Corporate Circlejerks and the Female Affinity For Nancyboys

I had to sit through a day-long corporate meeting and I’m taking my frustration out on you.

There is a certain personality type that just luuuuuuuuuuu-uuuuuvs meetings. In fact, they’d probably rather spend an entire work year having meetings than actually doing any work. It seems to be the same personality type obsessed with titles and glorified job descriptions (which serve as camouflage to disguise the fact that they get paid for shuffling papers and enforcing/generating bureaucratic red tape).

During these self-congratulatory orgies with the trappings of business meetings, a lot of time and money is spent, but nothing gets produced. The best of them may present 45 minutes of useful information while the remaining seven hours and 15 minutes are little more than mass mutual ego-stroking–an opportunity for the vain and self-important to dress up and receive awards for dubious accomplishments.

This last meeting only reinforced my opinion. In addition, the Random Seat Assignment gods were pissed at me that day. There were two top-tier babes and at least four second-tier who could have wound up beside me. Instead, the seat to my right was occupied (at the invitation of an obese woman at my table) by probably the last individual on the company roster I would have preferred.

I’ve seen this effiminate little character around before at smaller-scale meetings. Don’t know what department he’s in and not interested in knowing. But I made an effort to be friendly (by Two-Fisted standards, anyway). Maybe the guy was raised by a single mom and only had sisters, and thus was completely oblivious to how uncomfortable he makes men with all his mincing and such.

I had to scrap this benefit-of-the-doubt upon noticing how every female in the company he was acquainted with fawned all over him. Several embraced him and kissed his cheek like a long lost sister. That’s kind of a giveaway.

Okay, western women have been squirting for metrosexuals from Rudolf Valentino to Prince. I get that. (Sorry I can’t provide any more recent examples, but I intentionally avoid pop culture as best I can.) But there was no sexual tension in these greetings–quite the opposite. It was obvious they found him as unthreatening as a stuffed animal.

Going back to junior high, before I truly believed that homosexuals actually existed, I couldn’t help noticing this weird upperclassman who preferred to hang out with the girls. Not for the natural reasons, either. He was obviously much more interested in gossiping with them than any sort of romantic ambitions, and the girls in his circle were all protective of him. None looked at him or reacted to him the way they did me or the other jocks. Their demeanor changed around him in some other way, like he was a puppy with a broken leg or something.

This is a consistent phenomenon in our culture. I always thought that junior high situation was rare when I was a kid; maybe it was rare to find among adults…but not so anymore. When in college I discovered that (prior to the doubled-down media blitz to legitimize homosexuality in the mind of Joe Public) such women were commonly referred to as “fag hags,” even among homophiles.

Now it seems like every female is a fag hag. (A whole lot of males, too, come to think of it.)

I’ve heard women say things like, “I think that’s so cute!”

Let two males, behaving as if one were female, walk into a large group of women and listen to the collective “Awwwwwwww!” erupt as if scripted. You get the same thing in movie audiences after carefully manipulative homo-erotic scenes.

Once in the Bahamas, watching some comedy/musical/variety show put on by the resort staff, actors and actresses came out in various costumes, impersonationg different famous celebrities. The audience was international (though mostly from western nations) and the thespians were attractive. That seemed to be a requirement. There was very little applause for the hot babes–maybe because the men present had brought their dates, as I had. There was mildly enthusiastic applause from the gathered women for the bare-chested beefcake. But when one of the male actors appeared in drag, the hooting, cheering and applause was thunderous by comparison.

On another date a few years later, I watched a belly dancing demonstration. When it was over, the dancer instructed some kids how to dance and their parents all laughed and clapped. But after that she asked the crowd if they’d like to see a guy dressed in the costume and forced to dance. The question was asked like she already knew the answer, based on experience with other crowds. And sure enough, the crowd cheered its approval and some poor mangina was singled out to humiliate himself in front of everybody.

It’s all enough to make a man wonder: Is the same psychological compulsion driving women to invade male turf and ruin it also driving their collective desire to see men feminized (whether it be literally or superficially)?

Post-Apocalyptic Affirmative Action: The 100

You can find this series on Netflix or Amazon.

The scenario:

Earth was destroyed in a nuclear war. Hundreds of people survived in space stations orbiting the planet. The space stations were sent up by different nations.  They eventually found “unity” and combined all their stations into one impossibly gigantic station called “the Ark.” Cute, huh?

This multinational colony all speaks English. No biggie–we can accept that, as it makes it easier to tell a story. There is artificial gravity everywhere in the Ark, too–even the sections not spinning. The ace mechanic (a woman, of course) manages to fix heavy machinery on a regular basis without even getting her hands dirty, and while maintaining a perfect manicure. Because booty. (That’s right, this actress, though typically skinny, has the nicest rump you may see on TV, and she’s also smokin’ hot above the shoulders. But you’ll only get treated to the full package when she’s first introduced.)

So much for technical realism.

Air and resources are running out on the Ark, so they send 100 juvenile delinquents down to Earth to both get them out of the space station, and to serve as lab rats and demonstrate whether the environment is survivable. There are some legitimate criminal types mixed in, but most are just misunderstood teens.

It turns out the Earth is survivable (or there would be no series). In fact, the “Grounders” (a primitive society descended from survivors who never left the planet) are doing just fine, biologically. They also speak English with no dialectic variation from the multinational space station contingent.

So what we have here is potentially a TEOTWAWKI survival story with plenty of conflict within and without the “100” culture for a competent writer to work with and keep interesting.

PC Utopian tweaks:

Every single leader of import is either a woman or a minority–with occasional antagonistic exceptions like a white male who leads a sort of lynch mob. And of course the best leaders are the females. Even the Grounders–a hunter-gatherer society where survival depends on physical prowess–have a female leader and plenty of pixie ninja “warriors.”

Ri-iiiiight.

There are a couple bad-boy types. One becomes the bleeding heart pacifist “voice of conscience” type after the ship lands. The other was a janitor on the Ark, and becomes co-leader with a Strong Female Character who is star of the show. Of course she is the stronger, wiser, more rational leader of the two. Bad Boy #1 has, as his girlfriend, the hottest chick on the show (the aforementioned “mechanic”), but, in a society where females are apparently in short supply, he ditches her for the plain-faced blonde protagonist with the body of a teenage boy.

In fact, within a couple episodes, the show began to resemble a soap opera. The question the audience is prompted to ask is not “How will they survive this catastrophe?” but “Who’s sleeping with who this week?”

Maybe that’s the root problem: Much like what feministas and SJWs want to do to video games (what #gamergate is all about), they have invaded genres like TEOTWAWKI/post-apocalypse and have twisted it into just another pop culture tool to sell their agenda and condition an audience that would rather just be entertained.

They weren’t content to have their own gynocentric gathering places and their own gynocentric entertainment. They have to take over what few male sanctuaries are left and ruin them, as well.

If you want to watch something in this kind of modern-people-dealing-with-prehistoric-challenges flavor, a much better choice would be Terra Nova. It only lasted one season, and is certainly not perfect, but is far superior to this flotsam.

More on Race and Politics

(Or should I call it the politics of race?)

Racial tensions aren’t going to go away just because I wish they would. In fact, for the first time in my life, I’m convinced they’re not going to go away at all. Peacefully anyway.

The turdstorm of lies, distortions and disinformation obviously is only getting worse, too. So here’s Bill Whittle saying what nobody else has the balls to say on camera:

I’ve come to like Truth Revolt, especially Firewall. They don’t recognize or won’t admit the disease destroying our form of government. They still use Newspeak and still believe the GOP is ideologically where it was 80 years ago (free market capitalism, national sovereignty, individual rights, etc.), but it’s hard to find anyone willing to be honest even about the symptoms anymore.

The glaring oversight in this video is how the press also covered up for Clinton (so effectively, in fact, that “conservatives” have been bamboozled into seeing his only crime as lying about a blowjob in the oval office). It’s still worth a watch.

If You Like Your Freedom of Speech, You Can Keep It.

You’re likely to hear all sorts of excuses and rationalizations about “net neutrality” in the coming days/weeks/months. The Marxists (“liberals;” ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, HuffPo, WaPo, NYT, ect. ad infinitum) and the NeoCons (Fox News, etc.) will debate about superficial aspects of the issue, perhaps even passionately.

Don’t buy the crap about connection speeds–that’s a smokescreen.

I’m gonna cut through the BS and just get right to the core of the issue: Censorship and coverups.

The globalist left has been herding policy makers in the USA for well over a century, and they’ve enjoyed a complete monopoly on the flow of information for nearly as long. Their mass media has become increasingly blatant about the agenda in recent decades, but then somebody let the genie out of the bottle.

That genie was the Internet. The Internet has completely saturated the culture, and is the ONLY medium of significant reach that the globalist left doesn’t control outright (NeoCon straw men notwithstanding). Understandably, they don’t like that.

Even the Internet is dominated by leftists and left-leaning voices. Only about 30% of the content is truly outside the good cop/bad cop political theater, and of that, most is garbage posted by legitimate crackpots and probably Establishment shills spreading disinformation (subscribe to Before It’s News and you’ll get more of this than you can stomach).

A tiny percentage actually reports truthfully on the disease (as opposed to only some of the symptoms, like Breitbart, the Blaze, or Fox). But even that tiny percentage, though ignored, dismissed or libelled, is too much for the Establishment’s liking. What’s even scarier to them is there are millions of quiet, unnoticed individuals on the web who might start thinking for themselves at any time, then asking questions outside the frame of acceptable debate.

That’s what “net neutrality” is really about.

And if they don’t ram it down our throats this time, watch for an epidemic of some sort of abuse or unfair business practice by  providers to manifest, justifying regulation “for our own good.”

Race Riot Nation

After Trayvon Martin and Ferguson, plus having my finger on the pulse of the Official Victim Class where I live and work, I’m removing my rose-tinted Ray-Bans: There will never be a post-racial America. Those who truly desire harmony (and I believe there’s not many who actually do) don’t have the power or influence to compete with those who are inflaming racial tensions in America.

The present occupant of the White House promised a “post-racial America.” But then he also promised you could keep your doctor and health plan if you liked it, and that he would cut the national debt in half or he wouldn’t run for a second term. Obviously he does exactly the opposite of what he promises…with one glaring exception: his mission statement of “fundamentally transforming” America.

Got a whole lotta’ that going on.

The Official Victim Class never cared how or why the fatal shooting in Ferguson occurred. All they needed to know was who is black, who is white, and their minds were made up, permanently.

Exactly their same attitude in the last two presidential elections, come to think of it. Ironic that they accuse whites of racism so often.

So anyway, Radical Times is about the first “race war” in America–the South during Reconstruction, when blacks truly were oppressed. The original cover was okay, but nothing special. I like this new one much better.

The novella is a quick read with action, lost history, and my first attempt at a romantic sub-plot.

And hopefully it’s much less depressing than what’s going on, now.

Drowning in Literary Estrogen

I’ve been lamenting over the state of fiction for so long, I got tired of hearing myself bitch about it. I guess bloggers like Vox Day were blissfully unaware.

But now it’s come to his attention and it gave me a good laugh.

No wonder book sales are continuing to decline. Seriously, even the gamma males of science fiction aren’t going to read any of that equine ejectus.

This after he saw the lineup of Reader’s Choice books on Goodreads.

I was an avid reader from a young age, and window-shopping at bookstores was an enjoyable pastime for me until about the late 1980s, when the New York Publishing Cartel choked off pretty much everything I had a desire to read. I finally gave up going to retail bookstores altogether by the mid 1990s, realizing it would never get better.

And we are supposed to believe they’re honestly and truly going to make good, nay, even better, computer games. Really? To quote the Sports Guy: “The lesson, as always, is this: women ruin everything.”

Here is the primary difference between men and women. In the past, women would look at a male-dominated list of book awards and be struck by feelbad because she felt excluded. A man looks at that list, laughs, and thinks, do they really read that shit?

When was the last time men dominated the list of book awards–the ’60s? Well, whenever it was, he’s right.

Porphyry says:

Holy shit, is the future just a bunch of girls masturbating in public with cis-males trying to assist them? Cause that’s essentially what this is the literary equivalent of.

While Daniel said:

Oh Lord. In Memoir there’s a finalist titled “Redefining Realness.” About a trans woman*. His last name is Mock.

My tears of laughter are redefined real. Really redefined real.

*Technically, he’s a trans sister. I hope he’s got a show on the radio.

Then Waterboy asked:

Wait…Anne Rice is writing vampire novels, again? Did she redisunconvert again, or was she somehow able to reconcile glorification of evil with her “Christian” beliefs?

To which Stingray replied:

As I understand it, Ann Rice renounced her faith again. She couldn’t reconcile something or other. Some SJW talking point, I believe.

And Crude added:

Anne Rice’s Christian phase went a bit like this:

Anne: I’m a Christian now! Okay everyone, first order of business: Homosexual sex acts are A-OK. My son’s gay, so I know. Christ would approve of that, so get with the program!
Christianity at large: No.
Anne: This is a hateful religion! I can’t be part of a religion that doesn’t approve of sodomy! There’s no God after all, even if Christ was kind of nice! But Christ would dislike you!

What impresses me most about this exchange is that a dozen different commenters didn’t chime in to bleat: “Not that there’s anything wrong with that…”

Then Stillcho provided this insight:

8 different categories are listed, yet looking at the covers and titles one would be prone to suspect that they are all variations on a romance novel.

And Cataline Sergius sums part of the problem up nicely:

Honestly teenage boys are now actively taught not to read.

Think about it. How would you react to the idea of literature, after you had been force fed a diet a of Margret Atwood, Kate Chopin and Maya Angelou?

After that slog through estrogen soaked quicksand, you would either be a male castrato singing in the choir of SJW feminism. Sniveling grateful for every kick that came your way.

Or if you have kept track of your balls, you would be absolutely too delighted to be done with all this reading bullshit and happy as hell you’d never have to do it again.

I can’t slog any farther through the comment thread without either getting depressed or laughing until I pee where I’m not spozda.

Fortunately there are now some gates not guarded by the pinkshirts, SJWs, homophiles and other Marxists (cultural and otherwise).

My epic rant about traditional publishing back on the old Two-Fisted Blog may be of interest to some.

I threw my hat in the blogosphere a few years ago with the Quixotic notion I could stir up an interest among the average red-blooded American male to read again. Stuff like this drives home the point that it’s hopeless. Even if some average heterosexual dude gets a wild hair up his 4th-point to pause the video game and peruse some available books, when he sees a shelf full of bupkus like this he’ll back up faster than if he realized he just walked into a transgender bar.

And he’ll never bother again.

Captain Gringo #1: Renegade

Lucky for us, many of the men’s adventure series of yesteryear are being re-released as E-Books. Renegade is one of those shoo-in canditates, I thought…and somebody at Piccadilly Publishing evidently agreed with me.

I only read a few paperbacks from later in the series, so this was an opportunity for me to go back and see how it all started without breaking the bank or straining my already-overloaded bookshelves.


Lou Cameron originally wrote these men’s adventures under the pseudonym “Ramsay Thorne.” They are being advertised as westerns now, but that’s not exactly accurate, as they take place in Central and South America during the 1890s. I guess I’d call them “jungle mercenary” adventures.

In this one we meet Dick Walker AKA Captain Gringo as he’s awaiting execution by the US Army. As a commissioned officer, he allowed some prisoners to escape because he thought they were getting a raw deal. That earned Richards himself a raw deal. I found it interesting that he had been assigned to the “Buffalo Soldiers”: the 10th Cavalry–a unit I once researched extensively for a project I may or may not ever undertake.

The Renegade escapes, and almost immediately runs afoul of crooked authorities in Mexico. He also makes acquaintance with Gaston Verrier–a middle aged soldier of Fortune who originally came to Mexico as part of the Foreign Legion. In almost-believable fashion, the two of them team up to survive against bleak odds, and raise a lot of hell along the way. Surprisingly, they part ways before the novel is finished (Gaston is Captain Gringo’s consistent sidekick in the series).

The Renegade series reads almost like a Foreign Legion adventure, only with a XXX rating. And the sex scenes in this book are much raunchier than I remember them being in the later ones I read years ago. Cameron seems to have been more of an “anything goes” perv than I took him for back in the day. I now wonder if he didn’t spend some time in Hollywood adapting screenplays, or some other moral cesspool (Greenwich Village, maybe?) that erased any notion of taboos. But I’m getting ahead of myself here and reacting perhaps as much to #2 in the series as to this one.

The ethnic stereotyping is also much more pronounced than I remember, and occasionally grates.

Based on the typos in the new E-book, I would guess they put the original into digital format by running a scanner over one of the paperbacks, then trusting software to sort out the spelling and punctuation. It’s plenty readable, just annoying if you have OCD concerning syntax…like somebody I know. Ahem.

One asset to reading any of Cameron’s work is the nice little historical and cultural tidbits he mixes in with the plot, whether it be Latin customs or mindset; unexplained natural phenomenon; obscure historical events; or the function and employment of a water cooled machinegun. Though pulpy to the extreme, it can’t fairly be called “mindless entertainment.”

Crushing the Mythology of the Feministas

I respect anyone who has the courage to speak the truth, when doing so can get you in trouble any number of ways. I’ve tipped at my share of windmills (and, unfortunately, have had my share of failures showing that kind of courage); so I know from experience it’s not easy to do in today’s political climate.

I’m  glad to have found somebody blogging from across the pond who shoots straight and calls a skunk a skunk. That blogger is Demetri Marchessini . Other folks in the manosphere have knocked over feminista sacred cows before, but he topples several of them on one page. Here are some excerpts:

There is no physical activity in which women can compete with men. Moving to intelligence, countless IQ tests have proved that the average IQ of men and women is exactly the same, but there are big differences in distribution, and in particular abilities. For example, men have a much wider distribution of IQ than women. In other words, geniuses and idiots are usually men. Women’s IQs tend to be closer to the mean. It also means that at the higher levels there are fewer and fewer women. With regards to specific abilities, women are very good at any tests involving words – better than men. Also, their minds are quicker than men’s (but not necessarily more accurate). On the other hand, women are not good at tests involving spatial relationships. That is why there are very few women engineers – it is not that they have not been allowed to be engineers; it is that they are no good at it. Another interesting comparison is Bridge. Many more women than men play Bridge, but at the top tournaments women have to play in a separate section, because they are not good enough to play with the men. Or take chess. Women have played chess for hundreds of years, yet of the one hundred best chess players in the world, only one is a woman.

Try telling that to a film director or comic book writer, dude. The results might be funny enough to post on Youtube. Here’s a nice insight on how Margaret Thatcher was ousted in Britain:

Although Mrs Thatcher won the majority of the votes, it was considered not enough of a majority for her to stay. Now, the interesting thing was that the majority of Conservative male MPs voted for Mrs Thatcher. At that time, there were 25 Conservative women MPs, all of whom had been helped by Mrs Thatcher to find seats, and all of whom had been helped by her once they came into the Commons. Yet, they voted 25-0 against Mrs Thatcher. This lost the election for her. If even half of them had voted for her, she would have succeeded, and if all of them had voted for her, it would have been a landslide. As a majority of male MPs had voted for her, it is impossible to believe that the women’s vote of 25-0 against was based either on politics or on commonsense. Clearly it was based on emotion – and emotion of the worse kind. And yet, this vote changed the direction not only of the Conservative Party, which went well to the Left, but of the whole country. Everyone knew that Mrs Thatcher was never going to sign Maastricht. If she had stayed, we would not be in the EU. Those 25 ladies put us into the EU.

Help out the Yanks here, Demitri: What is an MP in British politics? I’m guessing the “P” is for Parliament but that’s just a guess.

Finally, we come to the famous “sexual harassment”. This too makes no sense. If women and men are “equal”, men should be able to treat women exactly the way they treat other men. And yet women object to being treated like men, while at the same time they insist they are equal.

Demitri argues that western civilization deteriorated to this bass-ackwards “gynocracy” and feminized culture due to the cowardice of the men who once held the power. I agree. But when I examine the multitudes of white knights and manginas surrounding me, raised by single mothers/television and programmed by government schools, I detect a degree of self-loathing as well.

Check out his site–it’s worth it.

Obama, Holder and CBS Conspired to Suppress Facts of Fast & Furious

It’s hard to keep up with all the abuses of power perpetrated by this administration and its lackeys. Even the coverups have coverups. Judicial Watch just uncovered some more information.

One of the documents provides smoking gun proof that the Obama White House and the Eric Holder Justice Department colluded to get CBS News to block reporter Sharyl Attkisson. Attkisson was one of the few mainstream media reporters who paid any attention to the deadly gun-running scandal.

In an email dated October 4, 2011, Attorney General Holder’s top press aide, Tracy Schmaler, called Attkisson “out of control.” Schmaler told White House Deputy Press Secretary Eric Schultz that he intended to call CBS news anchor Bob Schieffer to get the network to stop Attkisson.

Schultz replied, “Good. Her piece was really bad for the AG.”

Schultz also told Schmaler that he was working with reporter Susan Davis, then at the National Journal, to target Rep. Darrel Issa (R-CA). Issa led the House investigation into Fast and Furious. Davis now works at USA Today. In the email chain, Schultz tells Schmaler that he would provide Davis with “leaks.”

Will anything be done about this?

Only more covering up, possibly in the guise of a Kenn Starr-esque independent “investigation.” At the very most, the MSM will grudgingly feed us some diversion akin to the Monica Lewinski scandal while the high crimes and treason are swept under the rug and forgotten.

Blue Pill Politics–Which Wing is Flapping?

Lately I’ve noticed a meme that’s growing in popularity, regarding the “left-right paradigm.” To reduce the meme to generality, many observers are becoming increasingly convinced that there is little to no difference between “left” and “right.”

As convoluted a language as English is, it still annoys me when people are lazy and sloppy in its use; refusing to employ what precision is available to them. When I hear phrases like “semiautomatic machinegun;” “irregardless;” “for future preference;” “conversate;” somebody referring to nitrous oxide as “noss,” or to the Marine Corps as “Special Forces” (somebody I work with does this on a regular basis); the Darth Vader in me threatens to take over.

Maybe what these people mean to say (or at least what they should understand) is that there’s little difference between the Democrat and Republican establishments. What difference there is between “liberals” and “conservatives” is in degrees; not in principle. Oh, they’ll bicker like crazy over those degrees–enough to really convince you they’re at odds. In the end they are no more opposed to each other than the two cops who take turns trying to charm/bully a confession out of a suspect.

It’s worthwhile to consider where the left/right designations came from, since we’ve all been misinformed by our teachers, professors, and the talking heads of television.

Centuries ago in the French parliament, the monarchists/collectivists sat on the left; the anarchists sat on the right. The moderates sat around the middle and the “leaners” sat left or right of center depending on whether they exalted the state or the individual.

Again, you’ve probably been taught that it was the other way around; and if you look it up online, chances are it will be described as the opposite of historical fact. And this makes perfect sense: Left-wingers don’t like be associated with Hitler, Mussolini and Ghengis Khan.

 

Two things you have to understand about leftists:

1. Right and wrong, truth and lies are dynamic. (Like how they envision the U.S. Constitution and its Bill of Rights.) Does it advance their agenda? Then it’s truth. Does it reflect negatively on their agenda? Then it’s a lie. That’s the criteria. Period.

This is an old Marxist/Leninist doctrine which provides a clue to how they can be so comfortable with their own blatant hypocrisy.

2. They agree with the National Socialist German Worker’s (Nazi) Party on all domestic issues: who controls industry; who controls the press; a progressive, graduated income tax; compulsory state-controlled education; civilian disarmament; pervasive regulation of speech and thought; reeducation of dissenters; etc. They do hide their anti-Semitism, though, whereas the Nazis didn’t. So far their hatred is focused on the Jewish state, rather than their Jewish neighbors.

Yes, the Nazis and all fascists are left-wing, if you want to be honest and accurate.

trueleftrightIn fact, both Hitler and Mussolini were darlings of the press and the elitists of the left (sorry for the redundancy) when they first took power. It’s only after Adolf’s rash, rambunctious, too-blatant-to-whitewash behavior embarrassed them that the leftists disguised themselves in anti-fascist drag.

Now, not only do they have a conniption when somebody draws attention to their Nazi bedfellow status; they are infamous for accusing their political opposition of fascism.

Though the atrocities of Nazi Germany were dwarfed by those of Soviet Russia, and Red China (the most prolific mass murderers in recorded history), left-wing elitists have been much more successful in whitewashing the legacy of the Communist empires. Still, after suppressing the truth for 70 years, enough facts trickled down after the fall of the Soviet Union that they had to grudgingly admit that their Communist Bloc beneficiaries were bad guys, too.

But simultaneous with that grudging admission was another magic transposition–suddenly despotic Communists were “right-wing” too. And of course they weren’t called Communists or socialists anymore, either. Now they were merely “Stalinists.”

Abracadabra! Those big meanies are now all on the right, with the enemies of progress.

Those who still track the mainstream media can’t help but notice favorite Newspeak terms like “radical right,” “hardline right,” “new right,” “religious right,” “right-wing extremist” and so on. But you never hear the counterpart epithets…the implication being there’s no such thing as “radical left,” “hardline left,” etc. Which also makes perfect sense, since those very elements in the media are pretending to be objective, impartial messengers with no dog in this fight.

Back to the paradigm. When you take into account what left and right really mean, you quickly realize that very few Republicans even LEAN to the right. Democrats and Republicans (with few exceptions among the latter) are LEFT-WING. They don’t disagree about whether the USA should be fundamentally transformed into a third-world police state; only about how rapidly the transformation should occur.

Let’s briefly tackle “liberal” and “conservative.” A true liberal is somebody like Thomas Jefferson. Socialists hide behind the label in modern times because by simply using the semantic disguise of “liberal,” it soft-peddles their tyranical behavior and their despotic ambitions. There is nothing liberal about what they’re doing or what they intend to do.

“Conservative,” in modern parlance, is evidently the term for anyone to the right of Chris Matthews. What makes people assume “conservatives” are fundamentally different from the “liberals” is that they prefer lower taxes and want a significant portion of our suicidal deficit spending to go into the military. What their Facebook constituents seem most passionate about is Michelle Obama’s wardrobe choices and hip measurement.

My rough estimate is that 93% of the population, whichever party they vote for, completely accepts leftist Newspeak and the subliminal ideas it implants. That’s why I’m on the soapbox today.

The Democrat/Republican paradigm is a sham. The left/right paradigm is real, but the distortion of the facts has confused nearly everyone about what it actually is.

Red-Blooded American Men Examine Pop-Culture and the World