Today I drove behind a car that was covered in stickers in support of Beto O’Rourke.

There are many things I don’t understand. And then there are things that are so bizarre I’m afraid of understanding them.

And now the AFP has joined in:

How hard would it be, at the very least, to put the word “sham” or “coerced” before “vote”?

This happens every single time. And then people keep saying that the MSM are against Russia. Are they dumb or just really dumb?

Russians are going door to door in the occupied territories, shooting people in the head if they refuse to tick the correct box on the ballot. But for the mainstream Western media, that’s a real vote with real results:

96% of what, you bastards? Hostages who sign at gunpoint?

And honestly, when did a serious vote produce a 96% (Russians are actually saying it’s 98%) agreement on anything? Three seconds of googling would have helped these Reuters idiots figure out what’s really happening.

Russians are using Iranian drones to attack the Hasidic Jews celebrating Rosh Hashanah in the Ukrainian city of Uman where Jews make a traditional yearly pilgrimage.

In other news, there’s this:

It was right here on this blog when I had to explain to people why the US should have the right to veto Nord Stream. Who do you think will now be paying to clean up the spill?

Yep.

I set my alarm to recite the most important news of the day after ringing. What’s really weird is that Liz Cheney leads the headlines almost daily. You’d think this is some nationally important politician but nobody knows her. I’ve asked around and got completely blank stares in response. I’m obsessed with politics but even I couldn’t tell you what she does, what job she holds, who voted for her (or maybe she doesn’t hold office, I have no idea).

The media efforts to turn Liz Cheney into an important political figure have been going on for a couple of years at least. They have failed completely. Nobody knows who she is. But the efforts continue with admirable perseverance.

Why does liberalism lead to wokeness? Why do the beautiful ideals of individual freedom lead to the denial that biological sexes exist and an incapacity to say that men can’t get pregnant?

Human beings are by definition not free. We aren’t free from our biology, our physiology, our genes, our bodies, our minds, our history, our environment, and so on. We aren’t free from others. And we are definitely not free from ourselves.

Liberalism can’t avoid going to war against all these things that stand in the way of human freedom. You say 2+2 makes 4 but what if I didn’t choose that? What if I disagree? Why should these numbers matter more than my unique human self that is yearning for liberty?

To the argument that liberalism need not lead to these extremes, my response is that there needs to be an argument built into the system of thought that would stop the current before the extreme is reached. The women of Iran should be free to not wear the hijab if they don’t want to and free to wear it if they do. Within this logic, the notorious teacher in Canada should be free to wear huge prosthetic breasts to class if he wants to. He should be a woman if he wants to. Or a baby. Or anything else. Children are already free to have their sex organs surgically removed. Why shouldn’t they be free to use these same organs to have sex? What kind of barrier can be placed between these flavors of freedom? Why is one good and another not good?

We live in a liberal world, so we should all be answering these questions. Can liberalism articulate some sort of a limiting principle that would roll back the insanity of denying biology, genetics, arithmetic, history and psychology? I most certainly hope so.