My lengthy rummaging through book lists bore the fruit you can observe in the picture:

I’m starting with Emma Cline’s novel. Its protagonist is a prostitute, and that made me think about the absurdity of the expression “sex worker.” We don’t call me “a book worker” or an electrician “an electricity worker.” People are hiding their extreme prudishness behind these uneasy verbal contortions and end up sounding like idjits.

This is an obvious and primitive psy op. I don’t know if it’s promoted by Democrats or Republicans but that doesn’t matter. Neither want to stop or even mildly limit mass migration. Knowing that voters are very unhappy with the insanely high migration numbers, these bastards pretend that they were about to solve the issue but evil forces prevented them.

How do I know it’s a psy op?

The insanely inflated claims are a dead giveaway. “Trump won’t be able to run on immigration if we reach this agreement in Congress.” This insinuates that the agreement would have immediately solved immigration to the point that Trump couldn’t run on the issue. That’s an absolute lie. The agreement proposes such small-potato modest measures that a hundred Trumps would have ample opportunities to run on the issue.

Not that Trump wants or is trying to run on immigration. For obvious reasons, that wouldn’t be possible.

I’m beginning to realize that nobody ever will do anything but increase migration. I don’t know why it is so but it’s clearly where we are.

My normie friend asked me today if it’s “still possible” for Ukraine to win the war. This already showed me the state of the MSM news reporting.

The answer is, God, so very possible. If Mr Joe Biden stopped sabotaging, if the US stopped placing ludicrous limitations on what Ukraine is allowed to do, if we had just 20 airplanes and 20 more Patriots, it would all be done already.

People are so duped that they think men can be women, diversity is our strength and Biden is pro-Ukrainian when in reality he’s done everything to help Russia.

So yeah, it’s possible.

Another great true crime series from Netflix, people. This one is really good. It’s about a world-famous surgeon working in Sweden, at the most expensive hospital in the world, and doing groundbreaking work in stem cell research.

There was endless news coverage about this amazing doctor. Articles, interviews, documentaries.

But it was all a hoax.

The surgeon was a psychopathic butcher.

He was allowed to cut people – normally, very young ones – into strips because everybody was so in awe of the phrase “stem cell” that nobody checked what he was doing.

This story really has everything. People going in for highly experimental surgeries that they don’t really need and dying as a result.

The insanity of socialized medicine in Sweden.

A hypocritical liberal lady journalist from New York.

A bureaucratic machine that creates a breeding ground for psychopathy.

There’s even the stupidity of Putin’s Russia there.

I’m watching the series and I’m thinking, “Gosh, these people, this medical establishment, they can’t be bothered to notice when a conman butchers a sweet toddler to death under the guise of groundbreaking science, and we let them lock us up and inject us with some weird concoction because they are supposed to know best.”

Yes, it’s a bit of a monomania with me. But a great documentary.

Netflix disgraced itself with Making a Murderer but it’s more than made up for it with these less famous docuseries. They are so good that I watched two about American football stars involved in crime, and I now even kind of understand the sport.

By the way, I had lunch today with a friend who is a life-long Democrat and who wants to vote for Nikki Haley. Reason: because she’s not old. Nikki Haley, I mean. The friend is in her seventies.

That would be the absolute first for this highly politicized person to vote for a Republican. She’s even willing to disregard Haley’s anti-abortion stand.

I’m telling you, people, normies are different.

In Kharkiv, Russian bastards bombed the historic Pushkinskaya Street. There’s definitely an irony to them destroying the street named after the pedophile creep Pushkin of whom they are so proud.

When I saw footage of the ruins, I thought, “At least, my father didn’t have to see it.” He loved that street and immortalized it in works of literature.

Shame on you, facile monkeys, who refer to the efforts to stop this wanton destruction as “warmongering.”

The street will finally be renamed after the Ukrainian philosopher Hryhory Skovoroda.

People say she should drop out but that would be an insane move. Anything can happen before next November. Trump can get arrested, have a stroke, die, God forbid. I’d stay put for as long as possible because why not?

Besides, there are quite a few liberals who’d go with Haley over Biden. This means they have made an imaginative leap to voting Republican. Thus an awakening begins. Forget about this dud of an election. We need to look into the future.

A message I received from the cleaners:

“I hate asking you this and please don’t take it the wrong way but can we come tomorrow instead of Wednesday?”

Midwestern politeness is really out there.

We are knee-deep in mandatory trainings, and, God, are they ever stupid.

Take, for example, the homophobia index test. You are supposed to agree or disagree with the following statement:

“I enjoy the company of gay people.”

I definitely enjoy the company of some gay people. And definitely don’t that of many others. My enjoyment has nothing to do with their sex lives because I’m not a creep. So how am I supposed to answer it?

More importantly, how is N supposed to answer it? He doesn’t really enjoy anybody’s company except mine and our daughter’s. So in a literal sense, no, he doesn’t enjoy the company of gay people. How would he even find out if anybody is gay? Why would he retain that information?

Or this one:

“Gay people deserve what they get.”

This really depends on what they get. Promotions? I don’t know, are they good workers? Terminal illnesses? Then no, I don’t think anybody “deserves” it. It sounds like something is absent from all these questions, and that absent but turns them to mush.

Then there’s this:

“When I meet someone I try to find out if he/she is gay.”

No, it would never occur to me to do that. It will probably not occur to me to find anything out about that individual. Wouldn’t a gay person who’s looking to date be the most likely participant to be interested in finding out?

I have a question for gay people, though. Do you really want your co-workers to be interrogated about their feelings regarding gayness in this way? If somebody made a test like this about, say, Ukrainians, I’d lobby as loudly as I can to make the horror stop. I absolutely promise I never felt anything negative towards gay people in my life. Since I first found out they exist, I had nothing but good, positive feelings. This homophobia quiz, though, I gotta tell you. I started kind of realizing how one could develop negative feelings.