The United States of Orwell

We’re less than a month into the Biden Administration and we’re already seeing changes in the way things are getting done. Unfortunately, those changes aren’t good ones.

In the past week alone, the following events occurred:

– Leftists and non-Leftists called out the Biden Administration for promising $2000 COVID-19 relief checks, only to watch the President and the DNC lower that amount to $1400, citing the $600 previously approved was a “down payment.”

– White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki scoffed at the use of anonymous sources for news leads potentially critical of the Biden Administration.

– Biden supporters have expressed a desire/need to limit conservative voices in mainstream media, social media, and in general, suggesting they should be “named and shamed” so people don’t ever do business with them or take them seriously.

– Members of the media are arguing any seemingly dishonest statements from President Joe Biden lack nuance or, more frequently, advise the dishonesty was far worse under President Donald Trump.

New York Times tech columnist Kevin Roose wrote the Biden Administration needs to appoint a “reality czar” to address what he called a “reality crisis.”

– Leftists have eagerly supported “reeducation camps” for Trump supporters as a means to “deprogram” them.

– The Biden Administration requires people to wear masks on federal property as a means to stop the spread of COVID-19 while he has been photographed without one, leading Leftists to try to explain it away.

– Joe Biden announced a program to roll out COVID-19 vaccinations that matched what the Trump Administration was already doing at the same rate.

– Leftists are calling the incoming Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg the first openly gay person to serve in a Cabinet, thereby erasing Richard Grennell’s existence as the first openly gay person to serve in a Cabinet.

We’re not in the Upside Down, kids. This is what is actually happening.

Right now, we’re being told to believe what the government and its agents are telling us, even if it doesn’t live in the same neighborhood as reality. If you though the “gender is fluid” debate was insane, we’re entering a whole new suburb of Crazy Town.

And this is by design. The Left’s playbook has always relied on affecting change through manipulation of language. If they can get people to think a certain way through framing a topic in a certain way, Leftists can reshape perception, which reshapes the audience’s reality even if it creates self-delusion. Although there are many real life examples of this happening, there’s a literary one that seems to fit what the Left is trying, and in some cases succeeding, to do: 1984.

And before you Leftists call me out on it, I have read the book and understand it quite clearly. Unlike you, I also understand it’s not an instruction manual.

Whether it’s Big Brother (the fictional entity, not the TV show) or Big Biden, the principle of controlling the narrative is vital to the outcome. The more they can get you to believe 2 + 2 = 5, the better able they are able to convince you of other absurdities, like there are more than 2 genders, white people can believe they’re black, and it’s okay to enact fascism under the guise of preventing it.

George Orwell would be proud. Or frightened. Or confused.

But you needn’t be any of those because non-Leftists have a secret weapon that undercuts the Left’s most Orwellian of policies: free will. When you really think about it, the Left requires subservience to be successful, but only if you choose to be subservient. We can’t all be as outwardly rebellious as Number 6 from “The Prisoner,” but we can camouflage what we believe through the kind of intellectual subterfuge the Left employs. Outwardly comply, but inwardly resist. At some point, the Left will over-reach and their house of cards falls down.

And that’s the other secret weapon we have: the Left is just that stupid.

No matter what, the Left always manages to find a way to ensure defeat after securing victory, usually within a short time. Their main flaw is and always has been they don’t typically think strategically in advance of the next election. They think in terms of what wins now versus what will win years from now. The whole $1400 check debacle is proof of that. They keep doubling and tripling down on the “it’s basic math” argument when they need to be thinking of how to deliver what was promised without trying to weasel out of it. That doesn’t help anyone, let alone the people who actually need the money. Plus, once more people realize why they didn’t get $2000 in the first place and what party caused it (Spoiler Alert: It’s the Democrats), it’s not going to end well.

So keep your chins up, dear readers. No matter how many times the Left tells you 2+2=5, just remember these same rotten eggheads came up with Common Core.

Leftist Lexicon Word of the Week

Although COVID-19 put the kibosh on a lot of festivities this year, we still had the Pulitzer Prizes awarded. Aren’t we lucky? Among the wieners…I mean winners were reporters who wrote about global climate change being bad, Vladimir Putin being bad, and President Donald Trump being bad. You know, the same topics the media report on during any day ending with a Y.

And speaking of Y, why are these reporters winning an award for journalistic excellence when there is very little deviation in the subject matter? That, dear readers, is a fine topic of discussion.

the Pulitzer Prize

What the Left thinks it means – a prestigious award given to the very best in the journalism field

What it really means – an award as worthless as the reporters who win them these days

I wouldn’t want to be a journalist or a reporter today. The pay sucks, the hours are as erratic as Joe Biden going off script, and more often than not the only time you get recognized is when you screw up or get nominated for a Pulitzer. And more often than not, you get known for the former because most people don’t care about the latter.

So, why should we care? The people who are getting nominated are the ones who have an incredible, albeit waning somewhat, amount of power to shape narratives. There was a recent story that spread like wildfire that President Trump had a financial interest in a company producing hydroxychloroquine, a drug he promoted as a potential treatment for COVID-19. The press reported it without highlighting the fact the interest was 1) part of a mutual fund, and 2) so financially insignificant he could have found more money under his couch cushions. Even after the facts came out, people believed the initial truncated reporting.

And we’re no longer just dealing with half-truths being heralded, either. One of this year’s Pulitzers went to Nikole Hannah-Jones for the 1619 Project, a major New York Times undertaking reviewing the history of slavery in America. And by “reviewing,” I mean “making shit up.” One of the major contentions Hannah-Jones made was the American Revolution was fought to keep slavery alive here. Yeah, nothing about taxation without representation, unfair treatment of the colonists, and, oh yeah, “The Shot Heard ‘Round the World” that sparked the American Revolution (and included the death of Crispus Attucks, who just happened to be black). It was totes about slavery, yo!

Yet, in spite of the fact historians called out the multiple historical inaccuracies and Hannah-Jones promised to revise her derisive drivel before it gets published as a book, the Pulitzer Prize Board shrugged its collective shoulders and gave her the award anyway. Granted, it was for Commentary and not actual reporting, but the fact she was rewarded for making up easily refuted shit should tell you all you need to know about the Pulitzer Prize and journalism in general today.

While the New York Times can pat itself on the back for winning it, the real payoff is the credibility it gives them with fans and the general public. Joe Sixpack may not be able to name many, if any, Pulitzer winners, but they may recognize the name and extrapolate it means something good for the recipients. But we shouldn’t let the award dazzle us into thinking the Times is worth a damn. Let’s not forget the Times keeps Nobel Prize winner Paul Krugman on staff to write about economics, and he’s an idiot on the subject. Then again, it would explain how Hannah-Jones got her job…

In preparation for this week’s Lexicon, I did a little research on past Pulitzer winners, as well as the members who decide who get them. (The sacrifices I make for you…) To put it mildly, it’s mostly a Leftist circle jerk. There are the occasional exceptions to the rule, but it’s safe to say there are some real journalists getting shafted so the “right” people win and the media outlets they work for can pretend they’re actually doing something great for the journalism field.

Of course, they’re not. The profession has undergone a death by a thousand newspaper cuts, combined with a push (or in some cases a gentle nudge) to advance an agenda at the expense of the truth. Nowadays, bloggers like your humble correspondent are the ones digging through the layers of bullshit to get to the heart of a story and then tell it to the world. And we do it without killing trees or brain cells.

That’s more than I can say for the Pulitzer Prize “winners” this year.