Leftist Shamefulness: Can It Get Any Worse Edition

Finally finished this one!

With the problems Israel now faces, it is as difficult to focus on one angle as it is to focus on Biden incompetency.  There's just so much.   So this will be a bit scattershot, a kind of "roundup" type post unless something specific draws my attention. 

One of the most heinous aspects of this situation...apart from the heinous evil inflicted upon Israel by Hamas on 7 October, is the leftist response to it.  It seems impossible for the left to speak on the issue without some measure of Jew hatred, manifesting mostly in false comparisons meant to indict the nation of Israel as "just as bad" as those who seek its destruction.  I won't stand for that shit at this blog.  I won't delete assholes who try to perpetrate such lies, like Dan does in deleting truths he cannot overcome, but I'll simply call out those who do as the assholes they are, even if not in so many words.  

That said, we've seen and heard lefties try to equivocate in a variety of ways, mostly suggesting opposition of violence from either side, as if the violence perpetrated is equal in nature.  With extremely rare exceptions which don't ever come to mind, the violence perpetrated against Israel and Jews (I'll simply say "Jews" from this point on) is not in any way comparable to that which is perpetrated by the Jews in response.  This current situation is just one more example of the difference between Jews and those who seek their utter destruction.  The Jews do NOT target civilians.  EVER!  I've never seen it.  I've never been presented with evidence where it ever took place.  EVER!  Yet, our very own Dumbass Dan has suggested such a thing.  That muslim civilians die in a military response to muslim murder is the consequence of muslim tactics as well as simply a truth of war.  But those civilians are victims of muslim misbehavior, for there would be no Jewish response if not for muslim murderous attacks.  That's just a fact.

Recently there was an exchange between a reporter and the vile (https://www.theblaze.com/news/ilhan-omar-upset-reporter-truth-hamas-israel) "Squad".  Here, we see an example of false equivalency so vital to leftist perspective on issues like this.  The ungrateful America-hater, Ilhan Omar refuses to condemn the atrocities of Hamas and pretends that we're now to focus our attention on the likely suffering of pallie civilians.  She says this as if its an ongoing assault on the pallie civilian population.  She clearly doesn't care in the least for Jewish lives.  Neither, apparently, did any of the other Dem asshats standing with her.  But if they care so much about muslim lives, they should be railing against the murderous attacks by their beloved muslims which bring about responses which jeopardize the lives of muslim civilians.  No one is targeting muslims (except perhaps other muslims), but only targeting those who launched murderous attacks.  Other Dem assholes, like Cori Bush, pretends they're "oppressed" in the same way she wants people to believe black people are "oppressed".   The left never cares about true victims of crime and violence.  They prefer to present terrorist and criminal thugs as victims.  They're liars. 

And speaking of ungrateful America-hating assholes, there's Rashida Tlaib, who, along with the aforementioned bitch Omar, was quick to accuse the Jews of bombing a hospital...pretending to weep about the lost lives.  She made no effort to confirm the reports of the islamists who made the claim, and as far as I know at this point, she's made no effort to apologize for pushing the MISINFORMATION!  (Isn't the left supposed to be so greatly opposed to misinformation??)  Like the left always does, they are quick to regard the least negative allegation against their betters as gospel.

And of course as far as THAT goes, (https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/the_media_and_the_gaza_hospital_hoax.html) the pure-as-the-driven-snow leftist media was keen to jump on that story as fact as well.  This isn't surprising, since to the left, the Jews are like conservatives and Christians.  Again, any allegation is truth to them when it denigrates any of those groups.  Leftist journalism doesn't include any actual search for truth, and as suggested in the article, "the MSM does virtually no independent investigating anymore, relying wholly on biased outlets like the AP and Reuters which themselves knowingly rely on biased local sources, and also acts as willing stooges for Deep State leaks."  And who were the sources for these initial reports?  FREAKIN' HAMAS!!!  Yeah...let's go with them!  They never lie!  (https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/10/cnns_claims_about_gaza_are_loaded_with_canards.html)  The leftist media are incompetent, lazy and dishonest.  (Dumbass Dan is all about dishonesty!)

Then we have the many leftist controlled colleges and universities where stupid kids have bought into the lies of the left taught to them by leftist professors.   Some, like (https://nypost.com/2023/10/19/cornell-professor-exhilarated-by-hamas-attacks-apologies/) this asshole in the link, later tried to tap dance their way out of the shit storm they created for themselves, after having aided in stoking anti-Jewish sentiment among the stupid they're supposed to be grooming into responsible, mature adults.  It's abhorrent and every damned one of them should lose their jobs.

Among the worst of the leftists with regard to this issue is the current administration, as well as Obama's.  Their constant financial aid to those who seek our destruction along with that of the Jews is reprehensible and treasonous.  These murderers, such as those running Iran, constantly speak of us in the most hateful manner and somehow, Dem morons don't believe what they're so openly told.   This makes the Democrat Party the greatest danger to the survival of the United States of America.  And they prove it over and over again is so very many ways.  There should never be one more red cent given to any muslim nation which hasn't proven itself opposed to terrorism and Jew hatred, and then it would still be a risky idea.  And to contrast a great president against these two imbeciles, Donald Trump helped forge alliances between Israel and several arab nations, while the two imbeciles have put the Jews...and ourselves...at greater risk by sending islamists aid.  Gaza can go scratch.  They are undeserving until they rise up against their own to put a stop to the murder and hate.  Do you think that'll happen anytime soon?

A good knee-slapper is leftist calls for "proportional" responses to islamic barbarism.  Apparently the left didn't think that one out.  Otherwise, Israel's "proportional" response would include dragging families from their homes to be kidnapped, raped and murdered, decapitating and burning alive infants and all manner of other forms of evil.  Leftists are really stupid people.

Finally for this post, there's "restraint" and "cease-fire".  This is what Greg Gutfeld brilliantly described as "a free punch".  The evil can do what they want and the "restraint" response from leftists is a free pass.  It happens every time, and also with regard to domestic terrorism, otherwise known as criminal behavior.  We enable and promote this vile evil when we don't crush it when it raises its ugly evil head.  It was in Omar's lying outrage, "Yeah...they murdered 1400 Israelis, but how many lives do you want to see lost?"  Give me a break.  You don't get to demand restraint after never ever showing any yourselves (and I include all pallie supporters as complicit). 

It seems the left is out to raise the bar on shamefulness once again.  Can it get any worse?  I can't see that it won't.

They Will Never Stop.

I have a real problem with the worst purveyors of anti-Semetism.  You know...the Hamas, Hezb'allah, ISIS types in the world, who are now engaging in all sorts of vile barbarism against the people of Israel...AGAIN!!

It's bad enough there's no such thing as a palestinian.  As has been presented many times before now, that word was first used by the Roman Empire and was a region in which a variety of peoples inhabited.  Europeans controlling the area retained the word to describe the region, but there was no "palestinian" people which didn't include arabs, Jews, Zoroastrians and a few others.  

Eventually, plans by the colonizers to divvy the land resulted in arabs pissing themselves and deciding the Jews must die and some chose to call themselves "palestinians" as if that's an actual nation or people.  But they were just arabs who lived in the same area those others listed lived.  

But again, this has all been explained.  All that matters now is that playing nice with muslims serves no one and certainly hasn't served Israel.  The bottom line is this:  Israel deserves more land than they have, and the pallies...especially those in Gaza...barely deserve to breathe.  They're animals, who exist only to murder.  The few who aren't like that are Israeli citizens living the good life.  The rest are vermin who live in squalor, getting next to nothing of the billions poured out by foreign nations...including ours...to improve life for that assholes.  

And now, instead of using the financial aid to become the nation they pretend to be, they've turned of the barbarism to 11 and as far as I'm concerned, if the consequences of them doing so results in THEM being wiped off the face of the earth, it will be a greatly improved face.  That goes for all the other islamists, too. 

We KNOW What Needs To Be Done! We Should Do it!

 Philadelphia has experienced a few nights worth of looting and pillaging by what appears to be hordes of black people most prominent in the criminality.  Despite how modern progressive assholes will take it, it's not uncommon. and I say that with great regret.  But I won't pretend there's any racial aspect at play at reporting the truth.  All the media presented images attest to the racial makeup of most of those involved. 

So what?  Does it matter?  No.  Not to those who merchandise is stolen...who stores are damaged to steal that merchandise.   And certainly not to those who are trying to do their jobs without risk of physical assault for daring to object.  

Here's where I stand on these incidents:

I don't give a flying FUCK about the perpetrators of these mobs of thugs smashing and grabbing.  I affirm the right of store owners, or their employees, to fire upon these assholes so that the notion that one can just do this sort of thing dissipates in the minds of the lowest of the low of our kind.  I don't give a FUCK what race the perpetrators are.  Anyone who enters a store wearing a "hoody" and a mask should expect a bullet or a very damaging blunt instrument employed to respond to their criminal actions.  I'd be happy to see a metal pipe violently struck against the shin of any thief.  Cripple him right there and then so that they cannot flee and they can easily be taken into custody when law enforcement shows up, however long that might take (let them writhe in pain for the duration).  

Some, mostly leftist dumbshits, will ask, "is that property worth the life of the person who steals it?"  I respond, "Is your life worth losing for the sake of taking my property?"  I'd much rather deal with a beggar than a thief...especially given how violent and aggressive today's thieves seem to be.

I saw a clip today of a two women robbing a store.  After leaving, one returned when she realized she left her cellphone behind.  He demand its return and the person on duty said he'd return it if she returned the merchandise her and her bitch cohort stole.  She assaulted the guy to get her phone back because how freakin' dare he keep her property!   FUCK these people, I say!!

This shit has to stop and I don't give a flying rat's ass how many thugs die in the process.  They serve no good purpose and threaten too many.  If they choose to leave the dark side provided by Dem policy and come into the light, I will welcome them.  Until they do, they should live life knowing there are targets on their bacs. 

NOW What?

Diane Feinstein has passed away.  R.I.P. Diane, but you should have been gone long ago.  I don't want to speak ill of the dead, but when it comes to my country, I won't pussy-foot around.  (Oh, jeez, Dan!!! Was that out of line???)  

I've been trying to find some piece of legislation she crafted and got passed which made a shit's worth of difference, and thus far found none.  I've heard some praise her for the 1994 assault weapons ban, as if it actually did anything, but as I go through her own website's list of accomplishments, there really nothing there which justifies her repeated re-election.  Dems are really easy to please, it seems. 

I have to say that I'm enamored to some extent with anyone who devotes their lives to public service.  The reality is that many who last so long in elected positions profit in doing so, and while my gut reaction is "more power to you", that only goes as far as they've done something good for the nation.  I'm just not seeing anything which is much more than fancy ribbons and bows.  

I once did a post after the passing of Ted Kennedy.  I now regret that since he was really just a complete scumbag who was incredibly undeserving of any praise.  While I would put Feinstein up as another like Mr. Chappaquiddick, her resume isn't all that great.  It's too bad.  I'd much rather lament her passing as a loss to the nation, but I can't see any reason to really do so.  Anyone of her age is on borrowed time, being on the short end of their lives.  While we can rightfully mourn her passing, that it came is not unexpected and to some extent, some would see anyone over, say, 85 as being gifted with each day they breathe.  The father of one of my best friends was just written up in the local paper for having reached the big 100.  He's said to still be sharp as a tack.  Diane wasn't, and with the report of people having to guide her into expressing a "Yes" vote suggests she was past her sell-by date. 

I can fully dig not wanting to cash it in...not wanting to throw in the towel despite the reality that one is no longer getting it done.  But those who pretend to love such people betray them by allowing them to go too long without doing a thing to try to convince them its over.  It's sad.  Worse is the affect on the nation of someone so beyond the pale voting on legislation.  As such, she will be held up as evidence in support of age limits for government office.  That's easy to do when one is offering up those who are negatively impacted by their age, and then suggesting that everyone that age is equally impacted in a negative way.  It's rather exploitative, if you ask me. 

But now what?  That's the title of this piece.  California governor Gavin Newsome is said to be in a bit of a quandary about appointing a replacement for his state, but without getting into any detail or discussion about that, he's stated a desire to appoint a black woman, because checking boxes is what dumbasses do.  Ability is always second place when a Dem appoints a moron to a post of any kind.  So long as he gets to choose, he no doubt will choose stupidly, because Democrats are stupid people.

Thus, the balance of power in the Senate is unlikely to change, unless Newsome choose poorly.  By that I mean he chooses who he believes will be Feinstein like, or "Newsome" like and then the person turns out to be intelligent.  

Sometimes I wonder how politics can possibly turn anyone off!  There are serious times, and every move by any politician has the potential to make a significant difference in the life of an average American.  The passing of Feinstein presents just such a possibility.  Hoping for the best here if futile, but seeing how it plays out will be interesting. 

GOOD GOLLY!!!

 Watched a good chunk of the GOP primary debates.  The second one, not having seen the first.  WHAT THE F**K!!!!!!!

Well, that's what debates are these days, aren't they?  Too many, including one of my likely candidates, Ron DeSantis, felt the need to pretend Trump needed to be there and was a coward for not.  Bullshit.  It was a crap sandwich and I saw nothing which made me think one of them was more worthy of my vote than the other.  That's not to say each wasn't more worthy than any of the abject clinical morons the Dems are suggesting might run, including the Moron In Chief that complete dumbasses actually suggested would be a better president than Trump before cheating hard enough to deny Trump a second term.  No.  The only Dems who were anywhere near close to being a decent choice for president left the party, because Democrats are assholes.  They need to certify as assholes just to be in the party, and need an ID card with a picture of themselves with an asshole where their face is supposed to be.  They don't want any of their people to be mistaken for anything other than an asshole. 

Here's what needs to be done in any future debate:  Those hosting and asking questions need a switch to prevent anyone not directly asked a question from being heard.  When someone says, "Before I answer that I'd like to respond to the previous question posed to whomever"  they should be cut off.  Or if they try that after answering the specific question posed to them, they should be cut off. 

There was a Latina who asked a couple of questions which were based on false premises.  I don't recall at the moment and don't care to research it.  It happened enough that I don't need to do so.  But, when someone was asked a question with one of these false premises mentioned, no one objected.  No one said "what you said isn't at all true".  That concerns me.  If each held to the rules, they had only a few minutes to respond, and others could chime in afterwards with an extremely small window of time to do so.  But the answer doesn't matter if the question is bullshit.  Those bullshit questions should have been called out.

There were  three asking questions.  Stuart Varney, Dana Perino and Ilia Calderon.  The first two are FoxNews people and the third is from Univision.  Calderon asked more bullshit questions during the period I watched (almost an hour).  She seemed to be the leftist of the bunch based on the stupid things she said in the run-ups to her questions.  That's fine.  She can ask what she likes in any way she chooses to ask.  But when she says something untrue, the respondent should be correcting her immediately and I don't believe I saw anyone do so during the period I watched.  That's not on Calderon, but on the candidates.  

The other two asked some questions specific to specific candidates, and I don't think any response was what I would have like to have heard in the manner I think is incredibly important for someone seeking my vote should have.  

Two candidates are from my state (my new home for the last 16 months), Nicki Haley and Tim Scott.  Should either emerge triumphant, I can cast my general election vote for them over any of the American hating clowns the Dems will put up for prez.  But each did something I find concerning.  One of the questions asked of DeSantis had to do with this question of some slaves having acquired skills while enslaved during the time prior to Emancipation.  This is one of the bullshit question from Calderon, and apparently DeSantis had acknowledged this fact not long ago.  Leftists and race-hustlers jumped on any who expressed this reality as if it meant the person who understands that fact is diminishing the immorality of slavery.  It's how they roll, because leftists are assholes and need to demonize good people in order to deceive the stupid.  Racial questions always put white people on the defensive, and more often than not, that's the point of asking them.  But DeSantis should have simply said, "Well, that's true, unless we're to believe slaves were only for the most menial of tasks and never trained to serve their masters in ways they could have exploited once freed for their own benefit."  That shuts down the race-baiting immediately.  I don't blame any white person over being taken aback by such questions, knowing what race-hustling assholes the leftists are, but someone needs to step up and ram it back down leftist throats.  It ain't hard.  Just don't respect such shit.

Tim Scott found it a subject to which he needed to respond and he lost me by not saying, "Cut that shit out!  Of COURSE slaves learned stuff which benefited them once emancipated!  What kind of moron would think otherwise and on what factual basis??"  But he didn't.  He felt it necessary to assert what we all know about slavery. 

Nicki Haley, on the other hand, thought she was scoring points by attacking others like DeSantis and Ramawamy.  In my book, she didn't.  She came off like a conservative Hillary.  We don't need that.  To his credit, Ramaswamy sought to remind all that everyone on stage were basically good people, and the real threat was Biden and the Democrap Party. 

Bergum didn't get a lot of attention, and it's too bad.  I don't see him rising from his humble state at this point, but he comported himself well.  He seems a fairly sharp guy, but too little is known about him and I don't think he did anything to draw more support to him.  

Pence....I can't get beyond his weak response as Indiana governor to the immoral blowback against a religious freedom act he should have pushed like a mad dog.  And his weakness when he had a chance to return electoral votes many found suspicious was a travesty.  

Chris Christie talks a good game and I'd have to research his record to see how accurately he presented it.  He had me for about a minute years ago, but then seemed to be a piece of shit from then on.  

Ramaswamy is always bold in his pronouncements, but I'm not totally sold on the guy for president despite liking him in general.

DeSantis was accused of being weak in the first debate, but in this one I found him to be very much like the Florida governor which drew me to him as a true leader.  His responses never went over time and he seemed very confident and strong.  I haven't seen any reviews, but I'd say he came out very well and should get a bump.

It's very difficult to get a sense of who is truly providing real plans for success.  There's a lot of flowery expressions, a lot of self-promotion, and way too much stuff which doesn't serve anyone.  That's what a primary debate is these days.  In short, a waste of time, though I don't think they should be eliminated.  I just want to see them improved so that I can get a sense of who is really worthy of my vote.  These debates don't lend enough for the purpose.  At least in the general, there are only two.  That's better for avoiding the problems inherent in so many on stage. 

So my opinion is this:  Out of this debate, DeSantis is the guy.  I hope, if there's a third, the field will be smaller and Trump will be among them prepared to inform us how things will be even better than the first time around.  I'm still torn between him and DeSantis, yet open to be convinced any of the others might be the best choice.  I don't see that happening, but it's crystal clear that either are a universe better than any asshole from the Democrat Party.  They've hurt us badly enough for quite some time and there's not a one whose name is put forth who won't further harm this nation.  Our only hope is from the GOP as weird as that is to say.  But it's true.  There's no hope for us with another Dem in the White House or in the majority of either House of Congress.   That's just the fact.

Gimme, Gimme, Gimme!

As an employee, I've always enjoyed getting pay increases, whether it was a one time deal, and annual Christmas bonus or a straight up raise in my regular pay.   I'm like most people who believe that if it is possible, it would be nice for my employer to grant me yet more.  Also like most people, I believe I'm worth whatever I can get, for even at my worst moments, I still felt that I was overall, fulfilling my obligations and as such was an asset to the company.  While not necessarily being the most ass-busting employee in the house, I at least did what I could to ensure I was considered an asset.  

Unlike most, I didn't insist I should have more.  I never thought in terms of how much my company was making, how much those who owned or ran the company was  making.  That's because I saw my situation as a contract to which I agreed.  I work "so" hard and the company pays me a given amount for it.  

I've lobbied for more on occasion.  I would argue that my efforts made me an asset which seemed to me to be justification for more, and when refused I was, as most people would be, quite disappointed.  But I was still getting the amount to which I agreed when I agreed to take the gig.  I was getting what I was supposed to be getting as a result, given there was nothing I was promised I wasn't getting.  In some jobs, when I asked at the interview about how to increase my pay, some jobs had specific, though limited criteria, while others said something like, "Well, we'll see..." which told me not to expect anything other than the wage offered at the jump.  

As many know, the United Auto Workers are threatening (or maybe by now carrying through with that threat) to strike.  It's so nice to know that in these times of inflation, these unionists have no problem adding to it with another pressure.  But in listening to their "leader", UAW Prez Shawn Fain, he made a remark about the profits of the company somehow means he and those he pretends to represent are entitled to a larger piece of those profits, under the premise they helped get those profits.  

I think this is a bullshit argument.  It is expected that good employees means a healthy profit, but that's not the only means by which those profits are generated.  Indeed, that's not even among the most important one.  Each employee is expected to be a good one.  That's why they're offered a wage and compensation package in the first place...to do the job for which they were hired and to do it well.  They're not supposed to half-ass it.  They're supposed to have integrity and perform to the best of their ability because they agreed to when they took the gig, whether they expressed it in such terms or not.  That's what employment is.  No one goes into an interview and says, "Yeah, I'll take the job, but I won't bust my ass" or "I won't do it well".  Thus, if they were doing their part, and the company was paying what they promised to pay when they were hired, it doesn't matter how much profits the company makes.  The contract is fulfilled.  (Of course, if at the time of hiring a promise was made by the company to increase their pay when profits rose, that's another thing.)

But let's get back to that "We made you rich" argument used to whine for more.  Is that really true?  Not really.  Certainly not exactly.  Again, doing what was expected doesn't justify more pay.  Employees aren't hired to "make the company rich".  They're hired to do a specific task.  Who's ever been hired to "make me rich"?  Not me, and at my age, I can guarantee I've had more than few jobs in my life.  Never heard those terms before in a job interview.  What makes an employer rich?   A good business model and a good product or service.  Good management to keep the ship afloat in bad weather is another distinct factor.  Good employees who do their job as laid out upon hiring may be part of a good game plan, but it's just a part. 

The worst part of this is the expectation.  I love an employer who chooses to share the wealth.  But I have no right...nor does anyone else...to demand that he must.  That's just coveting and is too often demanded by those who do the least they can get away with.  How many of those employees are busting it all the time? 2%?  There seems to be a too common attitude that one is owed a job, and then having gotten one, that one is owed more based not on the terms to which both parties agreed, but based on whatever the employees demand must be paid based on things none of them had all that much to do with.  

As if that isn't bad enough, to then withhold one's services until demands are met, and somehow the employer is forced to keep the whiners on the roll, is damned near evil when you think about it.  Not only does it impact the income of the company, management, owners and any non-union personnel, but it negatively impact all peripheral businesses, such as suppliers and even local stores, restaurants and gas stations whose profits will suffer while these people aren't working because of the strikers?

So the company gives in and who pays the new wage?  The company?  Maybe.  But at some point, if not immediately, they'll pass those costs on to the customers of their products or services.  This will increase costs down the line, including the wages of those who now must pay more for the products of the company whose employees forced it to pay higher wages.  

And what if the company sales drop off or it's in some other way no longer making tons of money for any of a variety of reasons?  How many who went on strike will  step up and strike to reduce their wages? 

I don't like labor strikes.  Live within your means, save for a rainy day, develop other sources of income, seek a better paying job. 

Leftist Shamefulness: Word Abuse Edition Part the Second

 https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/09/when_is_a_child_not_a_child_when_sick_sex_is_involved.html

I was just going to add this to the original post below, but it's particularly perverse, that I thought I'd highlight it specifically.  The column says all that needs be said, but I'll just begin by saying it represents a most heinous example of how the left abuses words.  Here, what constitutes "adult" is determined by circumstances favorable and convenient for modern progressives over 21.  That is, if one needs a minor to be an adult, that minor is magically an adult.  If one needs a young person to be a child, then that older kid will still be a child.  We see this perversion manifest in a variety of ways, a few described in the article.  One thing's for certain, a lefty can't rag on Judge Roy Moore and still run this level of crap at the same time.  A lot of old timers need to apologize to the memory of Errol Flynn!

But this is where we're at.  We must constantly be vigilant for the next instance where the modern progressive will proclaim a word means something it never did...and truly never should.  

The left are truly vile.