Another One Bites The Dust

More thoughts!

● The Democrats are starting to drop like flies. Colorado Governor Hickenlooper dropped out. He ran as the bland white male governor candidate. Washington Governor Jay Islee dropped out. He ran as the bland white male governor candidate. Now Kirstin Gillibrand has dropped out. She ran as the bland white female sexual harassment fighter. Bland and white is not popular this year. Either way, there are more to come. Some very soon as many aren't qualifying for the upcoming debate. We seem to be headed toward a Biden v. Bernie v. Warren v. Harris primary. Biden v. Neapolitan... red, white and black, I guess. I would not be surprised if they ended up Biden v. Harris. Dumber and dumber.

● Saw something interesting. I saw that lesbians are opposed to Mayor Pete. They would rather have a woman than a fellow gay. This doesn't really surprise me much because lesbians are pretty anti-male, including gays. They have never played well with the rest of the "movement."

● If you believe the polls, Trump is losing big. But I don't believe the polls. The latest thinking is that white women are turning against him. I don't think that's true. The white women who voted for him are conservative voters. They are not "women voters." They don't move back and forth.

● The Epstein thing is pretty stupid. The media seems intent on convicting anyone who ever went to one of his parties of basically joining him in group sex with a chain gang of sex slaves. That's ridiculous. Never believe that the media is at all reasonable.

Stuff

Some things that have come up of late...

● Kathleen Blanco has died. She was the Governor during Katrina. Do you remember Katrina? That was when Dick Cheney conjured a hurricane that targeted only black people, George Bush refused to send troops to New Orleans to save the people who had refused to leave the city as ordered, and Donald Trump raped a bunch of black people in the Super Dome. Blanco, who must have been a Republican, allowed all of this because she was racist... oh wait, she was a Democrat. That's right. She's the one who delayed authorizing the Feds to send in the troops to rescue people. Weird. So she was really at fault? Well, and the dipshits who didn't leave and the thugs who decided to spend their time looting and raping, and the corrupt police overseen by Democratic Mayor Ray Nagin. Wow, now that I think about it, Bush and Cheney really did nothing wrong. So why do they get the blame? Hmm.

● New poll on the Redskin's name. After all the woke sportswriters gnashed their teeth and drew forth tears of great outrage to tell us how racist the name is and how we will all go to racist Hell for even using the word... most of 500 people of American Indian decent in a word association poll responded that the word they think of most when they hear "Redskins" is "proud." Grr. Don't these dumbsh*ts know they're supposed to be offended? A poll in 2016 even found that only 9% of Native Americans were offended by the word with 90% not being bothered. What is wrong with these people? Dammit. Well, never fear. Our team of liberal white sportswriter elitists will keep at it until these stupid people understand they should be offended!

● So Epstein was killed by alien contract killers who work for the Department of Fixing Things after Trump and Putin and AOC and Clinton all signed the contract to have him killed. I hear he was then strangled with his own testicles. Although, I also hear he's not dead and is living in Vegas with Elvis. Either way, he's gone. And now we hear he had a painting of Bill Clinton in a blue dress. Poor Bill. Blue is not his color. Seriously though, barf.

● Beto O'Rourke had his third relaunch... and still nobody cared. You can smell the desperate on that guy.

● Tim Cook of Apple has dinner with Donald Trump. He's also pushing for clean, family friendly films through Apple's production company. And he's talked about the dangers of technology. I'm finding this interesting. Despite being gay, is it possible Cook leans conservative?

● The Log Cabin (Gay) Republicans have endorsed Trump. They didn't before. I think that continues to verify that "gays" are leaving the political process, leaving the door open for both sides to win them individually. Even more, I think it suggests that the poison of the gay issue is disappearing.

Thoughts?

Killer Control

The Republicans seem to be considering a nod to gun control after the latest round of shootings. I'm actually not opposed. Here's why.

For starters, let me say that I am a huge believer in individual freedom. I am also completely opposed to a liberal favorite: group punishment -- unlike liberals, I don't believe you can stop bad people and bad things by punishing good people and good things. I also know that any attempt to ban guns would be impossible, would tear apart society (the public will not surrender), and will only leave guns in the hands of bad people. I also know that even if we could somehow wish away guns tomorrow, the killing would not stop. If anything, it would get worse as these people start coming up with creative ways to take massive numbers of lives. I could kill hundreds with a simple hammer, for example, were I so inclined. Trust me, there are 300 million guns in the US, if they were the problem, you would know it. And killers kill because they are killers, not because they have guns.

So why would I agree to some form of gun control then? To be frank, there are certain people who just should not be allowed to own guns... criminals, crazy people, Democrats... and they need to be watched.

A law allowing the government to gather information on which persons may have these so-called "red flags" and keep them from owning guns while keeping an eye on them strikes me as both eminently reasonable and narrowly tailored enough not to tread on the rights of the people who should be allowed to own guns.

I know the argument against, which is that the Democrats will try to jam the whole camel under the tent once they get the nose through, but I'm not really a fan of the "the other guy can't be trusted" argument as a means for inaction. I think it is better to organize your society rationally and defend it rather than leaving a bad situation because you fear the other side might exploit it.

I also think that politically, it is much more prudent to be the rational party on this. These mass killings and other gun killings affect people in ways that other crimes simply do not. If you don't let the air out of this balloon slowly, it will pop one day and that will result in an overarching oppressive scheme. It is better to give 5% than lose 100%, and right now I think those are becoming the alternatives.

Lastly, I see this as a good opportunity to try to make some real changes which the left will not like. It's time to allow states to hold crazy people longer than 24 hours, to force mental patients to take their pills, to raise the ratings on video games and movies that use gun violence, to let victims sue media companies for copy-cat crimes, to ban the media from reporting the names of shooters or their manifestos or otherwise make heroes of these guys, to add punishments that might deter them like castration or to give their assets to their victims. None of these is a silver bullet, but each combined will have an effect on this... and each will piss off the left something fierce. They will freak out and fight every one of these, and in the process will expose themselves as not wanting to do anything to stop these killings because all they really want is to take away guns.

Thoughts?

Liberals Behaving Badly

I love it when liberals batter each other, and there's been a lot of that lately. In fact, we just had some good ones.

● Ellen Pompeo, a leftist actress who attacked her own show "Grey's Anatomy" for not having enough minorities on staff, just got shouted down for racism. Ha ha! The irony is rich with this one. See, she was watching the Democratic debate and she didn't like that Kamala Harris was only attacking Biden because she feared that Harris was ignoring the other threats to her. So here's what she said: "She’s overconfident and believes [Biden] is her only competition." Tsk tsk. Such racism!

What racism you ask? Well, according to the internet storm that followed, it is racist to call a black woman "overconfident" because, well, that's racist. Indeed, here's one of the many representative comments slapping her down: “Black women are allowed only a certain amount of confidence. Must always yield something to whatever white man is around.”

As you can see, this is utter nonsense -- as well as being painfully written cynicism. Indeed, there is no reasonable way to read what Pompeo said as racist, and the twisted logic used to get there knowingly misconstrues what she said. What happened here is wishful victimology. These idiots saw the word "overconfident," recognized it as a criticism, realized a criticism had been lobbied at a black woman, got all hot and bothered over a victim fantasy, and screamed racism. It's ridiculously stupid. What makes this so ironically delicious is that their target is someone I guarantee you never thought she would find her back against the wall. She called out her own program for not hiring enough of them!, for Pete's sake! She's pure! She's not a racist like all those other people she criticized! How can anyone think she was being racist? Well, dumbass, because that's the world your kind has cultivated. When the left goes full intolerant, they often burn their own at the stake first, and you've been whipping them into a frenzy of intolerance. Burned by your own mob! Delicious.

And there's more...

● Noted progressive-liberal and Pluto-hater Neil deGrasse Tyson made the mistake of trying to interject some logic into the left's anti-gun tantrum after the shootings this weekend. He point out, quite correctly, that "across any 48 hours, we also lose 300 people to the flu." This is a problem-solver's thought as it attempts to frame a problem and downplay the hysteria surrounding it so a solution can be reached. The fool. The collective did not approve. Showing their shoot-the-messenger ways, scores of leftists screamed at this man on Twitter. Noted scientists and logicians rock band Smashmouth eruditely pointed out: "FUCK OFF!!!! There's your data!!!!" So very helpful.

Two things make me laugh about this. First, that Tyson thought he would be immune from hate even when going against the collective in mob mode. Heck, he's a leftist. He's even black! How can anyone on the left say such things to him?!! Clearly, he does not understand the hate-filled group-think practiced by his colleagues even against fellow leftists.

Secondly, the left loves to claim that the right hates science and they are the party of science, yet they scream down and threaten away any data that doesn't fit their narrative... just as they oppose science that is used for weapons or business, they treat unproven and discredited environmental theories as religious dogma, they treat science/research/studies/results that might lead to data they consider "racist" or "sexist" or anti-whatever-they-support to be taboo, if not criminal, and they ban any bit of science that might offend the wrong people. Not to mention, their mob mentality focuses hate on any solution or proposed solution other than the one they seek. Watch your back Neil, the death threats are next. Oh, and avoid overconfidence, Neil. Ask Ellen about that.

● The sitcom Friends which supported a pro-gay agenda in the 1990's is now being accused of being anti-gay because it used suggestions that one character was less than masculine as a source of humor. All humor will eventually find someone who wants to be offended... only the left gives them the power to push their offendedness on the rest of society.

● According to liberal NYT columnist Maureen Dowd, she and Nancy Pelosi have been smeared as "elites" by the left because during her late July interview she mentioned eating chocolates, wearing high heels, and having a book party for an author friend. Said Dowd, "If the Democratic Party is going to be against chocolate, high heels, parties and fun, you’ve lost me. And I’ve got some bad news for you about 2020." That sounds silly, but it's not. What this speaks to is the vast number of leftists who now turn their pet peeves into political attacks (particularly the body positive whiners and the anti-shamer shamers who attack people for things like not being dour enough, having money, dressing better than their lazy asses want to dress, being too successful, lacking self-doubt, and suggesting that others can succeed -- I'm not kidding, I'll write something about how telling people to fight cancer is hateful later this week). These people are the same as the race-screamers and the harassmentists... they want to remake the world in their miserable image and they see the internet thought police as the means to do that.

● Finally, we have the debate and its aftermath. Oh my. First, they attack Obama's record to smear Biden. Indeed, they hit Obama with many of the things I pointed out throughout his administration about Obama not being a good liberal: deportations, sending young black men to prison for "crimes", supporting big business, Obamacare being a sop to big insurance, etc. This brought out the Obama people to fight back. Then they smeared Biden as a segregationist and public service profiteer: "Biden's family fortunes mirrored the course of his career." Yeah, that's called "graft." They smeared Harris as a racist monster for all the young black criminals she put in jail as a prosecutor. And they smeared Buttguy for allowing racist, killer cops in his police department.

Good times! Did I miss anything?