we need to dig deeper into the matter if we all know what happened?
Unless, of course, the commission is a Trojan Horse.
Let me explain as I adjust my tinfoil conspiracy theorist hat. If this commission is to be bipartisan and true to its intent, it will have to look into every aspect of the events of 1/6. Including a certain Speaker of the House who may have made it more difficult to contain the “insurgents.” It might also have to figure out how the protesters who got inside the Capitol were inspired by Donald Trump’s January 6th speech…before he gave it. It’s these little details that always trip up the best attempts of the Left to throw shade. Granted, a 1/6 commission might not have to look too deeply into matters like these, but they would have to explain why or have their work mocked by a certain Midwestern blogger who likes to come up with weekly words the Left love to use.
Here’s where the Trojan Horse aspect comes into play. The Left knows certain parties within their midst have dirty hands and a real commission designed to investigate the Leftist narrative for factual underpinnings might stumble across how those hands got dirty in the first place. To protect those individuals, it might be necessary to appear to support a commission but not follow through on it. Of course, this will enrage the Orange Man Bad crowd, but it’s a good CYA move.
Then, there’s the Left’s recent obsession with eliminating the filibuster in the Senate. After decades of using it whenever possible, the Left has had enough of the filibuster and want to get rid of it because those evil nasty Republicans are threatening to use it to do the same thing the Left did! Who could have seen that coming, amirite? Anyway, the recent failure of the Senate to pass legislation that would create the 1/6 Commission breathed new life into the movement because the Left doesn’t like the fact they would have to get at least 60 votes to get it passed and avoid a filibuster. So, since they lost, they insist the rules need to be changed so they can win. With this defeat, the Left now has more ammunition to renew the call to remove the filibuster as an option. (Which, of course, is a bad idea, but try telling them that.)
Regardless, the idea of a 1/6 Commission may seem good and logical on the surface, but it’s a recipe for disaster, especially for those who have a genuine passion to get to the bottom of what happened. If you want to find out, do your own research. If you want to spend a lot of money and get nowhere, get a high-end treadmill. At least it will be less expensive than a government commission.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
I’ve been trying to avoid writing about this, but since the Left can’t stop talking about it for 2 microseconds, I suppose I’ll have to weigh in. After moments of tepid unrest (as opposed to the usual white hot variety), tensions between Israel and Palestine flared up, resulting in rockets being exchanged, and not in the white elephant kind of way. To put it mildly, they were putting some heat on those things.
As they typically do in situations like this, the Left has already taken sides with Palestine, with members of “The Squad” openly calling Israel an “apartheid state.” I’m sure that’s going to go over well with the white nationalists there, but that’s not important right now. What is important is the Left’s political gamble taking sides with Palestine, a gamble they’ve made before and won handily. In the grand scheme of things, does this matter?
Why, yes. Yes it does.
Palestine
What the Left thinks it means – a nation being oppressed by Israel merely for trying to get its land back
What it really means – a nation that no longer exists, due in no small part to its leaders
The biggest problem when discussing Palestine is agreeing on the basic facts that are not in play, mainly because there are so many people who disagree on them. However, there is one fact not even the staunchest of pro-Palestinian propagandists can spin away.
Palestine doesn’t exist today.
Oh, sure, they did at one time and the United Nations even recognize Palestine as a state, but that means nothing in 2021. Especially that second part. If your ace in the hole is a UN proclamation, you’re better off in admitting you got nothing. At least then you won’t have to worry about explaining away the UN’s noted anti-Israel bent. If anything, they should get bent.
The country that was once Palestine was comprised of a lot of land in the Middle East in what is now Jordan. Not Israel. Not the West Bank. Not even the Gaza Strip. Jordan. The fact Israel and Jordan are neighbors doesn’t help the situation any because they have easy access to each other and their respective populations and property. In short, this is a property line dispute with heavy artillery.
But as a former homeowner myself, I can tell you it’s hard to have a property line dispute when you don’t actually own the property. If the Palestinians had a valid claim to Israel, I would be one of the first to say so. As it stands, all they have are a UN proclamation and apparently nobody who knows how to read an ancient map. But what they do have is Leftists willing to carry their water for them. As it turns out, this is their default position on Palestine because a) they like to at least appear to support the underdog against the powerful, and b) they have a major anti-Semitism problem.
Let’s start with the first one since it’s first and all. The Left loves a good David vs. Goliath story, not because they necessarily want David to win, but because they love making Goliath look like a jerk in the process. Instead of fighting for the little guy, the Left tends to fight against the big guy because it’s easier to paint the big guy as the villain just like they did with the big banks. Of course, when it’s a big guy who agrees with them (I’m looking right at you, Jack Dorsey), the Left turns a blind eye…until it becomes convenient to throw you under the bus. Just ask Amazon.
Or we can just ask Israel. With the two terms of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and the first year of Joe Biden’s term, Israel knows full well what the Left thinks of them and how they will make nice to your face while helping the opposition. The Left has even sent political advisors to Israel to try to defeat Benjamin Netanyahu, all because he has this crazy idea that Israel should exist. That MONSTER! Out of Clinton, Obama, and Biden, only Clinton had Israel and Palestine try to work out some sort of agreement. Even when Israel was willing to give in to Palestine’s conditions, their leader at the time, Yasser Arafat walked away. Since then, the possibility of peace between the sides is more remote than a hermit at Ice Station Zero.
This is where the anti-Semitism comes into play. Yes, there are Leftist Jews who are on the “Free Palestine” bandwagon and will criticize Israel in the same breath they order brunch, but they are being used for votes and money, just like every other group the Left associates with. The Left loves the money and power the Leftist Jews give them, but nothing else beyond that. As long as the Israel-Palestine conflict continues, the Left will use it for their own ends without doing anything to help the situation.
Oh, and it should be pointed out, as the Left loves to do, the Palestinians are also Semites. So, what would you call a group of people who use the death of people they allegedly support to enhance their own political and fiscal power? Some could say they were…anti-Semites…
Amazing, but not unexpected from the Left.
Beyond that, some of the Left’s favorite hustlers…I mean figures have a history of out-and-out disdain for Israel and its people: Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Hillary Clinton, Louis Farrakhan, just to name a few. More recently, “The Squad” has shown it can flex with the best of them when it comes to attacking Israel. No matter how many times they get caught, however, the song never changes. Israel will always be bad, and Palestine will always be good. And as long as there’s money and votes to be had, the Left won’t care.
The larger question is whether Palestinians want peace. I can’t point to anything specific, but I get the feeling the majority of them do. Constant fighting without a reason to fight erodes your soul pretty fast, and the way many Palestinians have found a way to live without fighting is…by moving to Israel. Contrary to popular belief, Palestinians in Israel enjoy a modicum of power and respect so long as they don’t wreck anything. They even have a place at the table in Israel’s version of Congress, the Knesset. Hard to argue Israel is an apartheid state when they give more freedom to Palestinians than Palestine does.
And therein lies the real tragedy of it all. Palestinians really don’t have an ally on the Left, but Hamas does. That’s not an insignificant distinction to make, either. Hamas has been designated as a terrorist organization by the US and others, and currently holds all the power in Palestine. Oh, and they’re much more militant than Arafat was, and he was militant enough as it was for a guy who could pass for Ringo Starr in an off-Baghdad production of “Lawrence of Arabia.” The other option is to seek sanctuary with the ”enemy” or try to stay enough under the radar as to not attract attention. With fanatics like Hamas, though, neither option is good enough. You’re either in all the way or you’re a traitor.
Hmmm…I wonder if that attitude has anything to do with the religion Hamas members follow…naaaaaaah!
In the end, there will be more fighting, more death, and more heartache until both sides of the Palestine/Israel conflict decide enough is enough. Even then, the Left will find a way to paint Palestine as a victim instead of a participant, if only to secure more money and power for themselves. If only to try to stem the tide of eternal war (and, admittedly, make Leftists even madder than they are now), I will defend Israel’s right to exist.
And I will continue to act as an Israeli Chamber of Commerce for Palestinians looking to get out from the conflict.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If you’re a news junkie, last week was a coke-fueled Charlie Sheen-esque bender. Between the ongoing hostilities between Israel and Narnia…I mean Palestine, hackers halting production and causing a gas shortage on the East Coast, and Caitlyn Jenner being, well, Caitlyn Jenner, one man rose to the top of my list of topics to cover: Dr. Anthony Fauci.
Dr. Fauci is a divisive figure in the field of medicine, but with the Left he is a golden boy who can do no wrong. (I’ll get into the reason why later, so stay tuned.) Sure, he has his critics, but the Left is able to excuse the alleged transgressions and treat him as the most credible person on Earth regarding COVID-19. Whether the rest of us should put as much faith in him…well, let’s just say there’s enough material to craft a Leftist Lexicon entry.
Dr. Anthony Fauci
What the Left thinks it means – a world-renowned infectious disease expert, a man of science
What it really means – an indecisive medical expert who loves the limelight more than the science
I know I’m speaking heresy here, but I’ve been following Dr. Fauci’s advice about COVID-19 from the start. As a fan of science myself, I paid attention to his briefings and really tried to digest what he said. That is, of course, until the advice he gave started flying in the face, or rather mask, of common sense. At first, he said masks weren’t effective. Then, he said they were. Now, he’s even suggesting wearing double masks. As much as I like to follow the science, it’s hard when the science careens in wild directions like a drunk Super Ball.
Of course, the Left chalks this up to the science changing rapidly. They have a point, but only to a point. With something as tricky as COVID-19, the science is bound to change rapidly as new data become available. Having said that, these changes typically don’t happen from one speech to the next…in the same day…and without alerting people (namely, the audience) to the change. An inflexible boilerplate speech regarding a global pandemic isn’t a good look.
That’s where the Left comes in. No matter what Dr. Fauci says that contradicts himself or other scientific sources, the Left treats it as gospel. Ironic, given how hostile the Left is to organized religion…or is it?
Ever since global warming became a thing back in the 1990s thanks to Al Gore, the Left has deified science to the point it cannot be challenged without being called a non-believer. What do they call people who question the “science” of global climate change? Aside from “people who didn’t flunk science like the climate change cultists did,” they’re called “science-deniers.” Now, I’ve always found this to be a misnomer because I know of very few people who deny science. Maybe they have a different opinion or place a different value on it, but not too many people out-and-out deny science.
By the same token, though, it’s also a pretty big tell that the Left has turned science into a religion, if not a cult that would make L. Ron Hubbard salivate. You know, if he were alive and stuff. But it’s funny to me to watch Leftists mock people of faith for believing what they consider to be silly and unfounded ideas while these same Leftists hang on every word Dr. Fauci says like it’s manna from Heaven.
And that’s where the “Party of Science” goes off the rails. The major problem with putting science on a pedestal is the fact…now hear me out here…it can be wrong and/or corrupted. Science at its best is bound by human understanding, and a lot of the time our understanding lags well behind the science, causing a lot of bad ideas under the guise of scientific fact. World history and more than a few graveyards are full of examples of what can happen if we’re not putting on our thinking caps and our morality pants before trying something we think will be cool.
And I think we’re on the verge of making that mistake again. Not that I think Dr. Fauci is a quack, mind you. The problem I have is putting so much faith (and, yes, it is faith, possibly of the blind variety) in what he says that we stop thinking for ourselves and questioning ideas that don’t seem to make sense. At worst, we raise questions that get answered honestly and factually, which pretty much eliminates much of the “Party of Science.” Anything beyond that is gravy. Hard science is built on the foundation of challenging ideas and finding a better understanding of the world around us. Anyone who professes love for science but hates to have it questioned when it doesn’t make sense may be entrenched in the Cult of Science or covering up for mistakes they know they’ve made.
I’m looking right at you, Michael “Hockey Stick Graph” Mann.
But let’s give Dr. Fauci the benefit of the doubt and not paint him with the same brush as Al Gore’s number-fudging buddy. Let’s look at his track record with COVID-19.
On second thought, I’m sure his acolytes and he would appreciate that we not do that because it shows he wasn’t always following the science. Instead, it seemed like he was following the politics. When the Left said we didn’t need to wear masks, he said we didn’t need to wear masks. When the Left said COVID-19 wasn’t that big a deal, Fauci agreed. Once the Left’s tune changed (i.e. when they figured out how to blame Donald Trump for their incompetence while trying to memory-hole their own statements), Fauci’s did, too. And let’s be clear, the Left wasn’t following the science; they were following their typical political mantra, “Orange Man Bad.” We can criticize the way President Trump handled the COVID-19 situation, but we will be doing a grave disservice if we don’t include those who contributed to the lack of trust in the science.
And that includes Dr. Fauci.
The fact such a prominent medical figure can be so publicly contradictory without his credibility taking a bigger hit than the aforementioned Mr. Sheen at the aforementioned coke binge is a mystery to me, but remember the Left doesn’t think about the long term, just what they can get away with in the short term. With Dr. Fauci, they got a walking contradiction that they could spin into an appeal to authority complete with a doctor’s coat and a semi-impressive CV. The fact he could be turned into an anti-Trump cudgel was a bonus. And with grown adults fawning over him like teenagers at a BTS concert, I’m guessing the good doctor doesn’t mind the attention because he typically works under thankless conditions.
At what cost, however? Sure, the action figures and the “Fauci Ouchie” Twitter posts are neat, but at some point, that attention is going to fade and Dr. Fauci will become just another old white man in a lab coat that the Left will pretend not to know. If you’re reading this, Dr. Fauci (and I know you are because, why not), remember Cindy Sheehan? That could be you in a few months.
I hope you like ditches, Doc…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
If you’ve watched the Left as long as I have, first off, I’m sorry. Second, there are some cues when they’re going to try to advance/distort a word, idea, or concept by what phrasing they use.
This past week, the word “competent” has been thrown around like Tom Brady throwing footballs at training camp. The Left and the media (but I repeat myself) have expressed everything from not-so-subtle exhaling to sycophantic gushing over their perception of the Biden Administration as being head and shoulders above the Trump Administration. They seem pleasantly surprised at how the Biden Administration seems to know what it’s doing.
But, as we’ve seen previously, the Left loves to play with the language to make themselves look smarter, faster, and better.
competent
What the Left thinks it means – mature, intelligent, and empathic leadership shown by political leaders
What it really means – a phrase that should rarely, if ever, used to describe any Presidency
Why, yes, my general cynicism about government is coming through! How could you tell?
Seriously, though, competence isn’t normally associated with government as a whole because we’re dealing with human beings in power. The chance we’re going to get a savant in a Cabinet role is less likely than Donald Trump marrying Rosie O’Donnell. Even when we get someone reasonably intelligent in a role (see Dr. Ben Carson), the fit might not be there, which will result in a litany of mistakes.
Now, imagine that same work being done by stereotypical WalMart shoppers. That’s closer to how competent government is these days. Frightening, isn’t it? Add to that the immense number of regulations, policies, procedures, legalese, and general ideologically-driven goals, and you have a situation where even the best of intentions gets turned into the worst of bureaucracies.
In spite of the media’s best attempts to prop up Joe Biden as a good President, most people just aren’t buying it. The policy wonks, like your humble correspondent, see an Administration tackling problems like Pee Wee Herman while making somewhat manageable problems worse. And a lot of these are unforced errors, meaning they could have been prevented if someone had just taken the President aside and said, “I know what you want to do here, but it’s like letting Hunter have Charlie Sheen as his rehab partner.”
Take the border crisis, for example. Before he came into office, Joe Biden laid out a pretty clear invitation for illegal immigrants from Mexico to come on in! Then, when people took him up on his offer, the Administration was caught off-guard. I mean, how were they to know an open invitation to come here would be accepted so readily? It’s not like the President was in office for nearly half a century or anything, right?
One of the legitimate knocks against the Trump Administration was the lack of experience in important roles within the government. It seemed like President Trump handed out these roles like Planned Parenthood hands out…well, whatever it is they hand out. Now, with a new Administration, we see…exactly the same problems as the Trump Administration, but with a lot more tolerance from the Left. Seriously, who was the genius to made Pete Buttigieg Secretary of Transportation because he likes trains? I liked trains when I was 7 or 8, but I don’t put that on my resume so someone in a future Administration would put me on a short list for the Department of Transportation, or any Cabinet post for that matter. Given the nozzleheads in charge, I’m surprised Hunter Biden wasn’t put in charge of the DEA.
It’s because of the unforced errors that the Left is talking about competence with regards to the Biden Administration. The idea is to persuade you with multitude (i.e. an appeal to popularity) than to get you to think whether the Administration fits the definition. As you might have guessed, I’m pretty sure it doesn’t, if only because Obama Administration failures…I mean holdovers like Anita Dunn, John Kerry, and Jen Psaki managed to find work again after screwing up so badly.
But at least there aren’t any mean Tweets, right?
Even if you set the lowest possible bar for competence, government finds a way to limbo under it with room to spare because there is no punishment for failure. If anything, people tend to fail upward. Want proof? Who is President and Vice President right now? A two-time Presidential candidate whose mental faculties are on the decline and a Presidential candidate who dropped out before the Iowa Caucuses due to a lack of support. And people expect competence out of these two?
I mean, aside from Leftists.
I have a saying that applies in this situation: “If you have to say it, you ain’t it.” If the Biden Administration or its stenographers in the media have to keep telling us the Administration is competent, it’s a clear sign it’s not (oh, and that the media are hacks). But don’t just take my word for it. Watch the Administration carefully and see if they perform at even basic levels of competency. Or you can do the DMV Test. If your local DMV works more efficiently and effectively than the federal government, there’s a problem, and Spoiler Alert it’s not a local one.
I know the Left wants to create a clear difference between the Trump Administration and the Biden Administration, but you can’t just slap a descriptor on the latter and call it a day. Government by its very nature doesn’t solve problems and expecting people who have spent a good chunk of their lives proving it and/or covering up for it to suddenly get it stretches reality like Mr. Fantastic, only less believable. When the Biden Administration does something right, I will be among the first to call it out because I’m good like that. Given what I’ve seen so far, though, I may be waiting a while. Good thing I packed a lunch!
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
President Joe Biden gave a joint speech before Congress last week, which I think is as close to a State of the Union Address we’re going to get from him this year. In it, the President talked about a lot of topics, some of which were actually in English, but one of them that has become a focal point is systemic racism. Much like air or pop singers who use AutoTune, systemic racism is everywhere from your local police to pancake syrup (and I wish I was joking about that last one). Yet, the Left feels confident they can combat systemic racism and win because…well, they’re Leftists!
While the Left finds systemic racism under every rock, very few are willing to tell us what it is, only where it is. So, leave it to your humble correspondent to lift the veil on this controversial topic.
systemic racism
What the Left thinks it means – when entire systems discriminate against people of color
What it really means – an easy explanation for a more complex issue
Let’s be fair here. America’s history is rife with racism, and we’re still dealing with the repercussions of that history today. And we still haven’t gotten a handle on how to address the past and make progress, at least from a governmental perspective. The Left recognizes this and has a strategy to deal with it.
1) Find the system
2) Find the racism
3) Complain about the racism
4) ?
5) Profit
Right now most of the Left’s plans to deal with systemic racism is stuck in Phase 4, but they’re still able to move to Phase 5 when it’s time to elect more Leftists. Yet, with all of the systemic racism that’s supposed to be out there, why it is the systems themselves aren’t being torn down or reformed?
It would negatively impact Phase 5.
Politicians of all stripes love crises because they create opportunities to expand their power base, get a little more scratch from people, shore up support for ideologically-driven goals, and so on. If a problem gets resolved, though, that avenue dries up. Thus, any issue that can be exploited will be exploited until it no longer generates the desired upsides. Then, the issue mysteriously goes away! Amazing how that happens, isn’t it?
Of course, the Left has no problems taking actions that benefit themselves while giving the black community the shaft. Remember the 1994 crime bill? That resulted in higher numbers of blacks being prosecuted and incarcerated for drug-related crimes. Remember the “three strikes” sentencing initiative? That also negatively impacted the black community due to the number of repeat offenders. In fact, I can’t really point to anything the Left has advocated that has wound up helping the black community in any meaningful way over the past couple of decades. They’ll throw money at the problem, which generates votes, but doesn’t move the needle towards actual progress.
That brings us to systemic racism. It’s a nice idea in theory, at least to Leftists, because it allows people of color to blame their woes on a nameless, faceless system rather than actions taken or untaken, and it allows white Leftists to show solidarity to people of color without actually helping. And by tacking on as many systems as possible, the concept of systemic racism will continue to live on ad nauseum. (And, no, that’s not a typo.)
Here’s the problem, though. The concept doesn’t seem to reflect the wider reality. Even with America’s racist past, our present and even our future are far removed from that past. Look around you. I’m willing to bet most of you live in integrated areas where you’re around people that don’t look like you. In some cases, there will be strife because some people haven’t gotten the memo about getting along, but most of the time, we coexist without issue. At least, that’s the impression I get from the “Coexist” bumper stickers and, oh yeah, the utter lack of violence, destruction, and general mayhem. You know, aside from Portland.
This opens up a whole lotta questions, the first one being where is the systemic racism? If it’s as extensive as the Left wants us to believe, it should be, well, everywhere. The fact we can’t see it may not be absolute proof it doesn’t exist, but it’s hard to argue it’s there if there aren’t concrete examples. If mortgage banks contribute to systemic racism (as the Left believes), there wouldn’t be as much, if any, intermingling of cultures and people of different racial backgrounds. We would be gentrified.
You know, like white Leftist neighborhoods?
That leads to more questions, each one damning the idea of systemic racism further. Think of it like a game of Jenga on the San Andreas Fault during a 4.5 earthquake. You might appear to have a strong foundation, but sooner or, well, even sooner the whole thing comes tumbling down.
That’s not going to stop the Left from making systemic racism a thing because it still leads to Phase 5, and there are enough people willing to believe it exists. Unfortunately, there’s nothing we can do to convince those who believe to look at the reality of the situation. Instead, let’s focus on what we can affect: the systems themselves. Just because systemic racism isn’t a widespread problem doesn’t mean it isn’t a problem where it exists. And right now, there’s one prominent group where systemic racism is prevalent and pervasive.
I call it the Democrat Party.
After all, they are a power structure that benefits from keeping people of color down…
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
The eyes of the world were on Minnesota earlier this year, and not because the Twins and the Vikings have been mathematically eliminated from the post-season on the same day. Former police officer Derek Chauvin was convicted on three counts related to the death of George Floyd, and the Left cried tears of joy because justice was served (according to them). Yet, there are some, including your humble correspondent, who don’t quite agree with the sentiment, thanks to people like Maxine Waters voicing opinions prior to the jury being sequestered to deliberate.
We’re going to be dealing with some lofty concepts here, kids, so grab a cold beverage and strap in.
justice
What the Left thinks it means – an outcome that reinforces our collective societal will and punishes those who try to subvert it
What it really means – an outcome where the process and the verdict support a fair result
To make things perfectly clear, I happen to agree with the verdict. What Derek Chauvin did on camera crossed the line between securing a suspect and police brutality. It’s hard to argue that (although I’m sure there are plenty of people willing to try). If the case were tried purely on the evidence, the result would be the same.
Ah, but there’s the rub. This case wasn’t tried purely on the evidence. The Court of Public Opinion, which has a track record that makes the 9th Circuit Court look like Solomon, has been trying and retrying this case pretty much on the daily. Whether it’s elevating George Floyd to heroic/deity levels or using the case as a means to promote everything from defunding/abolishing the police to rooting out white supremacists en masse, the Left has been milking this situation for all it’s worth. Judging from the recent home purchase of a Black Lives Matter founder, it’s worth quite a bit.
Even with the video evidence, there is still an important step to consider: ensuring both sides get a fair hearing. The Court of Public Opinion typically isn’t the venue for such discourse, so it falls to the actual court system. And that’s where the Chauvin verdict goes off the rails like Gary Busey driving an Amtrak route. Thanks to Leftists like Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, and President Joe Biden, the environment surrounding the trial made a fair hearing impossible. There is some question of whether the jury was sequestered to the point they wouldn’t have heard the aforementioned Leftists’ comments, so we can’t be sure one way or the other.
And that, ladies and gentleman, is how you plant the seeds for an appeal.
Leftists were so hellbent to get a conviction that they didn’t take into consideration what they were doing to deny justice, the very thing they claim they wanted out of the Chauvin trial. Although lack of self-awareness isn’t a bug in the Left so much as a feature, it took an amazing amount of blockheadedness to agree to the idea to let some of the most divisive politicians in modern history and Joe Biden weigh in on what the jury “should” do.
Speaking of which, Speaker Pelosi? Call your office, provided you’ve extracted your feet from your mouth after thanking George Floyd of “taking one for the team.”
Anyway, the Left’s approach to justice, real or whatever make-believe version they want to promote today, is based on their general approach: the ends justify the means. In the Chauvin case, the Left wanted a guilty verdict so they can continue to perpetuate the notion police officers are killing innocent black victims constantly. (Of course, actual data shows that’s not happening, but Party of Science, kids!) As long as this perception is considered to be reality, the Left can keep bringing it up as a means to get money and power without actually doing anything about it.
Think about that last part for a moment. The Left needs these problems to continue for their own purposes. And if it takes people dying to make that happen, so be it! Who would have thought the party that supports abortion on demand would have such disregard for human life?
Meanwhile, the Left keeps slapping “justice” on everything to the point the word loses its meaning. You know, just like they did with racism! Environmental justice, social justice, economic justice, racial justice, about the only thing they haven’t touched on is actual justice, and let’s be glad they haven’t or it would get screwed up worse than it already is. And if the Derek Chauvin verdict is any indication, they may have their sights set on it.
The issues they face, however, are a bit deeper than they are. For all the times they’ve taken up for convicted cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal and the number of lawyers in their midst, you’d think they’d have figured out the American criminal justice process. Just because you hold your breath and stomp your feet doesn’t mean you get the verdict you want. There is still a matter of evidence and procedure that have to be followed or else you get a conviction that gets overturned faster than a pancake at IHOP. And that’s by design, my Leftist friends. Actual justice doesn’t begin and end with the judge’s gavel; it begins with following the steps to ensure all parties involved have a chance to be heard and present a case. I know that kinda puts a crimp in your “execute first and ask questions…well, never, really” approach, but it does make things a lot handier when it comes to, you know, actually getting a legal ruling that won’t get overturned due to a lack of procedural integrity?
In other words, if you follow the rules and don’t let Maxine Waters say something incredibly stupid about an ongoing trial, you don’t have to worry about the verdict you want getting thrown out. Granted, that may be a hell of an ask from the Left, but we can hope.
Regardless of how you feel about the Derek Chauvin verdict, it’s hard to say whether justice was actually served. On the one hand, he has been convicted of contributing to George Floyd’s death. On the other, the environment surrounding the trial made the conviction all but certain, but not in a good way. When that happens, it’s a good thing Lady Justice is wearing a blindfold or we’d be due for a series of rampant scale-whippings.
Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week
To put it mildly, this past week has been what the military would call a “target-rich environment” for somewhat humorous weirdos like me. On the Left, there has been a move to create four more Supreme Court seats and do away with the Electoral College. On the right, Project Veritas exposed CNN, which promptly got James O’Keefe kicked off Twitter.
Now, which would be more entertaining, a dry discussion about the Supreme Court or the Electoral College, or poking fun at a cable news network whose fortunes are as bright as a Socialist Socialite policy position?
Let’s just say I’m siding with schadenfreude.
CNN
What the Left thinks it means – a reputable news organization that occasionally ventures into “Fox News Lite” territory
What it really means – a news network who keeps finding a way to tarnish its reputation
Back in the day, CNN was the only name in cable news because, well, there weren’t any other real cable news networks out there. And it was unique in that it showed a global perspective on news, which was a big risk because of the way American media are set up to cover international events. Think coups and earthquakes, kids.
Where CNN really came into its own was during the first Gulf War. With reporters live on the scene giving regular updates and being one of the few (if not the only) television news crews there, CNN became a household name around the world. Once the Gulf War ended, CNN could have either rested on its laurels and coasted or continued to cover stories as balanced and as in-depth as possible.
Given the fact we’re in the process of mocking it, I’m guessing you can figure out what path CNN took.
What happened that caused CNN’s fall from grace (no relation to Nancy)? That’s hard to say because there have been a number of incidents in the 30 years since the first Gulf War that could have been the catalyst, but for me, it was the campaign and subsequent election of Bill Clinton. For better or most definitely worse, Clinton was our first “rock star” President, and CNN acted like a pack of teenage groupies hoping to catch his attention.
To me, the minute any news outlet picks a side in an ideological battle, it ceases to be an example of good journalism and becomes an example of good propaganda poorly masquerading as journalism. As other news networks popped up or became more prominent as they carried water for the Commander in Briefs, talent had viable options to exercise, and some of them did. As that happened, CNN picked up other talent, but the replacements didn’t fill the talent void. And in the case of Brian Stetler, became a talent void in and of himself. Pro Tip: if you have someone with as inconsistent a track record as Stelter, don’t let him host a show called “Reliable Sources.”
Aside from Stetler, CNN doesn’t have as much star power as it once did, and even less actual journalism is being done. Maybe it’s me, but when you call yourself a news network, it kinda implies you know what news is. Judging from the Project Veritas video, though, even the staff wouldn’t recognize news from a hole in the ground. And don’t get me started on whether they know their asses from the aforementioned hole.
Although the video didn’t expose anything new (assuming CNN swung Left was so obvious Stevie Wonder could see it), it does damage their brand at a time when they need to regain some of their viewership. Although the landscape is looking like the Hatfields and McCoys, but more cordial, there is room for a straight news organization that gives different perspectives.
Which the Left hates.
The Left relies on being able to control the narrative, so any time one of their usual outlets decides to…horror of horrors…show more than the Left’s version of events, the Left accuses that outlet of betraying them. Just look at how they go after Jake Tapper when he tries to reason with the Left. Granted, it’s getting more rare than how Dracula likes his hamburgers, but it happens.
Right now, CNN is finding itself the odd network out. On the right, there is Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN, and on the left, there is…pretty much everybody else. No matter how Left CNN leans, it will be outdone by someone else. To put it another way, CNN is now the New Coke of cable news: some love it, but most prefer the Coke that actually tastes like Coke. MSNBC will do what CNN does or used to do with a greater Leftist slant, so CNN becomes an afterthought. Personally, if it weren’t for the Left’s hatred of Project Veritas, I’m not sure Leftists would care how bad CNN looks right now.
Yet, I’m reminded of a saying: “Where there is chaos, there is opportunity.” If CNN wants to be relevant again, they need to resist the urge to become MSNBC without Rachel Maddow. They also need to resist the urge to swing to the right, especially considering the Right doesn’t trust CNN as far as Pee Wee Herman could throw Mount Everest. So, I see the best way to stand out and move forward is to look towards the past. Wipe the slate clean and go back to straight news, complete with an announcement of the change so people know what’s going on. Sure, it will piss off the Left, but the way I look at it, you’ll get more viewers than if you continue on your current path.
Of course, that will go over with Jeff Zucker like David Duke at a BLM rally, so it probably won’t be done anytime soon. Even so, what do you have to lose, Jeff? A bunch of whiny crybabies who think they respect science while simultaneously believing there are more than two genders? At some point, you have to cut your losses, buddy.
And when it comes to Leftists, you’re dealing with a lot of losers!