I Can’t Look Away from the Creepiness (posted 12/2/22)

Two stories today, both of which show the leftist establishment at its skeevy best.

The first story features everybody’s favorite paleface, the Land o’ Lakes Butter Maiden herself, Liz Warren. (#wemustneverstopmockingher)

She’s got another bee in her war bonnet (#neverstop), this time about Twitter, and the unfair way that Elon Musk has started to use it to foster free speech in America.  The nerve of that guy!

When a Fox business reporter asked, “Do you think that users have a right to freedom of speech, even if what they’re saying is wrong or offensive?” Grandma Squanto had reservations. (#nevernever)

Quoth the Shawnee Scold, “I think that one human being should not decide how millions of people communicate with each other.  One human being should not be able to go into a dark room by himself and decide: ‘Oh, that person gets heard from, that person doesn’t.’ That’s not how it should work.”

Unless that person is Jack “weird beard” Dorsey (former owner of Twitter), I guess?  Or Pagan Narwhal (Twitter’s former CEO), or Vijaya “Teflon Don” Gadde (Twitter’s former head of censorship)?

Or Jeff Bezos?  Or Mark Zuckerberg?  

Because all of those zillionaires have been sitting around determining who gets heard from and who doesn’t for years, and the Irritated Iroquois (#neverstopneverstopping) never seemed to mind.  But let someone who disagrees with her authoritarian political vision buy Twitter, and watch how her headdress feathers get ruffled. (#seriouslykeepmocking)

Out of our lefty elites’ vast oceans of cluelessness, the free speech debate might be the one area in which they are the most deeply ensconced in their bubble.  Over and over again, they’ve demonstrated that they don’t have the slightest idea of what their conservative opponents think.

When Musk took over Twitter, hordes of them either said that they’d leave before the Musk-rat could kick them off, or announced that they’d defiantly stay UNTIL he kicked them off.  When he didn’t kick lefties off, they were totally disoriented.

It was like they were bowed up and ready to push against Musk with all of their strength, and instead of pushing back, he just stepped aside without any resistance.  And they clumsily pitched forward and face-planted, like Joe Biden each time he tries to climb a mobile airplane staircase.    

They really don’t understand us at all, mostly because they all have advanced degrees in projection.  Whenever THEY get control of a news outlet or tech platform, they impose one-sided censorship, character-assassination and banishment.  So they assume that we would behave the same way. 

When we don’t, they end up looking foolish, as they have every day since Musk bought Twitter.

But I’m not sure that the elitist lefties understand themselves any more than they understand us.  Because nearly all of them chant the mantra of, “We love free speech, but not hate speech.”   

But that proclamation misses two huge points.

First, the most significant and culturally influential speech that the leftist establishment banned involved not hate, but political debate on such crucial issues as covid, possible voting fraud, Hunter’s laptop and Biden’s graft-tastic dealings with foreign regimes, the disastrous effects of an open border, etc.

That’s the essential stuff of democracy, from the Founders’ time to today, and the left squashed it without a moment’s hesitation or a second thought.   

Second, even in cases of what could arguably be labeled “hate speech,” the left – and, to be fair, many on the right – ignore the essential question of “Who gets to decide what is and isn’t hate speech?”  Because just like every contentious concept – racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, capitalism – hate is in the eye of the beholder.

The left will not tolerate anti-Semitism, for example.

Unless it comes from Screwy Louie Farrakhan, Al Sharpton, the jihadi twins Omar and Tlaib, etc. and etc.

They also won’t tolerate sexism.

Unless it is used to attack Melania Trump, conservative women, pro-life women, or attractive female Fox News hosts.

They are deeply offended by racism.

Except when it’s used to support rabidly anti-white groups like BLM or La Raza, or to attack “whiteness” and white people, and toxic white men and white Karens, and Asians who keep scoring too high on standardized tests.     

One point that the left is clear about: a less censorious Twitter is a threat to them.  Because their ideas are fatally flawed, and in a free and fair debate, they’re going to get beaten like a rented mule.

And that’s why the crotchety Choctaw from Massachusetts has got her buckskin dress in a bunch. 

So let’s do whatever we can to champion free speech.  And let’s never stop mocking her. 

In my “Find a Mirror” segment this week, I’m going to very briefly discuss the super deviant ad that most of you already know about.  

Until last week, if you’d asked me what I thought of Balenciaga, I’d have told you that they make a fine automobile that competes with the Ferrari and Lamborghini.  Or possibly that Balenciaga is an exquisite pasta dish that I prefer served al Pomodoro.

But last week as I walked into the living room, my lovely wife and I had this conversation: 

Norwegian Goddess:  Have you seen the Balenciaga ad?

Me: No.  I suppose the ’23 is out now?  Does it have 12 cylinders, and how many CO-ers will have to hit my Tip Jar before I can buy one?

NG: You really think you’re hilarious, don’t you?

Me (with a charming, self-deprecating shrug): Who am I to fly in the face of public opinion?

NG: Just look at this ad, bonehead.

Me:  That’s Dr. Bonehead, to you.  (after a 30-second perusal) Good lord! Why does that little girl look so sad?  And why is her toy bear wearing bondage gear?  And what kind of sick pervs (and probably big Democrat donors, I’m guessing) would think that this ad is acceptable?  I need a shower!    

And, scene.

I’m sure you’ve all heard about the repulsive, exploitative ads, and the resulting firestorm.  They are of a piece with our culture’s recent spate of pedophilia-adjacent weirdness, from twerking drag queens in “family friendly” shows, and drag queen story hours, and trans-ing the kids all over the place.    

“But Martin, what could be worse than these ultra squalid ads?” you are not asking, because you don’t care for rhetorical questions.

To answer that one, we must travel to where the intelligence quotient goes to die: The View.   

That Mensa club looked past the idiotic parents who let their little girls “star” in these ads, and the perverse “creatives” who came up with this pitch, and the soul-less executives who green-lighted it to find the REAL culprits behind this Satanic slumber party of a campaign: conservatives.

I Schumer you not.

Here’s the reasoning, according to the vacuous ladies of the View: 

“There’s growing anti-LGBTQ sentiment right now.  And how it’s being framed is as portraying trans people as ‘groomers’.  This is a term you’ll hear on the far right… this is where you get the anti-drag queen stuff.”   

Yes, the problem of ads that sexualize children is “how it’s being framed.”  And who is framing it that way?  The “far right,” of course. 

Because who else could possibly have a problem with drag queens doing burlesque routines in front of toddlers?  (By the way, that answer would include the vast majority of gay people, who are just as repulsed by this as any other non-groomers are.)

Einstein McSocial-Critic continues: “So Balenciaga played right into their hands, by having kids in a sexualized manner….  It was a really bad mis-step at a moment where it’s a dangerous time to give credence to those kind of insane takes.”

So the only real mistake that Balenciaga made was a mis-step that “played into the hands” of the real villains – the conservatives — and by doing so, giving “credence to [their] insane” interpretation of all of this innocent near-kiddie-porn stuff.

Or maybe – and hear me out, lefty brain trust – it’s not insane to accuse people of sexually grooming children when you’re discussing an ad that [begin Sam Kinison screaming voice] DEMONSTRATES SEXUAL GROOMING OF CHILDREN! OH! OHHHH!

After all, some sicko handed that poor little girl the S&M teddy bear, and if she asked about why he was dressed like that, probably told her something like, “Oh that’s right, you don’t recognize this stuff, do you?  It’s okay, you’ll learn all about bondage, ball gags and fetish gear when you start kindergarten next fall.” 

Ugh. 

The last word went to racist little ball of evil Sunny Hostin, who brought it all home, as only a morally-dead-inside cretin could, when she identified what’s really “distasteful” in all this: “Balenciaga lately… their stuff is just ugly!”   

I only wish that Chris Hansen could have burst onto the Balenciaga set, announced that this was an elaborate episode of “To Catch a Predator,” and arrested every adult involved in sight.

To everyone involved in that campaign, and everyone on the View excusing them, I say, “Find a mirror!”

Fetterman/ The Marquis de Sade ’24!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: