Intensely Illiberal Liberals..

Nothing Is More Liberal Than Sexual Slavery

So Trump is now President Elect, and lots of Democrats are losing their shit over it. Strangely though, all of the protesters look extremely happy. 

"I hate him so much it fills me with joy!"

Rather than get drunk with a gang of friends and set things on fire like so many young people did in Chicago and Los Angeles, I shall relay some useful information about how the Democrats can actually win the next election instead. 

Its very simple folks.

You need to get rid of the mad-bastards like this....

"Nothing says progressive like caving a sluts head in with a brick!"

"Hillary won, OJ was innocent, and my spelling is impeccable."

"I am all for women's rights.... the right to marry me when they are six years old!"

"And asking someone for their phone number is rape."

... and replace them with the logical, centrist, left-leaning New Democrats that emerged after the 1988 Presidential Election.

So where to start?

For openers, centrists needs to combat the idiots in their own party before they take aim at the Republicans.

 Or the Russians.

Passionate Democrats must be willing to reign in the far-left, destroy the illiberal liberals, and return to the centrist but left-leaning, common sense Democratic Party of 2008/2012.

This doesn't mean you are right of center. It simply means you are taking positive steps to drag the party back to the middle-ground, the middle-ground that always wins elections.

I am a socially liberal, typically very progressive person.

And yet come the election, I had one foot in the Trump camp because of the endless identity politics of the regressive left.

"Just because they pray 5 times a day, recite the Qu'ran, and fucking love Allah.. doesn't mean it's got anything to so with Islam"

I spent fifteen years criticizing the Republicans. It started when Bush proclaimed "You are either with us or you are against us" (ignoring the fact that France, Spain, and Mexico have little interest in murdering American citizens) back in 2001 and it continued throughout the Obama administration.

 Every shrill cry when Obama said something in fun, and the Republicans went “Arg! He’s a Muslim!” or he bowed to a head of state “Arg! He hates America!” made me cringe and say “are we really so childish?”

And then at some point in 2016, many Democrats suddenly started being just as silly.

A quip about making your ill relatives vote “He’s like a warped serial killer!” a bad sexist joke “Arg! He HATES all women!” a childish mocking of a reporter “he loathes the disabled” an uncouth comment about Illegal immigration “he despises Mexicans!”

Is life really so black and white? Do we ever act so judgmental and paint in such broad brushes in the real world?

 So he made some crass comments about a handicapped guy at a rally, not nice. But does anyone actually think it makes him "Literally Hitler" or warrant a headline like this?

"What do you mean hyperbole? He mocked a disabled guy once, of course he is going to stuff everyone with a limp in the gas chambers!"

 The endless, authoritarian use of language policing are ridiculous too (ever hear about Jordan Peterson?) the obscene demands for "safe-spaces" and "trigger-warnings" at centers of learning when anything more controversial than wallpaper is being discussed.

 The idea that little white girls having dreadlocks is disgustingly offensive, that only Chinese people should eat Chinese food, that absolutely everything is mean spirited or “cultural appropriation.”

"You know who else had hair? Hitler."

Incredibly, the regressive left even go all in for "hate speech" if the offender's actions were done with no base or hateful intentions at all. Indeed, sometimes the "offender" was attempting to do the exact opposite (Benedict Cumberbatch saying what were ultimately very nice things about black people but still being despised for it.)

"Must dash ladies, I'm off to push a black man down some stairs"

The move from equity feminism to “manspreading” and “mansplaining” and blatant misandry. Plenty of women put their bags next to them to avoid sharing a seat, you don't see foaming mobs of hairy men founding the "bitch-bagging" movement and demanding women give up their driving licenses.

Which incidentally is what they actually do in Saudi Arabia.. but let's not discuss that, because it upsets third-wave feminists.

The idea that as a straight white man, I must be endlessly polite to people who constantly dehumanize me, and label me, and are so quick to reduce me to an -ism without any evidence or merit. That's pretty silly as well. Its identity politics isn't it?

 Tens of millions of straight white guys are loving husbands, doting fathers, and general stand-up chaps. Why must we be cool with generic insults towards straight white men when we spend so much time talking about the dangers of broad sweeping statements about absolutely everybody else? That whole "Resolutions for White Guys" video by MTV was one of the most cringeworthy things I have ever seen. Does anybody not see the glaring hypocrisy of such a flagrant use of identity politics?

 If anyone was unlucky enough to miss it first time around.... enjoy!

"Tune in next week for Lesbians: They All Love Cock Really." 

The idea that words are assaults, that edgy jokes are hate crimes, and that the occasional use of sentences like “that’s a bit gay” means that you want to ban gay marriage and force those born with a different sexual orientation to enter the gulags.

That totally logical and entirely reasonable criticisms of bronze-age theology are “racist” (The ignorant and intolerant treatment towards the endlessly polite Sam Harris at the hands of Ben Affleck.)

The idea that wearing a Halloween costume from a culture you weren't born into means that you support internment camps.

"And after the party, I shall fly to Liberia and burn down an orphanage." 

And The final nail in the coffin for me, was the ceaseless partisan nonsense pushed by Google, Twitter, and Facebook. The incessant authoritarian behavior of a flagrantly biased mainstream and social media saw me slowly begin to hate a left I have always identified with.

Indeed, the past 12 months quickly pushed me from being a passionate and vocal Sanders supporter, to an ambivalent Trump supporter.

And in the aftermath of the election, more of the same. Endless hatred for “white men” despite the fact that Trump won more of the Hispanic vote than Romney (29%) a fair number of black people (8-10%) hundreds of thousands of gay people, and tens of millions of college educated women (42%). Nobody wins an election in a vacuum, so why is all the blame being laid at the door of straight white guys?

I’m pretty sure millions of people that either wrote someone in, or even went for Trump, probably see the world like me too. The authoritarian left, mainstream media, and every major social media platform all played their part. Everyone loves an underdog, and with almost every platform, paper, and media group ceaselessly attacking Trump for the last 9 months, absurdly it almost felt like the crass, arrogant, privileged billionaire was the one we should be rooting for.

 Basically, 2017 needs to see the death of the Social Justice Warrior. If these extremely illiberal liberals are not shown the door, the Democrat party is going to be shown the door too.

"Preventing slavery is racist!!" 

 I may not like Donald Trump, but I'm not about to join a fruity cult just to support the alternative....

Why All Veterans should be "Vets for Sanders"

Yes, I know he is a hippy folks, but at least he is a hippy with genuine integrity. How many politicians can we say that about?

"This bird should not have to work 40 hours a week and still be short of worms"

 It may seem like a hard sell talking military veterans into voting for Bernie Sanders. He seems far too short-sighted, but so what? Does a U.S. President have absolute power? With that in mind, for the life of me I cannot see why some of the most needy people in the United States (veterans) would vote for career bureaucrats that have never and will never give a single shit about them. 

 Sure Sanders has never actually served in the military, but I have never used a tampon before and I can still see the appeal.

"Put the kettle on luv, Ive had a shit day at work."

 Indeed, vetsforbernie.org is not seeing half as much traffic as it should be, as the vast majority of those that have served in the United States military seem to gravitate towards the Republican party. 

 As a veteran I can definitely see some appeal to Trump, despite the crass comments and the fact that it looks like he cuts his own hair in the garden shed with a broken bottle.

 For starters, he says exactly what he thinks, or perhaps what he thinks people want to hear, it's impossible to tell which. But either way, it is refreshing to hear a politician talk straight for a change. Unfortunately though, as a billionaire with a vast fortune that he was essentially born into, his appeal should be very limited. As everyone knows, 99% of soldiers do not come from privileged background and many struggle to find good jobs when they leave the service.

 Getting grenades throw at you when you are trying to take a shit is not a life choice that people who are born into wealth tend to gravitate towards making. I can understand that, I probably wouldn't have joined the Royal Marine Commandos, earned a Green Beret, and straddled the battlefield like a mighty colossus for a decade if my dad had enough money to pay me through university either. No judgement from me here.

"It was fun and all pop, but I really wish I had spent the last two years shitting in a cave instead" 

But Trump can never understand what it really means to be poor and working class, its something that has to be lived, and veterans do indeed live it. The same goes for Clinton, Cruz, and all the rest.

Recent data suggests that veterans in the United States are 

• Less likely to have a college degree
• Twice as likely to be homeless
• Make up 33% of the homeless community at any given time
• More likely to suffer from substance abuse problems
• More reliant on food and clothing banks
• At higher risk of suicide

And much more besides.

  Who do veterans think is  going to work the hardest to ensure that they get the  help as assistance they need when they leave the armed forces? A somewhat obnoxious billionaire with a numerous business interests, or a dyed-in-the-wool socialist type who has fought for better treatment for the poor and needy for his entire political career?

"When I was in the White House, we had to eat a member of our 60 man Secret Service team just to survive"

Sure he seems to view the world through a rose tinted lens. His views on immigration and the rehousing of asylum seekers from a troubled area when we have no sensible way of vetting them genuinely worries me, but America is a nation of checks and balances. He will not have the freedom to enact the most damaging aspects of his plans, because that is not how this country works. He is not the supreme leader, and the U.S. Constitution ensures he never will be. 

A Man with a Plan

But I can ignore all of that, because he at least has a vision, and will attempt to do the right thing for the neediest people in our society, of which, veterans are undoubtedly a very high proportion of. 

And even withough all of that, I can back Sanders for the simple fact that I think he has shown better judgment than Hillary Clinton in 3 very important ways.

Sanders seems to show genuinely good judgement with regard to his choices about war and foreign conflict. He is definitely smarter than some of the intelligence officers that I worked with, but then again, so is my nephew, and he is 6 years old and has lengthy conversations with his Easter eggs.

Bernie Sanders voted for the war in Afghanistan, and so would I.

Bernie Sanders voted against the war in Iraq, and so would I.

 Hillary Clinton, well, we all know that she voted for the war in Iraq, Bernie Sanders mentions it 6 days a week. I'm not judging her particularly badly for that, it was a stupid war, and a pointless one, but it could possibly be an honest mistake on her part rather than a cynical decision made to please some shadowy business interests. But as George W. Bush himself said... 

Let's have it said right here gents, on the record. Operation Iraqi Freedom was an absolute clusterfuck. It was as well thought out as the impluse purchases made in ports around the world when drunk sailors show up after months at sea.

 I did 2 tours in Iraq, it was a messy business. In places like they, they simply do not practice democracy like we do. They understand force, and they tread warily around the biggest dog in the kennel. We all know who that was.

"I don't smoke many cigars, but I like to smoke a fat one whenever Tariq Aziz"

Saddam Hussein was a bad-mother-fucker. He killed lots of people, but we had a dialogue with Saddam Hussein. He had a functioning country and a functioning government and we could actually work with him. Saddam was basically told he was good to go by the U.S. Government before the invasion of Kuwait that preceded Desert Storm. His now infamous meeting with U.S. ambassador April Glaspie is common knowledge, but let's not get into that here.

Saddam Hussein's Iraq was basically functioning as intended, deaths sat at a few thousand a year, and funny thing, because burying people up to their necks and throwing bricks at them until they are dead works as an active deterrent, secular killings (the Sunni/Shia debacle has cost over a million lives) were at a minimum. A strong and brutal leader kept a country with deep rooted societal divisions functioning as intended.

Post Saddam Hussein Iraq looks almost as bad as Sunderland.

Sunderland following a $90 million gentrification package

And Hillary Clinton wants to get rid of Bashar al-Assad. 

Doing the exact same thing and expecting different results is the very definition of stupidity. 

Assad is another bad-mother-fucker. He kills lots of people, but we had a dialogue with Bashar al-Assad. He had a functioning country and a functioning government and we could actually work with him. Bashar al-Assad kept secular killings at a minimum with force, and fear. But Bashar al-Assad was and is a secularist. His wife lived and educated in London, he protected the Christian minority of Syria with threats of force, and occasional, brutal actions of force too.

"Hafez! Hafez! Stand next to the clown and smile or I shall grind his bones to powder and leave him for the jackals!" 

 The work of the likes of Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar is what saw him fighting a dirty civil war. A dirty civil war that started because all of those countries tacitly endorse Jihad. This is common knowledge. The propagation of Islam is the motivating factor. Erdogan has been encouraging the spread of Islamism in once secular Turkey for many years. The Saudis and many of their allies view getting rid of Ultra-Othodox ISIS as a problem that comes a distant second to ridding the world of Israel and spreading their faith. 

President Obama essentially wanted to carry on with the same ridiculous plan that George W Bush enacted, to replace a brutal dictator that kept a country stable, with a bunch of religious fanatics, one of which, ate a mans heart on camera. 

"Leave it to soften for twenty minutes in a puddle, garnish it with pubes..... fucking lovely"

The U.S. Government, the French Government, and the British Government, wanted to repeat the same mistakes we made in Iraq. 

It is criminally stupid, and makes me think the conspiracy theorists have a point. Rather than arming the rebels, we should have been covertly backing Assad. This would allow us to carry on the charade with our "allies" in Turkey and Saudi Arabia, but still have a stable functioning country, and thus not have to worry even more about ISIS, as a strong Assad regime would make short work of the rebels, ISIS, and any other assholes that wanted to carve their own Caliphate out.

I'm glad these pricks are on our side

 So, whether Democrat or Republican, I can give any veteran 5 good reasons why Bernie Sanders is the best option. 

• Voted for the war that had a point, and against the one that didn't
• Spoke out against forcing an Assad regime change and opposed bombing Syria
• Is certain to increase spending for numerous Veterans programs
• Wishes to provide free college tuition, another boon for those with limited GI Bill funding.
• Nationalized health care would immeasurably benefit the many veterans that carry both physical and mental scars 
• I wouldn't believe Hillary Clinton's radio

Ok, that was six.  

It's Unfair to Label the Academy Racist, and Here's why...

"Take the kids Angie, I'm off to burn a cross in Morgan Freeman's back yard"

 Its been impossible to switch on the news and not see something about the Oscars controversy lately.

 The whole hubbub started after Spike Lee and some woman who used to act before she became Will Smith's wife essentially accused the people who vote for the candidates of being racist. The allegation stems from a lack of diversity in both the list of nominees and the Academy in general. 

 A cursory glance at the list of actors and directors up for the all important best picture and best actor statuettes does show a punishing lack of diversity. Around 94% of the Academy are old white men, so to be fair, the lack of color critique could also refer to women or people with special needs.

 Although, Leonardo DiCaprio did such a good job of playing someone with special needs in What's Eating Gilbert Grape? that everyone presumed he actually was mentally challenged until they saw him in Titanic, so that has to count for something.

Actually, I thought he was retarded after Titanic as well, but then I actually saw Titanic.

An Unfair Label

I have to say though, nobody chooses their race, or indeed their age. I'm sure there are plenty of pleasant, socially just old white men alongside the nasty old racists, so it all seems a little unfair. Liberal people complain about labels all the time, and surely "racist" is a label?

"You wont be smiling when we get to the workhouse you little twats"

 The members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences have a right to feel aggrieved for a very good reason. The members of said academy are consistently bashed by the right-wing for being packed with screaming liberals.

 To an extent it is very true, although there are a few notable exceptions. But yes, nary a year goes by without some morally righteous but usually very ill-informed star embarking upon a crusade. Often regarding the problems facing the developing world, or sometimes just something as trivial as the Falklands Islands. Either way, I'm sure everyone is aware that the actors and writers and directors and artists that populate Hollywood are regularly called the "liberal elite" by the right wing media, and I am sure that few people would say that the label is entirely unfair.

 Indeed, the average Hollywood actor is more likely to adopt a child from the developing world than they are to grind one to mulch and feed it to their pit-bull before a dog-fight. Or break a young woman's jaw for having the temerity to disagree with him. Or snort cocaine of a child prostitutes tits. 

 Obviously that brand of abhorrent behavior is the forte of the professional athletes that we idolize and consistently praise.

"If God didn't want dogs to fight to the death, he would have made them chickens"

Instant Racism

 Frankly I think it is completely unfair to suddenly claim that the members of the academy are racist. If I had spent my entire life championing the cause of people of color and ethnic minorities of every stripe, I would be a little upset to be branded a bigot the moment I happened to annoy one actors wife, even if she does happen to be black. The people she is accusing of being prejudiced are the same group that constantly bash the police for the appalling treatment of minorities in the United States. 

 Obviously I am not going to sit here and deny that racism is endemic in the police force after they shot a 12 year old kid dead in Cleveland, Ohio. Especially after one of the officers insisted the boy should be charged under the "being black on a lawn" act of 1837.

"LOOK OUT SHES GOT POP TARTS!" /blamblam

 But it is a hell of stretch to claim that the same people who have twice nominated Will Smith for an Oscar, and twice given said Oscar to other black people (Denzel Washington for Training Day, and Forest Whittaker for Last King of Scotland) are suddenly racist because no nomination was forthcoming this year.

 In fact, I would go so far as saying it is illogical, completely without merit, and looks suspiciously like sour grapes. I have no idea how many hundreds of millions of dollars Will Smith has made out of his stellar career, but I suspect it would be a fair amount less if actual racists were running the show.

 Benito Mussolini would definitely not have been a fan of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air.

I am though, Uncle Phil throwing Jazz through the front door gets me every time.

No you fat oaf, that Carlton is the good dancer, Geoffrey is the butler!

7 Reasons Star Wars: The Force Awakens Sucked

"The fans might actually like sexy protagonists, fire these losers and get me a cloned garbage man!"

I wasn't going to bother updating my blog to rant and rave about Star Wars: The Force Awakens. No, I was merely going to file it under "Painfully Inadequate Modern Hollywood Remakes" and get on with my life. Sadly I was moved into action when I woke up this morning to a story about how Kevin Smith loves Star Wars VII.

 So I find myself at odds with a respected director, actor, and writer who apparently knows everything there is to know about Star Wars and absolutely loved the new movie. Unfortunately I disagree for about 100 reasons, but for the sake of brevity I cut it down to the 7 things that made my inner Comic Book Guy shriek with rage. Spoilers... obviously.

"If these bastards don't open that plastic Amazon clam-shell its going in the fucking trash."

1.  It Was Basically a Remake.

Yes it was. It was largely the story from Episodes 3 and 4 rolled into one. An original movie? No chance. Stop me if you have heard this plot before. Through little effort of his/her own, a recently orphaned desert dwelling nomad quickly finds himself/herself embroiled in a plot to battle against a massive galactic empire. Said orphan is young and inexperienced but has a good heart and soon takes to the quest with  gusto, befriending a handsome/geriatric smuggler and a Wookiee. The orphan gets followed around by a cute droid all of the time and the young orphan can speak droid fluently. At some point, the young desert orphan makes friends with a bearded old bloke in a dressing gown. Meanwhile the evil empire has built a massive ship that can destroy whole planets with  ease, but fortunately they left another weak spot uncovered so we all know how that's going to end up...

"If that punk kid can fight Kylo Ren I fancy my chances too."

2.  Instant Jedi.

Becoming a Jedi takes years of patient training, we all know this. At least a decade as a Padawan, often longer. Training with a master, before attending a trial (which may be skipped in rare circumstances) and finally graduating from Jedi Academy. Sort of like joining the Green Berets but a bit more pansy. It took the might Luke Skywalker months of training to skillfully wield the force. Qui-Gonn Jin can subtly manipulate the minds of weak men thanks to 30 years of training. In this movie, Rey manages to completely mindfuck a Stormtrooper in moments with absolutely no training at all. If it was that fucking easy, why isn't everyone at it? No training, no subtle suggestions or hand movements, just the Star Wars equivalent of being barked at by a Drill Sergeant, which leads nicely to my next point.

3. Puny Dark Side

The band of ill-trained misfits easily defeated Kylo Ren and the First Order in lightsaber combat, as they had once spoken to a man who knew a guy that owned one.

If rare individuals can wield the force like a sledgehammer, imagine what type of things one trained for decades can do eh? I mean, lets say, a kid with the DNA of Luke Skywalker and a strapping robust father like Han Solo. Well Kylo Ren was all over the place with his abilities, certainly he was less useful than the untrained orphan. One moment, he is actually stopping blaster bolts in mid air with little effort (which begs the  question why they bothered blocking them in the last 6  films.) An hour later and he cant even pull a lightsaber towards him with any ease. And that reminds me, remember when Luke pulls the saber a few feet with great effort in Empire Strikes Back? Well Rey has fucking mastered that, and she never got any rudimentary training from Obi Wan. In fact, she is so good at it she pulls the fucker towards her with the speed of Thor's hammer. Kylo Ren thought it was headed for him but what does that fool know eh? He was only trained by Luke Skywalker for years before handing the reins over to a (presumably at least equally skillful) Dark Master.

4. The Fucking Bowcaster

"Fuck this stick, If that skinny pensioner can use the Bowcaster I shall wield one too"

Every nerd knows  that the denizens of Kashyyyk are the only ones strong enough to wield a Bowcaster, the magnetic propulsion crossbow used by the enormous Wookiees. In fact, according to the Star Wars RPG, humans are incapable of actually cocking a bowcaster. And this makes sense, considering they are all enormous towering balls of fur and death. Well, apparently Han Solo, a slight, 70 something who should be well into retirement, he can fire one easily. Piece of piss in fact, because he never misses moving targets while under fire. Perhaps this is a weaker version and only hits with the force of a Nerf Gun? Well no, because it scatters armored 220lb. Stormtroopers across the battlefield with consummate ease. And Han exclaims "I like this thing!" which suggests he has never fired the fucking weapon despite 50 years of adventuring with his chum. I only worked with the Foreign Legion twice and the first thing I did was fire a FAMAS, so I call bullshit. Which brings me to the next point... 

5. Cheap Throwaway Lines Raping the Canon

"Ok kids, we know you millennials don't like the training part so fuck it, we are just giving these things out."  

A little humor is great in a film like this, not only because it reminds nerds of the comics. Plus, its also true, a little gallows humor is commonplace in all of the worlds military organizations worth their salt. The issue with the humor in SW7 is that there is far too much of it, and most importantly it completely contradicts the canon, as well as common sense. Han has never once touched Chewie's weapon? Stormtroopers, genetically enhanced and brainwashed from birth, yeah they get those Stormtroopers to work sanitation. It was like a cheap throwaway line from Under Siege (he's just a cook!) but it has real concerns form me. Why not get droids to do it? Do Navy SEALS specialize in sanitation as well? And why would someone born and raised in such conditions, without even having a name, be so witty and urbane, and ask girls about their "cute boyfriends?"

6. No Lightsabers?! 

How can they have a Star Wars movie so lacking in lightsaber fights? Seriously even shitty video game companies have done some absolutely top notch fights involving everyone's favorite energy weapons. If you have never seen these awesome short videos before, you are very welcome.

Fast, furious, exciting, and pretty lengthy. I counted one actual lightsaber dual in that movie, the showdown in the snow with Kylo Ren. And it certainly wasn't as good as any of the action highlighted above. It was not only ridiculous, it was dull. And why was it ridiculous?

7. Fencing Professionals Required; No Experience Necessary

"How does this thing work again GrampaAAARRRGG!!"

It is not hard to imagine that fighting with something as dangerous as a lightsaber would require decades of training, I had a go at fencing once when I was in school and I almost gouged my eye out. I could probably deflect three  swings tops. Unlike blunt fencing blades, lightsabers are capable of cutting through 4 feet of steel, they can go through bone like butter. Both Rey and Finn literally picked them up off the floor and not only avoided cutting their own fucking limbs off, but managed to fight and defeat Kylo Ren. The injury in his side at least made the struggle somewhat less ridiculous, but it was still beyond stupid. I wouldn't be comfortable swinging an actual lightsaber around practicing in my garage, I certainly wouldn't be able to deflect multiple extremely fast blows from a youthful antagonist with two decades of training.

Anyway, I didn't hate it, I would give It a steady 2/5. It certainly looked and sounded great in 3D IMAX, but the story was lame and was filled with contradictions, childish humor, and general idiocy. I'm stunned by the universal acclaim, particularly from fellow fans, and obvioiusly by fans I mean those actually bought Genndy Tartakovskys version on DVD, and read many of the novels and comics, not merely those jumping on the media bandwagon. I have yet to meet another cynic so anybody who actually knows the lore and still loves it, please comment below and enlighten me.

I welcome healthy debate, sensible criticism, and full on insults and arguments alike!