Running Out The Clock A Blast from the past from September 24 2012

Running Out The Clock A Blast from the past from September 24 2012

*Reading this now is interesting. And I thought they were insane THEN. The amazing thing though is how decisions, like betting on paper for trad pub were crazier than we thought when crazy governments decided to shut down all retail. – SAH – 2021*

Lately, in politics, in publishing, even in industry, I keep wondering what rabbit hole opened up and swallowed me whole.

No, I’m serious.  Listen to me.

We have publishers who choose to try to kill ebooks to “advantage” hardcovers, something that should be self-obviously out of the realm of sanity, because… well… for one we’re in a recession and hardcovers always do badly in those, second because people who’ve decided to go mostly e-book aren’t going to buy the hardcover.  They’re going to wait then let it drop.  By the time the ebook comes out, they won’t remember they wanted to read that book.  So, it’s a huge fail.  But the publishing houses are committed to this strategy.

And you wonder – are they insane?

We have journalists who don’t seem interested in investigating anything at all and who – please don’t argue with me.  I’ve seen the emails from journolist and it’s disgusting – think their job is (just as the publishers think their job is) to control the outcome of things that should be beyond their power.  To “push the right view” as it were, instead of the truth.  They have to realize (round ’bout the second summer of recovery malaise they should have realized it, but even the WSJ was buying into the hype and singing from the hymnal) that even if people wanted to believe them, they’re going to believe their lying eyes FIRST.

And you wonder – are they insane?

Don’t get me started on our government, which seems to have crossed entirely into the realm of fantasy, thinking that wars can be stopped by apologizing to people who want to kill you (listen, dork, this is not your freshman seminar.  In reality people who want to kill have other issues with you than that you might have been a little too forceful with them, mkay?  In the case of America the problem they have with us is that their kraptastic leaders have convinced the people of some countries that WE are responsible for their misery.  This keeps the leaders in power and the masses howling against the Great Satan.  I think the leaders of those countries might run some publishing houses too.  See behavior to Amazon.)  Or thinking that we can conjure money out of thin air and this means we’re CREATING value.  Or thinking that taxing “the rich” means more money, instead of “the rich” leaving for other countries or stopping money-making activity.  (Hint, taxing doesn’t happen in a vaccum.  It changes behaviors.  That’s the whole point.)  Or thinking that they can support a fast-aging group with a shrinking youth when the youth has neither jobs nor enough numbers.)  Or…

And you wonder – are they insane?

Then there’s Hollywood.  Even accounting for the fact that they get a lot of money from overseas, surely it wouldn’t be that hard for them to make movies that appeal to both?  And even overseas, frankly, certain types of flicks sell better.  Instead we see the politically correct take over and over again, and – as in books – it’s boring and it no longer sells, and yet they keep doing it.

And you wonder – are they insane?

And I’m sure ALL OF YOU – all of you – with expertise in fields that I don’t know are observing the same effect.

And wondering – are they insane?

They can’t be, right?  Even accounting for third-generation stupidity —  meaning that in many fields for three generations the “search” has been for people with certain political opinions, not the best at whatever the field is – even with the fantasy land most of our education has become, people can’t be THAT stupid.  They have to realize what they’re doing isn’t working or is having the opposite effect of the desired, right?

And then it hit me: they’re not trying to adapt or adjust to the future – they’re running out the clock.

You know what I mean.  There’s a football game where one team is barely ahead and the time is running out and instead of pushing for scoring, the team is just blocking and running out the clock.

Seen from this perspective the picture suddenly makes sense.

No, this is not a boomer-bashing post, but it is undeniable they are the largest age-cohort to come through in a long month of Sundays.  And here statistics don’t lie and the trying to co-opt my age range doesn’t work.  The boom stopped around 53/54.  And they are… shall we say clannish?  For a long time it was a more or less open secret they preferred to hire their own cohort.  Now, I’m not sure because I don’t care anymore.

What this means is that when I started getting published most of the publishers/editors were ten to twenty years older than I.  Their interchangeable assistants (Baen always excepted in these things) were ten to fifteen years younger than I.  Most of those are gone, and there are other bright, doomed and clueless faces there.  BUT the main editors/publishers are still the same.  Still making the decisions.  Still… running out the clock.

I’ve heard comments to this extent once of twice.  Most of them are now either at or past ages when they could retire.  Their stocks aren’t doing too well, but if they keep the houses going to a point they can retire, then they’ll have their pension or whatever.  And what happens to the industry/government/art when they’re gone is of remarkable little concern to them.

This is not an effect of the boomers being evil.  It’s an effect of a massive bump in the population that was then followed by a contraction in birth rates.  It means that the people who are now in control are in their early/mid sixties, with a few older ones.

It means both they have trouble adapting to new situations and catastrophic change – which we’re surrounded by on all sides – and conceptualizing or caring about things in the future in ten, twenty, thirty years.  This is compounded by the fact that in my field at least most of them are childless.  (And in other fields a remarkable number of them are childless.  Both the demands of a career and economic pressure did that and account for the baby bust following the boom.)

So, in enlightened self-interest, people who have no investment in the future are running out the clock.

What I think they’re failing to take into account is: what happens when the last tick echoes?

75 thoughts on “Running Out The Clock A Blast from the past from September 24 2012

  1. It’s not just the demands of the fields. I’ve noticed around the table of the graybeards, only about half seem to have kids, and that doesn’t really correlate with the ones who are the most productive or even super type-A personality either; they’re all graybeards. Just some of them had kids. And most of them, only a few.

    1. That’s interesting. My experience was different. The graybeards where I worked (mega defense contractor) pretty much all had at least 2 kids. Percentage of them that followed parent(s) into engineering wasn’t much different that the general population however.

      1. A graybeard engineer is a very different thing from a graybeard executive. Someone who lasts that long as an engineer has done so because people find his advice valuable even when they would really rather not hear it.

        1. That is when an engineer’s advice is most valuable. I am very definitely a “graybeard engineer”, a boomer, and I have spent most of my career as an independent contractor, so I could tell the mahogany row inhabitants “that won’t work”. Of course, early on, I got my contract terminated a lot, but once you’ve established a rep for accurately telling it like it is, another assignment is not that hard to come by.

        2. I can’t recall ever actually having *seen* a graybeard engineer.

          By the time they hit their fifties, they either get replaced by cheaper newbies or moved into management.

          1. If you’re in “tech”, it’s pretty rare–I only know any in high-reliability and high-security software (i.e. banking). I know some in CPU/GPU design. I know several in aerospace–when I was a young pup, I only got a visit from them when things had gone horribly wrong. Nowadays, I’m the one visiting projects which have gone off the rails.

  2. Nine years on, and it’s still the same people running things . . . mostly. Plus ca change, plus ca reste la meme.

    Except nothing has changed, except eternal lockdown to protect them from the results of failing immune systems . . .

    Health Dept freaking out about ‘new’ variety of coronavirus here. I’m sure the little city council will, too, and equally sure county will shrug, and little towns will shrug, and everything and everyone will carry on as they have been. (It’s a virus: they mutate, what did anyone expect?)

    Maybe it’s the weather. Maybe I’m just (as accused since teenage years) too cynical.

    1. And people freaking out that it will mutate like the flu—it doesn’t mutate like the flu. We get yearly flu viruses because their mutations make them unrecognizable to the immune system. Coronaviruses don’t mutate as fast *nor* as comprehensively, so the current vaccines will be effective for longer and partially so for a long time.

        1. of course, the other way does make sense. It’s yearly flu viruses that require the yearly flu vaccines.

      1. In addition to the mutation of the flu virus, there is also the fact that there are SO MANY existing strains of the flu … a large part of the flu vaccine choices are survaillance of incidence of strains overseas as well as here, that give some indication of what is coming for the next season.

        And yes, the covid spike protein that the vaccine targets is thought to be unlikely to mutate itself that much, another reason to hope that the vaccine will remain effective longer.

      2. Hum. Rhinoviruses, maybe cause 30-80% of common colds, Coronaviruses maybe 15%. As I understand it one reason there’s no common cold vaccine is mutation and subsequent vaccine ineffectiveness.

        Mutation, by the way, does not necessarily make a virus more virulent, if fact the opposite is more likely, if you’re a template (virus) and you destroy the machine that replicates you (cells in me, thee, etc.) your survival rate diminishes drastically.

        As to the mutation rate of coronaviruses in general; most of the info I’ve found suggest, compared to other viruses moderate. As to Covid19, some studies are suggesting itmutates every 2 weeks, some every 2 months.

        I don’t get yearly flu vaccines nor do I plan to get the Bad China Cold vaccine, but that’s my personal choice, what anyone else does is their business, not mine.

  3. Ah yes, the question we’ve all been asking since 2008. Are they really that crazy, or do they know something we don’t know? I think we have our answer now–it’s both. We did not know the extent to which they had rigged the system. But yes, they’re crazy. Driven mad by unaccountable power, driven mad by fear, driven mad by something darker, the outlines of which we can only dimly see, who knows…but it’s madness all the same.

      1. Don’t use my magic 8-ball. Has a result that is a problem to deal with. ‘Open up parts of the problem, and divine for solutions using entrails until problem is resolved.’ Obviously, I would not use an 8-ball if entrail divination worked.

      2. The very traditional answer to madness is ice floes.

        The traditional answer is locking up the dangerous ones where they can’t hurt the public.

        There are several problems with this. Basically, the institutions are broke, and the facilities unavailable.

        How do you decide who is ill? Who is dangerous? Who should be locked up?

        Our default answer is a free range asylum, and these scale to some degree, but are terrible from a safety perspective.

        Prisons probably wouldn’t scale immediately. I forget the specifics, but the proportions of those under court restriction is/was about half in actual prisons or jails. I’m not sure if two million was around the half, or the whole.

        I’m inclined to think that left delusional and unpersuadable might be a number that is significant in comparison. Mainly because of knowing someone in that category (who also isn’t really competent enough to be a danger to others).

        Possibly we need to publish some research in psychological journals how wall to wall counseling can be extended to the methods of the miracles of Saint Augusto of the Whirling Blades, and applied to the problem.

        Of course, murdering the substance abusers might be a feasible answer. If enough of the left delusional intersect, drug use/possession is a reasonably testable criteria, and might drop the numbers of left delusional to the level that can be handled by ordinary means.

  4. The most concerning thig is they are accelerating their charge off the cliffs of sanity, into the abyss.

  5. Maybe it is partly their inability to retire, just yet (and, to be fair, who could blame someone who is looking at their retirement, and saying “Is this ALL?”)
    But, perhaps it is the lack of children that is paramount. Without kids, what incentive do they have to retire? Those of us with them are eager to shed work, and enjoy grandpa and grandma time. FINALLY get to all those hobbies that we’ve been wanting more time for.
    What do they have:
    – sex with semi-interested peers (particularly those that are paid to be there)
    – endless time to spend with acquaintances, also eager to fill the days
    – no longer surrounded with underlings who will pretend to hang on every word
    The new ‘senior living’ residences are filled with them. As my husband described them, “It’s like high school, but with money!” That wasn’t enticing, because, unlike him, I HATED high school. Life as an adult, on the other hand, has been generally interesting and fulfilling.

      1. I think that is why my on again, off again desire to write fiction has returned with a vengeance. Now that I know there is no one I am sending into the future, I face the rest of my life as a weird adult high school.

        I’m rejecting that in favor of building something I can send. It might be a poor substitute for sending someone, but it isn’t a pointless status game.

        Perhaps that last clause also captures why the Left annoys the piss out of me

    1. particularly those that are paid to be there

      For later generations, those people might be better.

      About 15 years ago you started seeing escorts offering the “full girlfriend experience”. It tracks to men in GenX and later complaining about women not wanting to be more traditional in their dating/mating roles.

      We, as a culture, have actually forgotten how to mate so much that a “full girlfriend experience” is a sales pitch.

      1. I remember reading the “Mayflower Madame’s” book about running a very successful escort business. One of her “girls” (Sidney Biddle Barrow’s term, not mine) was a red-head, which was about the least-popular hair color, and not all that beautiful. But she was very, very popular, and had one gent who hired her time whenever he could. The madame asked the happy customer why he liked this girl so much. “She listens, and she’s enthusiastic.” She paid attention to him, read up on things he and other clients mentioned so she could discuss them later if the topic came up, and generally acted as if she enjoyed being in his and other men’s company. It was a winning combination.

        I read that book in 2001, and the story has stuck with me ever since.

        1. Around the same time (a couple of years later after my first wife left) I was a Thursday regular at a strip club…because there was a woman who’d come to my table and ask if I would buy a dance.

          One time I said yes, but you don’t need to dance. She sat there and talked to me while cuddling mostly naked. Every now and then she’d point out she needed to visit other tables so I’d pay for another dance.

          Learned some about her and what she had to put up with as a stripper by the third time. She seemed to be happy to see me because I just wanted her to pretend to like me for a little while.

          It’s nice to not have to worry about what I’m expected to do or pay for and just have someone listen and make appropriate noises to your stories.

          1. In one of my English classes (fun fact: a friendly classmate in that class joked that all she had to do to earn an ‘A’ was to disagree with everything I said in class) we had to read a book where (iirc) each chapter was a different person talking about a particular unusual job that they’d had. One of the chapters was related by a woman who had (and might have still been when it was written; I don’t recall) worked as a professional prostitute. Some of what she said tracks with what you related. Most of the johns seemed to be not purely interested in the sex (that’s not to say that they *weren’t* interested in that, mind you), and some of them were extremely eccentric (including one man who apparently thought the highlight of the evening was suddenly sitting up in the coffin he’d placed in the middle of the room and startling the girl he’d hired for the evening). The mere presence of the woman in many cases seems to have been more important than the job that the woman had nominally been hired to do.

            For her, on the other hand, it was all just a job. IIRC, at one point she mentions doing multiplication tables (or something like that) in her head while servicing clients.

        2. On the studying topics, I know Jouet teaches that in her being a modern courtesan class. She’s pretty amazing.

        3. Contra that, I recall one of John Malloy’s Dress for Success books telling of an experiment he did. Apparently for many men the type of success they sought to dress for was not merely that of the business world. Exploring what women said they wanted in a man they found most women said they sought a confident man. So Malloy trained his actors to act confident, dressed them up and sent them out to see what type of clothing attracted the ladies.

          Results were uniformly disappointing until Malloy playing a hunch, trained his actors to behave arrogantly and sent them back out, to great success.

          Presumably women of that time wanted a man who was arrogant but could not admit to themselves what attracted them … alternatively, they didn’t know a confident man when they met one and defaulted to confidence’s coarser cousin.

      2. GFE was a term in that industry as far back as the mid 90s… which would be 25 years not 15 😀

          1. yes well, i also have to think about how long ago i was in the Army, and how ling my mom has been gone, etc….

      3. The “Full Girlfriend Experience”? Back in my dating days most of the guys I talked to about such topics complained their girl friends were full.

        I shall not repeat what they said they were full of.

  6. A very good case can be made that all the economic events of the last half century or so are just the effects of the baby boom working itself out. This includes the bust in Japan and the rise and coming bust in China. It also explains a fair bit of why everything was so bad during Obama’s reign of error and why the WuFlu BS by knocking back the workforce so much, is such a disproportionate tragedy. The US should be booming.

    1. I also think it helps explain the irrational exuberance of the stock market. Retired boomers have to put their money somewhere, and it’s mainly in the stock market — and housing.

      1. It’s a big reason that interest rates in Germany and Japan are negative now and why they were so high back in the 70’s. Price inflation, monetary velocity, the whole damned thing.

        US demographics are fairly solid out about 10 years and then they get stupid unless the echo boom people start to have children.

      2. Well interest is crap. As long as money printers go brr stocks and property are property gonna increase in paper terms

    2. The Democrats used the CCP virus as a pretext to deliberately wreck the economy precisely because a strong economy stood in the way of their quest for absolute totalitarian power. The last thing that leftists want is a strong economy, because people might think they can do without government. A bad economy is used to justify the rationing in the name of “fairness”. They want to do the same to energy so that they can control people’s lives by rationing energy as well.

      Remember, Bernie Sanders and the other leftists who run the Democratic Party wax poetically about Soviet breadlines and want such lines in the USA because, in their own words, “they are fair”.

      1. Except Bernie and company are God-damn liars. There is absolutely nothing fair about breadlines, and those who think there is need a high velocity lead suppository inserted cranially.

        1. They actually believe such lines were “fair”…and there is a reason “fair” has the ” ” around it.

        2. For Bernie & Co. to be liars they would have to know and be suppressing the truth. It may simply be that they are God-damn fools.

          Of course, it is conceivable they are both.

  7. Running out the clock, and hence those waiting for the clock runners-outers to die off so they get a chance to run, common through history?

    I’m reminded of freshly freshmany, stepping softy into the hallowed halls of Academia in the late fifties:

    Taking a geology course. In the library stacks, finding, in an Immanuel Valikovsky tome, the phrase, continental drift. Freshmanly heading to the card catalogs and pursuing the phrase. Going to my geology class raising the query continental drift vs diastrophism. Finding, following that, that my grade dropped 3 points from an A to a D.

    Life lesson learned; those in power built their reputations upon “facts” and theories, said “facts” must not be questioned else said reputations, and attached, power and glory, come tumbling down.

    After the fact that that generation of geologists is safely dead and buried, continental drift is the accepted “fact” and I expect a student suggesting diastrophism (The the same agencies changing the landscape today, wind, water, blowing sand, etc., shaped the continents throughout the past.) be considered, could well expect a drop in their grades today.

    As in Academia, the same holds true in publishing, politics and probably even post hole digging.

    BTW: Valikovsky was, and still is fringe, but where else can you learn one of the ancient names for Venus was ‘the bearded star’ suggest it may be a massive captured comet? Hey, I agree it’s highly unlikely but, were I a student, I wouldn’t bring it up in an astronomy class. 😉

    1. Funny the rabbit holes this place can send one down. I’d never heard of Valikovsky and in looking him up I discovered he had been accused of of pseudoscience by one Harlow Shapley, whose son Lloyd I did know since he had been awarded the Bank of Sweden Prize in Honour of Alfred Nobel, mistakenly called the Nobel Prize in Economics. Lloyd Shapely had done significant mathematical work that was applied to Game Theory in Economics. The irony is delicious. Economics is pseudoscience and closed form solutions in game theory require that there be a last move, which ties in beautifully with the theme of the piece.

      1. Valikovsky? Or Velikovsky? Velikovsky is a classic case of the blind pig finding an occasional acorn. He correctly predicted the Greenhouse Effect making a fetid swamp of Venus but his rationale for it was utter bollocks.

        See: Worlds in Collision.

    2. “diastrophism” HmmmLike a runaway cyanobacteria increasing the oxygen content of the atmosphere? Or am ancient volcanic eruption in the middle of a Siberian coal field pushing the CO2 levels sky high? Or 10 mile wide meteorite wiping out the dinosaurs? Nah. Could never happen.

    3. I’ve been using this Cosmos segment as an argument against censorship proposed by liberals.

  8. What I think they’re failing to take into account is: what happens when the last tick echoes?

    Why same as in a football game…everybody shakes hands, leaves the field, and goes back to the locker room. What else could possibly happen?

    They don’t actually have the ability or desire to see beyond their own desired end point. The idea that the system that let them advance is the same system that will see them into retirement never occurred to them. They destroyed that system because it was/is “oppressive”. It never dawned on them to check it and see what positive things it was doing at the same time. Like the G.K. Chesterton quote I saw earlier today (on MeWe?) Before you remove something because you can see no use for it, you should actually wait until you see the use for it. THEN you can decide if the something is necessary. Boomers (I’m technically one) forgot that little lesson.

  9. … wars can be stopped by apologizing to people who want to kill you

    In fairness, this could conceivably work, if only we stopped invading and overthrowing regimes – such as Libya’s Gaddafi – which posed no threat to us. Such actions tend to raise doubts about our sincerity. Heck, even the way we treat our allies, such as Israel Premier Benjamin Netanyahu, give pause to any foe contemplating our reassurances.

    1. In general, but amped up with Dems in the White House, over my lifetime being the enemy of the US was better than being its ally.

      Being a neutral the US was courting was best, but being a US ally, at least a non-first world ally, was the worst.

    2. Maybe, but there is also that part of the population who simply want to take whatever they want, regardless of who it hurts.

      And that’s not including the posturing that can so easily get out of control, or how our basic culture really does tend to completely replace many older cultures, simply by existing. After a generation or so of exposure to Western culture, most moderate Muslims are basically WASPs with different words.

  10. … thinking that taxing “the rich” means more money, instead of “the rich” leaving for other countries or stopping money-making activity.

    Reading comments of NY politicians planning on raising taxes “on the rich” calls to mind folk who cannot imagine pushing their lover hard enough they will leave. California used to hold the same delusion.

    1. They are driving out all the tax payers, and keeping all the freeloaders. I’m sure that will end well.

      1. Yeah. I’m really glad we managed to move out of New York state last year. When I saw what they were doing to the economy… shudder. I knew taxes were going to go up and NY already had the highest taxes.

    2. Taxing the rich is as ridiculous as sin taxes to get people to stop indulging in said sin. “Hey, we’ll keep raising the taxes on cigarettes! That way people will stop smoking! And we’ll use the money for schools.” A year later…well, for some strange reason we didn’t raise as much money as we expected with the cig tax…let’s raise it again! Then when you try to explain that the cig tax did indeed work…people quit smoking when it got too expensive, all you get are puzzled looks. They really do not understand actual cause and effect versus their hoped for, illogical cause and effect.

      1. They know this. Obama even admitted that he wanted to raise taxes on “the rich” (a term which is always a moving target and pretty much covers everyone who isn’t a government employee) even if it resulted in less tax revenue, in the name of “fairness”. What it comes down to is that the Democrats see taxes as a means to engage in communist redistribution of wealth, and their ideal tax rate FOR EVERYONE is as close to 100% as possible,

          1. Especially when the non-government employees make less than the government drones and apparatchiks.

    1. I’m glad it’s out in the open. Makes it more difficult for the indoctrinated to argue with you. Not that many of them will stop arguing, but they are forced to resort to some of the more ridiculous statements.

  11. Our enemies are cowards. Our enemies act with immaturity. They call fire down onto their own positions because their foxhole-mate didn’t bring them back the ham slice MRE, but gave it instead to that little girl in the foxhole next door.

    “I’ll show you!”


  12. We were in town today. (dental visit for me and weekly shopping trip). In Bi-Mart (small box club store), $SPOUSE went to get something, and she relayed the following exchange when she got back to me. Woman1 (younger of the two) “That’s a beautiful cross you’re wearing.” Woman 2 “In California, it’s against the law to wear a cross like that. It’s offensive!” Woman 1 “You’re embarrassing me” $SPOUSE: Death Stare.

    My first reaction would have been “Fuck you”, with a few seconds more thought: “Bless your heart.”

    Thinking about it: Woman 2 is a nutcase/member of the Evangelical Athiest’s Church, or was trolling to try to get an assault tort. $SPOUSE says both could have been Irish Travelers. Had one encounter with such years ago. At a Subway clone (Blimpies, now long gone from town) the couple startedto bitch about the food, then escalated. Threw the trash on the floor (small fraction of a sandwich, plus drink) and generally obnoxious behavior. The manager refunded the meal cost and invited them to leave. Might have been better calling the police…

    I wonder if it was a new scam, or if California-nutcases picked today to shop in Oregon.

    1. And no, even in Cali-F’n-ornia, it’s still not illegal to wear a cross. Unfortunately, it’s illegal to lynch rude asses in Oregon. So far, anyway.

    2. Woman 2 “In California, it’s against the law to wear a cross like that. It’s offensive!”

      I THIS state it is offensive to advocate for the legal regime that has encouraged so many Californians to flee here. People who like California’s laws should stay the f*ck in California – or move the h*ll back. If you are not sure of the way back I’d be happy to point you in the right direction and give you a boot start.

  13. OT: The lefties keep trying to change the language we use, in accordance with the Book of Orwell. It’s time for us to start doing the same, proactively. Some suggestions:

    “unsurrection” — what happened at the Capitol on January 6th

    “neo-racists” — those who call themselves “anti-racists”. More generally, adherents of Critical Race Theory.

    “neo-fascists” — those who call themselves “anti-fascists”. Black-clad thugs, often armored, who travel in mobs to commit violence, arson, looting, and other destruction. Personify the precise opposite of “the rule of law.”

    “Xi’s disease” — caused by the SARS-2 novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China. This is not a “racist” or “discriminatory” name for the disease; rather, it is a name which associates the disease with the individual most responsible for turning it into a global tragedy. (If he finds that offensive or insulting — he earned it.)

    “leftist privilege” or “lefty privilege” — If you often find yourself nodding in agreement with news stories from formerly respectable sources such as the New York Times, the Washington Post, CNN, or the three broadcast television networks, you have lefty privilege. Confers the ability to “cancel” random individuals for no actual reason.

    Other suggestions?

    1. I do know a few of their Orwellian definitions.

      “anecdote” — a magic word which allows Leftroids to dismiss facts they can’t deny, and arguments they can’t refute.

      “racist” — anyone who disagrees with a Leftroid about anything.

      “white supremacist” — anyone who disagrees with a Leftroid about anything, but especially ‘gun control’ or illegal immigration.

      “Neo-Nazi” — anyone who utterly destroys a Leftroid’s arguments with facts and logic.

Comments are closed.