James Bond 007: From Russia With Love (Xbox, 2005. Part 8 of the War Games series)

From_Russia_With_Love_Xbox_CD-I_bookAs we watch the Democrats peddle their warmongering interventionist and laissez-faire let’s-wait-for-war attitudes, ie as they play their war games on their way to the fall brawl known as the midterm elections, where voters will probably vote Democrat to bring us nookular annihilation, I’ll take a look at some literal war games. Cold War video games, anyway.


Today, we briefly address matters of espionage and acts of war by taking a look at a video game which contains both: the video game ‘adaptation’ of From Russia With Love. This was released on Xbox, PlayStation 2, and Gamecube. I played maybe one level of it on the Gamecube 13 years ago, but went all-in and beat the Xbox version for this review.

The Game


Sean Connery voiced Bond in this game and was classy as always about it. That’s the highlight.


An airborne jetpack battle, with an attack helicopter too. I don’t seem to recall that scene from the movie.

It only loosely follows the plot of the film, but it is more faithful than GoldenEye on the PS3, with some locations being recreated quite well. You’re thrown into the action as you take part in a pre-credits sequence that seems more fitting to a video game adaptation of something bonkers (Bondkers?)  like “The Spy Who Loved Me” or “Moonraker”. In regards to scenes like this, the makers of the Bond movies once lamented that often they’d try to make something more grounded like “From Russia With Love” but end up with another “Thunderball”. Seems like the makers of this game just went full-tilt at that notion.


The game is nominally set around the time of the movie, 1963, but you get gadgets that no one would’ve thought possible at that time. Like your own remote-controlled helicopter drone the size of your head with a TV camera so you can see where it’s going, something which was only just coming into existence when the game was released. In just the next movie Goldfinger needs a laser the size of a man to cut through metal. In this game, Bond has a laser watch. 20 years before he would ‘really’ get one, in “Never Say Never Again” and 32 years before he’d ‘officially’ get one in “GoldenEye” (quotes around officially and really because “Never Say Never Again” was made by a different studio and competed directly with an “official” Bond film, “Octopussy”, leading to an event the media dubbed “Battle of the Bonds”. “Octopussy” won, but probably because it came first. It certainly wasn’t better than “Never Say Never Again”).

You also fight a combat drone. No indication is given about whether its remote-controlled, which was possible at that time, or automated.

The general plot goes like this: Octopus (a S.P.E.C.T.R.E. stand-in, because at the time the name S.P.E.C.T.R.E. was still in a rights battle, as well as the plot to the book “Thunderball” which introduced them, which is how another studio was able to make a Bond movie in 1983. The court-settled rights-holder was able to get a Bond movie made. And it turned out to be, in the learned opinion of my brother and myself who have been watching Bond films for 20+ years, one of the best two. “Diamonds Are Forever” was the other of the best. The rest go from “ok but has plot holes and looks terrible” to “laughably bad plot and hilarious visuals”) is setting up a situation where Bond can steal a Soviet decoding machine, and then Octopus will steal it from Bond. And Bond blows a lot of stuff up. Cars, tanks, jetpacks, a jet, people, a drone carrying machine guns, helicopters, boats, and buildings. Not much spying in a lot of places, emphasis seems to be on shooting.


Women drivers, amiright?

In addition to characters from the movie, a new female assassin has been introduced to help Red Grant (in the book/film, Grant was SMERSH/S.P.E.C.T.R.E.’s assassin hired to steal the decoding machine from Bond). She says little and does less. Red Grant’s role is on the other hand is expanded. Personally I think he should have died when you first fight him, and they should have left the giant death machine final boss to the lady assassin instead of killing her off earlier with her own utter stupidity (she flies a jet into a closed door, one that was shut for the whole time you were in the stage), but that’s why I don’t make games I guess…


Aside from the James Bond wallpaper, this could be any old third-person shooter. The controls are pretty standard (though I had some difficulty since I’m not terribly used to the Xbox controller’s layout, more specifically I don’t know which of the 6 buttons on the right is which without looking- I didn’t own any kind of Xbox until 2015). With the jetpack, it seems like just an updated “Star Wars: Shadows of the Empire” (maybe I’ll get to that media circus one day), minus the ability to switch to first-person and ability to target anything. There are “James Bond moments” hidden throughout this game, which involve almost mundane things compared to what the mission needs you to do. This concept was first introduced to me in “James Bond 007: Agent Under Fire”.


Targetting. You need to press the left-trigger on the Xbox controller. That will target an enemy somewhere on the screen, usually farthest from you. And if an enemy moves behind an object, there is a chance your lock will be broken. There is also a chance you will lock onto the person at such an angle where your gun will empty its ammo at an obstruction, even though you can clearly see the enemy. It’s not consistent. Like if there’s an enemy behind an object and he pokes his head around the corner you mostly will be able to target him but sometimes won’t. It’s a mess. And there’s no viable way to just aim without the targeting system active. Oh, by the way, when you lock on a target, good luck locking onto another. Sometimes it works, sometimes no.

A second button triggers something else while targetting that can be quite useful, or very painful. You press it while targetted, and get a small yellow dot showing where your bullet will go plus several circles indicating places to shoot. This lets you in some cases aim at a grenade hanging from someone’s belt, causing it to drop and blow up anyone nearby. On enemies sliding down on ropes from the ceiling, this allows you to shoot the ropes so the enemies fall to their death. It can be painful if you shoot the grenade off while the person is right next to you, as I found out when I aimed a shotgun at their chest and some of the shot knocked the grenade off.

From_Russia_With_Love_Xbox_RuinsAnd now we get to the “bonus stage”- the Ruins. Bonuses are supposed to reward you. Not this one. In this stage, all of the flaws in targetting are exposed. I ran out of profanity when trying to play through that stage. I finally beat it! There are lots of obstructions to let the enemies hide and break your targeting lock. The level itself is composed of wave after wave of enemies in a bland, dark, musicless environment that’s mostly boring monochromatic rectangles. You complete a floor, go into a hall, go to another floor, go to another hall, go to a floor, etc. As long as this level is, there is no halfway point. Most of the other levels I’ve played in this game have one, but not this one. Ammo is a luxury here, and of course the game automatically switches to the gun with the LEAST ammo and the lowest rate of fire when you run out of ammo with a different weapon.

Some misc complaints that only warrant a sentence are as follow:

  • The camera is slow too. And on the boat stages when manning the gun? Don’t bother zooming, the camera moves twice as slow. The enemies move too fast for it to be anything more than a hindrance.
  • Enemies out of nowhere, enemies you can’t aim at but who are taking out all your health.
  • Doesn’t really bring it to your attention that your gun is changing, so you’ll suddenly realize that you’re not shooting anymore when you should be.

I guess my evaluation is this: if you liked the book, watch the movie. If you liked the movie, read the book. If you like the book, read Khruschev Remembers to learn more about two of the Soviet leaders mentioned (Ivan Serov and Lavrentiy Beria- Stalin himself was scared of Beria). If you like either the book or the movie, don’t expect anything like it from this game.



In the movie, Bond killed no Russians. He did kill Russian-hired Bulgarians- local hitmen. Not so in the game. Bond kills hundreds of Russian soldiers, destroys armed Russian cars, and destroys a Russian tank. He blasts his way into a Russian embassy, steals plans to it, steals a Russian jetpack, and massacres a bunch of Russians on his way out. It is impossible to believe World War III did not start from all of this.

Acts Of War

You’ll recall that the Left wants a war with Russia and wants a Civil War, in all ways acting like the few Bolsheviks in 1917 who wanted to continue the war with Germany as well as fight the Russian Civil War. Maybe liberals figure that if we have traditionally conservative soldiers deployed overseas, it’ll be easier for them to wage a Civil War at home?

What’s interesting to me is this: in attacking Saudi Arabia over the murder of Jamal Khashoggi, liberal outlets noted that Saudi Arabia’s blockade of Qatar was an act of war. Liberals failed to note that President Trump killing 200 Russian soldiers with his missile strikes at Syria also constitutes an act of war. In fact, the Left would have you believe we’ve surrendered to Russia without a war even starting.

What War?


What’s ironic is that billionaire Soros, whose organizations are funding communist protests, actually funded protests against the USSR according to one of my college professors years ago.

But as I mentioned in my last post, the Left had moved on from war with Russia, though it’s still there as a backup narrative in case they lose the midterms. Right now the Left is focused on the crazy Trump supporter who sent pipe bombs to CNN, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Maxine Waters, and various other targets of Trump’s rhetoric, as well as focused on trying to tell us that the anti-Semite who hates Trump massacred a synagogue because Israel-loving Donald told him to (“After Fanning the Flames of Anti-Semitism, Trump Is Hiding Behind the Pro-Israel Defense”, as Slate phrased it in a headline. What was Trump’s crime? Being critical of George Soros. You see, according to the Left, if someone who is LGBTQ/Jewish/a minority/a woman does something you don’t like, and you criticize that person, you hate everyone who is LGBTQ/Jewish/a minority/a woman. Because I guess according to the Left either those groups are incapable of doing wrong, or everyone in that group does wrong thus we can’t say it’s wrong. You figure it out, I don’t care anymore. CBS is out there with talking heads saying Trump is evil for being anti-Semitic, yet they’re trying to make us pity Iran which has built up an anti-Semitic record of its own, outside its daily hatred of Israel).

Let’s compare the Left’s reactions to similar events, shall we? Pipe bombs which didn’t explode, with some that couldn’t have exploded, are sent to liberals that Trump criticizes, thus Trump is evil and his words inspire bombers. A liberal shoots Republican congressman and actually injures them, and according to liberals their assassination threats against Trump have nothing to do with the actions of this crazy guy and the real problems are gun control and Republicans spreading hate (liberal outlet Vox noted in a headline “Blaming “heated political rhetoric” is the most useless response to a shooting”, with this being the only political attack they’ve applied that to). That’s right- after months of hearing mainstream news figures, ACLU personnel, and celebrities talk about the need to kill Trump and his supporters, after Hillary basically labels half of Trump’s supporters Lebensunwertes Leben, after mainstream liberal voices say Trump and Republicans will kill people, if a liberal picks up a gun and shoots Republicans then it’s the fault of Republicans. Entirely. They’re to blame for liberals calling them murderers, and they’re to blame when a liberal tries to murder them. Whereas when an anti-Bush Trump supporter who made a bomb threat while Trump was still a Democrat mails pipe bombs to people Trump is rightfully critical of, that automatically means Trump is to blame too.


It’s just a game.

And just ignore various murder attempts on Republican candidates and Republican Congressmen. The murder attempts mean as little as the lives of the potential victims, according to the Left, or so I’d assumed based on the lack of coverage these events have. A month before the pipe bomb issue, a Republican Congressional candidate in California was almost stabbed to death by a liberal. No national news coverage. Quite obvious whose side the media is on, as I like saying we no longer have to give a hypothetical “what about…” scenario, we can just say outright “when x happened to this Republican, you were silent”.

Then we have an interesting encounter Steven Crowder had with Texas Democrats. One of them instructed her twitter followers to firebomb his van. He saw her at a Democrat convention and challenged her on that point. She was silent, and a crowd formed around him. They called him a Nazi and chanted that “healthcare is a human right”, but not one of them condemned calling for him to be firebombed. The chick in question finally said vans are inanimate objects, but had no response aside from chanting a slogan when asked about the people inside the van who would have been killed. One person even accused Crowder of being a snowflake for complaining that someone demanded he be firebombed. Fast-forward to October when a Trump supporter sends pipe bombs to liberals. Not a joke now, is it.

The same liberals who thought it would’ve been great if Crowder were firebombed and called him a Nazi are outraged that someone dared send pipe bombs to their political leaders. But remember- they set the tone for this by encouraging violence first. It was, sadly, only a matter of time before a Trump supporter responded to the Left’s disregard for human life with the same thing. And the Left was waiting for that, because they were in need of an electoral victory. I’m almost wanting to say they were hoping someone would send them bombs in the mail so they could use it as propaganda, and I can fully understand people who believed that the pipe bombs were a false flag. The Left did everything it could to provoke a response, and then ran with it once they got what they wanted.

Anti-Semitic Reaction

The Left has another interesting reaction- New York Magazine declared that Trump is an anti-Semite who just hasn’t said he hates Jews. The same Trump whose son-in-law is Jewish. The same Trump who is pals with Israel, which the Left hates. Simply because Trump is critical of George Soros, a Jew, that makes Trump anti-Semitic. So it was stated in the wake of an anti-Trumper shooting up a synagogue. Even when the guy hates Trump, the Left still blame him for it.


The media says you should pity and support people that tell you this did not happen, and then claim Trump is the only evil anti-Semite, and claim Trump is bullying said people that don’t believe this happened.

What the Left was silent on is how under Obama, and still on college campuses, anti-Semitism, especially among liberals, was quite active too. Don’t let distorted stats and fake new fool you. Liberals hate Jews. So when they smear Trump as anti-Semitic and look for any excuse they can think of to justify it, it’s merely to deflect from their own deep-seated anti-Semitism. Yes, it is possible to be Jewish and anti-Semitic too, for those of you wondering why the Jew-owned media (not anti-Semitism, it’s actually true for CBS, NBC, and ABC. But not CNN. I thought saying “Jew-owned media” was a stereotypical anti-Semitic attack and tried to do research to debunk it, whereupon I found there is truth to it.) would betray its own. Just look at a certain woman named Stella Kübler-Isaacksohn. In particular they support Palestine, and in case you weren’t aware Palestinian attitudes towards Jews are about equal to Nazi attitudes. Anyone else rememebr when liberal Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), leader of Democrats in the House, once said Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist organization, was in fact a humanitarian group.

Also, liberals interrupted a moment of silence for the victims of the synagogue shooting. And Twitter, self-appointed Leftwing censor, does not censor anti-Semitic tweets even though it readily and happily censors anything from tweets insulting CNN anchors to tweets calling traitor Chelsea Manning a traitor. Users are suspended or banned for the latter two, while comparing Jews to termites is acceptable according to Twitter. Let’s not also forget the many Democratic ties to Louis Farrakhan.


This would of course be RINOs, like a certain GOP representative who sided with the liberals mentioned above who blamed Trump for Rep. Scalise being shot by a liberal after months of liberal assassination threats. Well, that’s how I’ll segue into this section. This title can refer to a lot as I’ll go into later, it’s sort of a catch-all after I wrote myself into a corner when trying to keep up with current events above.


A British spy sneaking around a Soviet tank is infiltration. A British spy sneaking over to a machine gun to destroy a Soviet tank (something not really possible with a T-55 tank) is an act of war.

To tie this section in with the page overall- one thing I did little of as Bond in the game was infiltration, actual spying. The closest I got to it was a few seconds re-enacting the scene from the movie where we learn Russian clocks are always correct. I would not call shooting your way into an embassy to steal plans, or shooting your way into an embassy to steal a decoding machine, “spying”. In the film, Bond simply took advantage of the panic caused by a bomb explosion to steal the machine. In the game, I guess Bond IS the cause of the panic. And soldiers shoot at him, as mentioned above. Not really much “spying” here… unlike the communist spy ring that gave our atomic secrets to the Russians. And yet we’re told McCarthy was a scary crazy man, told that the Stalinist Hollywood 10 who loved his purges were totally not communists and were innocent. Liberals see everything as Russian interference today, but saw nothing as Soviet interference back then. I guess when your ideals of purging political foes and iron-fisted rule over the populace align so well, it’s hard to tell where Soviet interference ended and liberalism began.

Anyway, matching definitions of “infiltration” more accurate than the video game’s, we have Democrats insisting that no one is leaving the party, that Russian bots have infiltrated twitter to make it look that way as mentioned above. How convenient that Russians have infiltrated all these things, including our elections. So what happens if Democrats win? Does that mean the Russians wanted them to win?

What will probably happen is the DNC will conveniently forget about how rigged they say the system was against them. Sure Trump said the system was rigged and forgot about that once he won, but he also cited Bernie Sanders as an example of the system being rigged, and how right was Trump on that? Very.

Speaking of cybersecurity threats, anyone remember how Hillary Clinton’s email server was (and was probably, depending on the link you clicked) hacked during an act of cyber spycraft? Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) certainly does not.

No Infiltration Needed

Here’s an example of other ways intelligence operates. Aside from sending Bond in to kill half the Russian army and blow up a few helicopters and tanks, sometimes information is obtained simply from leakers. Like certain Islamic staffers that belonged to various Democrat officials at different points in their careers, who sold info to foreign intelligence services. I mention “Islamic” because Democrats tried to say the accusations were examples of Islamophobia when defending their staff members. In fact, contrary to the treatment Democrats gave Kavanaugh’s accuser, they said accusations by a Muslim woman against these two staffers of abusing her were an act of Islamophobia. That’s right, if you are a woman accusing a white man then we should believe you, but if you are a woman accusing Keith Ellison or Democratic Muslims then you are a liar. Worse, if you accuse Democratic Muslims you’re a bigoted woman. Welcome to the Left.

What Do You Think?

Looks like such a fun game, vote Democrat and make it happen! Remember- liberals want spies EVERYWHERE. Like with Stalin, they want you to know that saying the wrong thing will make you an unperson. So you can’t even let yourself think it, lest your best friend observes a slight change in your behavior and has you arrested. We already see liberals tearing families and friendships apart over political disagreements (I blame liberals here because they prove to be more intolerant- aside from studies, we have hard evidence: when Obama won the cities were peaceful, when Trump won liberals burned them down), if they had the option to arrest a stranger do you think they’d pass on it? Just ask Kavanaugh for that answer.


Meanwhile, the Left wants a war going on. To kill off conservative soldiers (whom they see as potential terrorists anyway) and distract you from what they’re doing domestically, or even to give them an excuse for decreasing our freedoms domestically. Remember- that’s what they accused Bush of doing with the Patriot Act at the onset of the War on Terror, that’s what FDR did to Japanese-Americans in World War II, so it’s not like this is a new tactic or so ridiculous that it never has reached our shores.


There wasn’t a game over screen that I saw, so instead enjoy this acknowledgment that I published this post on Halloween.

WarGames and War Room (Colecovision, 1983-1984. Part 7 of the War Games Series)

WarGames-War-Room-ColecovisionAs we watch the Democrats peddle their warmongering interventionist and laissez-faire let’s-wait-for-war attitudes, ie as they play their war games on their way to the fall brawl known as the midterm elections, where voters will probably vote Democrat to bring us nookular annihilation, I’ll take a look at some literal war games. Cold War video games, anyway.


Image from IMDB

Today, we again address the Left’s warmongering. Civil War, war with Russia, and now war with Saudi Arabia. Russia has nukes, and for Saudi Arabia nuclear weapons are a phone call away, or in the case of liberals in the U.S. just a dump truck in downtown Manhattan away. So let’s address the more classical notion of nuclear war by looking at “War Games” and “War Room” on the Colecovision.


We have played out a variety of attack strategies on the new Kutuzov computer. I wanted to say that in the more appropriate context of reviewing “NATO Commander”, but I don’t have the money for such advanced machinery as is needed to play that.


WarGames-Colecovision-Title-ScreenOf course I had to cover this one. It’s the name of the whole series! But originally I didn’t even think of it; I’ve had the game a year or two now so I kind of forgot about it.

Everyone remembers the movie, right? No? Adolescent Matthew Broderick spends half the film shirtless, then a computer runs a tic-tac-toe simulation until realizing it will never beat itself, then applies that to nuclear war and realizes there’s no winning a nuclear war. The end.WarGames-Colecovision-Difficulty-Screen

The video game is a simulation of a nuclear war. You start by picking your difficulty level. Next, you go to a screen showing the continental U.S.A., because contrary to Jim Carrey’s histrionics, I guess no one cares enough to target Hawaii. Or Alaska, but that’s probably because fallout could blow into Russia if they’re not careful.


All 3 delivery methods seen here. The white F-4 Phantom indicates a Russian jet (blue is yours), the white submarine is a Russian sub, and the white dotted lines are incoming missiles. I doubt Soviets would like having their forces portrayed as white, given their little conflict with the White Army.

Soviet nuclear weapons are delivered by three different methods: submarine, ICBM, and bomber. But that’s ok, because you can stop them with your attack subs, anti-Ballistic-Missile missiles (as discussed in the piece about Missile Command), and interceptor squadrons. It’s the 1980s so luckily your interceptors are useful, unlike the F-94C and F-89D.


The controls are… well, you need the overlay to understand what the heck is going on. Just sitting there pressing random buttons did not work for me. I figured out that the first 6 buttons controlled which region of the U.S. you were looking at, and that one of the buttons took you back to the overall map, but that was it. I was not able to determine that the bottom-left button selected submarines, the bottom-middle WarGames-Colecovision-Missile-Commandselected anti-missile missiles, and the bottom-right selected interceptors. Once you’ve selected your method fo defense, you must move your crosshair to where you want it to go, and then press one of the buttons on the side of the controller to activate it. Submarines will move where you send them and stay there, destroying any enemy that comes to it. The interceptors will fly to the location you select, but then return to base once they reach it. You can keep them moving around if you guessed wrong. The missiles


Pressing 1 shows screen A (pictured earlier, with the caption describing enemies), pressing 2 shows screen B, etc.

explode once they reach their target.


The goal of the game isn’t to blow up everything coming in, that’s actually quite impossible. Some sections of the map have ICBMs coming at you, but no missiles to shoot them down with. Other sections might have bombers or subs coming in, but nothing to counter them with. Plus you can’t really be everywhere at once. In the time it takes to clear up a strike in one region, another probably took several hits.


Counterstrike averted? Guess Hillary wasn’t in office. Or the foe sent her a barge full of cash.

So what is the goal of the game? You spend 8 minutes trying to keep the overall DEFCON level from staying at “1” for one minute. If that happens, a massive counterstrike is launched and the world ends. You must limit the damage to America from incoming Soviet nuclear strikes until a ceasefire can be negotiated. Apparently, ceasefires in a nuclear war take only 8 minutes to hammer out.



Though to many Leftists, the electoral disadvantage brought on by that little white dot indicating a fireball where San Francisco used to be might as well mean the end of the world, based on how they react to Republican victories.

I liked this game. The cursor moved nicely. The game is actually easier than it sounds (my first time playing it on easy was a win). I’d go so far to say that it’s easier than Missile Command, though that might be because unlike Missile Command you only have to last 8 minutes in this game. It’s quick, it’s frantic hopping from area to area keeping up with where the big map shows enemies coming in, and you end the game knowing that the world didn’t end with it.


I’m not saying much about the sound here because it’s just your typical beeps and boops from consoles of this era. Not that I could hear much, my TV played a heavy overlay of static over the game’s sounds.

War Room


Despite all my complaints, I did like the title screen. I liked the fact that it even had one (Colecovision games tend to have the generic one you saw above for WarGames, which is what’s displayed when you turn the system on). What won me over was the little nuclear war animation at the top.


The white circle with 4 extensions in the middle is your satellite, move it over the black plus sign in the lower righthand corner and then fire your laser at it to save a city.

This game is much like WarGames, except it came out a year earlier. You have a satellite icon that serves as crosshairs that you move across the screen, and pick off enemy missiles with its laser. This was based on Reagan’s Star Wars idea, but has no relation to Star Wars on the Colecovision (which I’ll get around to writing about eventually, I’ve had the screenshots for 4 months). The missiles are dropping on population centers in the U.S., areas that can resupply your satellite.



Ok genius, YOU tell me which button it is.

You have only a finite amount of resources, including laser blasts. When you run low on a supply, press one of the buttons (I forget which, there’s 14 on that controller and I just hit them at random) and a minigame for supply gathering starts. You maneuver Uncle Sam around the screen picking up supplies, but avoiding Hammer-And-Sickles. If one of these catches you, the city becomes Soviet territory and begins hemorrhaging nuclear missiles at your other cities. Like a volcano of nuclear weapons erupted.


I can see myself liking this one except for one glaring problem: moving the satellite. As you might notice in the picture, you have a nice round joystick. But in the game, you cannot move diagonal, and the joystick has to be pointing left, right, up, or down, ie to traditional d-pad directions. And the joystick is a bit big to be moving with just my thumb, I need it and another finger to work it. Imagine playing Super Mario Bros., but whenever you want to move right you have to place two fingers on a small joystick pad and pull right. The stick is too small to grip with your full hand, like what I was doing with Mario Bros. on the Atari consoles. But even at that, the directional controls just seemed more responsive, it felt like with War Room I had to be more precise. Notice too that WarGames had no such issue, it’s solely the fault of the developers of War Room.

It’s either Uncle Sam or that guy from Monopoly. Pick up the stuff that isn’t a Hammer-and-Sickle, and don’t get struck by said implements of Communism.
Otherwise your city becomes a Hammer-and-Sickle block, and lobs nukes at other parts of the country.









They Want Real War

While Civil War and war with Russia both were fighting for dominance in Democrat thought, and applicability to the midterm elections (after a year of public disinterest in nuking Russia, it seems Dems settled on Civil War), the Saudi Arabian thing is quite recent. Why are we now seeing Saudi Arabian actions as acts of war, why are we saying Saudi Arabia committed an “act of war against humanity” (actual Daily Kos headline)? Because they killed Bin Laden’s best friend (that’s probably hyperbolic), a radical Islamist, and in general the last person you’d expect to find the Washington Post publishing if liberals actually valued the things they claim to value.


“Pffffft, дилетанты”

Granted, Saudi Arabia did it terribly, poorly, and until evidence comes out I’ll say probably for not a very good reason, but that’s like arguing that if Stalin ordered the NKVD to kill Hitler because Hitler said a mean thing about him, then Stalin declared war on humanity. Stalin isn’t a good person, it’s a petty reason, but no one would miss the slime that was cleaned up. At best with Bin Laden’s Buddy, we shouldn’t care that he himself is dead, we should just be concerned about why the Saudis might have done it. No more concerned than the average liberal is when a black kills another black.

The same liberals who got worked up over this cheered Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) when she said that Kavanaugh was guilty of rape because of his political views, and cheered when John Hinkley jr tried to kill Ronald Reagan, and rooted for the many people threatening to assassinate President Trump are saying that it was wrong for Saudi Arabia to kill someone just because they disagreed with their politics. In other words- abandoning the law and destroying someone’s life, whether in Hirono’s “might-as-well-be-lethal-because-he’d-be-called-a-rapist-forever” way or the Left’s preferred “bullet-to-the-brain” way, is perfectly acceptable to liberals if it’s to their advantage.


Maybe liberals think all of the threatening tapes were mistranslations of Bin Laden’s really bad American Idol auditions?

Which begs the question- why do they count Bin Laden’s friend who wanted to Islamize the world as one of their friends? Why did the Washington Post publish his stuff to begin with? The best answer I have is that Saudi Arabia’s current Crown Prince is allegedly a progressive reformer, which the Left hates (liberals love the Muslim Brotherhood, covered for them, and don’t mind at all women and the LGBTQ community being oppressed, just so long as it’s by an America-hating Muslim group), and Trump got real buddy-buddy with the self-proclaimed reformer. You know, the people that Bin Laden’s friend used his platform to criticize because he wants to remove Western values from the Middle East, the people that want historically oppressed groups to be less oppressed. Traditional liberal allies, thrown under the bus like when Stalin betrayed the German Communist Party (my source for Stalin doing that is Khrushchev Remembers, one of the notations).

The oldest opinion piece Washington Post has from Bin Laden’s Buddy is Nov. 17, 2017. A little over a week prior, the ruler of Saudi Arabia arrested a bunch of people who both were corrupt and in the way of him having power. Kind of like what Democrats want to do to our government, starting with either Kavanaugh or Trump or both, except Democrats don’t really care about the corruption part, they’d say “impeach” if Trump jaywalked. Trump encouraged this arresting behavior by Saudi Arabia’s leadership. 6 months prior to that, Trump went to Saudi Arabia and signed an arms deal.

What a coincidence- Saudi Arabia and Trump are pals, and right after Trump supports one of their pseudo-authoritarian (the arrested folks were kept in a 5-star hotel) moves, Washington Post starts publishing a writer who is critical of that Saudi Arabian leadership- Bin Laden’s friend. I’d say politics makes strange bedfellows, but liberals are quite fond of terrorists if their principal targets are America or its allies, and certain folks in a position to know would say liberals and terrorists only differ in their level of violence and what they use to justify their oppressive ways. That also explains the curious case of journalists liking Turkey despite how many journalists languish in Turkish prisons, as mentioned in my last post. As for why Bin Laden’s chum fled, well, he did have a history with the Saudi Royal Family and the Crown Prince was cleaning up corruption/enemies there, while Bin Laden’s Buddy’s Buddy’s Mentor tried to kill the Crown Prince’s uncle (his father’s half-brother).

In Memoriam

  • Jamal Khashoggi was a journalist, not a jihadist (CNN)
  • Trump just literally put a price tag on Jamal Khashoggi’s life (Vox, who routinely put price tags on infant minorities with their pro-choice support and the many dollars their politicians get from Planned Parenthood) 
  • “DON’T MOURN FOR KHASHOGGI”: INSIDE THE FEVERISH CESSPOOL OF THE PRO-SAUDI RIGHT (Vanity Fair again. To the wandering Vanity Fair eye, you’ll note I didn’t particularly consider what Saudi Arabia did good, just that your Saint Jamal is a sinner with the worst of them)
  • In death, Saudi writer’s mild calls for reform grew into a defiant shout (Washington Post)
  • Khashoggi was a free speech warrior and the latest casualty in a global war on journalists (USA Today, you’ll note that Bin Laden’s Buddy opposed free speech contrary to this blatant bit of propaganda, which Bin Laden’s Buddy himself may have been author of with the Left buying it hook, line, and sinker. I also find it odd that his posthumous piece had such climactic things to say about open societies and freedom of the press, like he knew he was about to die? Or like someone at Washington Post decided to write it? If he did write it, it’s as laughable as North Korea claiming to be the “Democratic People’s Republic Of Korea”.)

A Liberal’s ideal vision of Saudi Arabia’s capital. Not pictured: any living members of the government. I’ll be covering the source of this picture in 2 weeks.

Yup, the media just loved their friend and are outraged Trump isn’t bombing Saudi Arabia or whatever. Their friend used one of his Washington Post pieces to praise the Muslim Brotherhood. Their friend has been all about ending democracy in the Middle East. But as I explained last time, the Left has been all about ending democracy here, so like I said- they’re kindred spirits. No wonder they got along so well.

How To Stop The War(s)

Why’d I type that? I have no clue. If given power, the Left will carry out the threats I mentioned last time and restructure society. If left out of power, they’ll riot as Hillary Clinton noted. Luckily just enough time has passed that maybe they’ll have forgotten about their Russian war rhetoric so we can avoid re-enacting “War Room” and “WarGames”, and instead we’ll just be invading Saudi Arabia, killing the ruler, and leaving a hotbed of slavery and chaos much the same way Democrats did with Libya.

Or Saudi Arabia will drop a few million for some Iranian missiles and Pakistani nukes, then send them airmail special to Leftwing cities like Washington DC and New York. Or dispense with the formality of an ICBM and just give ISIS a nuke and tell them to have fun coming up the border that Democrats refuse to secure despite the possibility of terrorists coming in through it (note in that link that the Guatemalan President talks of arresting Middle Easterners, meanwhile liberal outlets deny that any terrorists would try to sneak in this way. Do the math- if you are a Middle Eastern terrorist and you see how easy it is for Middle Easterners to get into your biggest target, what would you do? Notice too that the Washington Post is trying to deny that these Islamic terrorists, with whom they seem to have a rapport as established earlier, would enter the country through the border that Washington Post does not want secured. I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but at what point do we stop giving them the benefit-of-the-doubt that they’re just stupid partisans?).

What Do You Think?

Looks like such a fun game, vote Democrat and make it happen! Since these two games -fun/winnable as WarGames is and unplayable as War Room is- are much like Missile Command both in theme and objectives, I didn’t want to just rehash the Russian warmongering and nuclear annihilation promised in that one. Fortunately, liberals gave me a way to cover Bin Laden’s Buddy (Jamal Khashoggi, I will finally name him down here at the end) and still talk of warmongering.

The Democrat media has come out loving this journalist, the leaked emails from the DNC showed the depth of collusion between the media and Democrats (as do their donations), so what more do I need to say before it’s taken as granted that what you see in New York Times and Washington Post is what passes for mainstream thought in the Democratic Party? And if those guys (and Obama) are out there aiding jihadists, weeping that an Islamist can no longer talk about how great the Muslim Brotherhood is using the Washington Post as a platform, with the Post hailing him for being a positive reformer, with other outlets saying that his calls for government to censor reporters are free speech, then what does that tell us about what mainstream Democrats think? (As for censoring speech, bear in mind what mainstream Democrats have said about the government being allowed to edit Facebook posts to remove what Democrats think is fake news)

So… they want an unsecure border, don’t care that terrorists can sneak in, want to destroy our alliance with a moderate force (and reaffirm our alliance with Iran, which regularly shouts “Death To America”, something probably also heard in the halls of Washington Post HQ just as frequently), celebrate Bin Laden’s Buddy as a hero, think censorship is free speech, and want nuclear war with Russia. Does ANY of this sound like a good idea?




Guerrilla War (NES, 1987. Part 6 of the War Games Series)


I found out the expensive way that most of the boxy NES consoles need a lot of upkeep to function. So instead I give you the budget alternative, the Retron. With HDMI hookup. No, I never played the arcade release of this game.

As we watch the Democrats peddle their warmongering interventionist and laissez-faire let’s-wait-for-war attitudes, ie as they play their war games on their way to the fall brawl known as the midterm elections, where voters will probably vote Democrat to bring us nookular annihilation, I’ll take a look at some literal war games. Cold War video games, anyway.



Image from WWE Network

One popular feature of the Cold War was the Civil Wars, which the left labels as revolutions. Communist revolutions backed by Russia, anti-Communist revolutions backed by the West. Civil wars where the political fate of the country is fought over- Spain was such a victim during I guess what could be called Russia’s brief Cold War with Nazi Germany. The Left sure does love inspiring revolutions, remember ComIntern? Well, today we look at a game focused on one such revolutionary experience: Guerrilla War.

The Game


Someone decapitated an M2 Medium Tank

It’s a vertically-scrolling shoot ’em up. In other words, you move towards the top of the screen and kill anything that moves. It’s best if you have a friend with you, while it is interesting to play through on its own you die A LOT. You can’t tell from these pictures, but you are swarmed by enemies. I don’t even know if it’s possible to get through the game without taking a hit, and there’s certainly no replay value unless you and a buddy are laughing it up as you keep dying. Since you see your scores after each death, it seems like you could make a series of mini-competitions out of the game.



Can’t imagine what island this is supposed to be. Leave a comment if you can figure out what island had a revolution and has its capital in the northwest part.

Oh, did I mention you have infinite lives? I really liked that part. I had played Commando prior to this, and hated how I kept getting nowhere and then getting a game over. These games are like After Burner– made for eating quarters in an arcade machine. Just giving you finite lives and telling you game over can be very frustrating when you know in the arcade if you just had $100 in quarters you could win!


The story of this game goes that you’re a generic revolutionary trying to overthrow a generic corrupt government. At least the story in the U.S. release. You’ll notice from the screenshots that the island has quite familiar geography and terrain. And you’ll notice that your character looks kind of familiar.

I thought you were supposed to be Fidel Castro, but the Japanese title of this game is “Guevara”. The story was censored for U.S. markets. Apparently Player 2 is supposed to be Fidel Castro. But Fidel himself is never Player 2. El Comandante was quite fond of himself, so you can understand why I and every liberal out there who believes in Castro (all of them) would think you were playing as him. Also, the Player 1 and Player 2 sprites are just palette swaps.


Looks like a mixture of Castro and Guevara to me. At varying points both had roughly this hairstyle and beardstyle.

Well… that’s it really. It’s insanely difficult if your goal is to get through without losing a life, I like the visuals, it’s an interesting twist to play as the communist revolutionary for once even though the cover art makes it look like you’re a capitalist fighting Soviets. Not that story matters in these games. So I’ll just scatter my pictures throughout this otherwise quite serious opinion piece.

A Quick Note On One Of My Sources

Khrushchev-Remembers-Front-CoverI reference a translation of Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev’s memoirs, Khrushchev Remembers, a lot below. I thought it would be nice to have a communist voice tell communists about their revolution gone awry. In fact, Khrushchev claims he had written the memoirs in part because Stalin’s reputation was undergoing a positive rehabilitation, something he did not want to see after remembering Stalin’s excesses (even though he was party to them). The New York Times has been doing something similar (one article they wrote was very sexist, heteropatriarchal, heteronormative, objectifying, and LGBTQ-exclusionary. NYT boasts about how great the sex was for women in Soviet Russia. Meaning women enjoyed men forcing themselves on them a lot more. And the LGBTQ community was nonexistent in the mainstream, because your first step from out of the closet was into a gulag. To be fair, Lesbians could still be lesbians… but only if one of them had a sex change, definitely not if both were in their original body no matter how comfortable they were with their gender identity. Yet NYT apparently wants that exclusionary environment recreated here, and thinks all that a woman should care about is sex with men), and one of the folks who helped with the Left’s anti-Trump Steele Dossier’s fabrication was an ardent Stalin supporter.

But the real reason I reference this now is there was some dispute when this book was initially published about its authenticity. It was even suggested to be a CIA conspiracy. However, tapes of Khrushchev narrating the story were released.

For those who do a quick Google search for “”Khrushchev Remembers” authenticity” and only look at the top two results (or 4 of the first 10), you wouldn’t know that this book is authentic because Google pulls out newspaper articles and reviews from around the time of its publication in the early 70s which question its origins. I’m leaning towards saying this is an example of Google’s biased search algorithm, since the folks at Google are very fond of the USSR, and as you’ll see below their political ideology of “liberalism” is more akin to “Stalinism“, which Khrushchev attacks in his memoirs.

As you’d expect, his memoirs are a trifle one-sided. He glossed over that whole “I had 83 out of 86 members of Ukraine’s Central Committee executed over the course of one year” thing.

Today’s Guerrillas


Castro personally greeted everyone who sailed into Cuba.

Given how Fidel Castro could do no wrong and was a celebrity for everyone in the liberal media, from actor to anchor, and everyone on the Left I don’t see it as hyperbole to suggest that this game is pretty much what they think happened. One ABC News journalist HAD SEX WITH CASTRO. And the liberal media complains Trump is the one out enabling dictators and encouraging men to treat women as objects. Cuba has the harshest free speech laws in Latin America with 10 years in prison for saying something the government doesn’t like, over 10,000 Cubans simply disappeared because the government didn’t like them, and after all that not only does the liberal press praise Castro, THEY LITERALLY SLEEP WITH HIM!

Liberals don’t particularly care what their communist dictators do, much like in Khrushchev’s analogy they see victims of communism merely as wood chips flying about while Castro axed the tree of capitalism.

(Just as an aside about liberals complaining Trump enables dictators, the media as I write this is accusing Trump of enabling the oppression of journalists by not attacking Saudi Arabia in some fashion over the disappearance of part-time Washington Post Columnist Jamal Khashoggi, and the media’s largest source of information on that issue is also the largest jailer of journalists in the world, Turkey. 33% of the world’s jailed journalists are in Turkish prisons. But liberals have been sucking up to Turkey despite this oppression while saying Trump is the one enabling dictators, something the media was happy to do for the 2018 Winter Olympics when they were literally peddling North Korean propaganda. Plus, this disappeared columnist whom the Left has declared to be a saint of journalism, Saint Jamal Khashoggi, is in fact a radical Islamist, and opposed freedom of the press. Worse, another of the media’s sources is a friend of the journalist whose mentor tried to assassinate the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia. They didn’t report that bias, even though one of the folks citing him had reported on that assassination attempt. The media also has yet to report that Saint Jamal was friends with Osama Bin Laden, and both had the common goal of establishing worldwide Islamism. So while it might’ve been wrong for Saudi Arabia to chop the guy up for opposing their government, it couldn’t have happened to a nicer person. But because Saudi Arabia is moderating, actually letting women drive for example, that makes them an enemy of “radical” Islam (I’ve covered why I use quotes around “radical”, at least on the occasions where I remember to put quotes around the word), thus an enemy of the press, a press which meets very few oppressive anti-free speech regimes it doesn’t like.)

Ironically, ABC News who were quite critical of President Trump’s “grab ’em by the pussy” remark ended up having their sexually active reporter prove Trump’s statement to be correct- his statement being that men who liberal women think are celebrities get away with a lot. cough Bill Clinton cough Keith Ellison cough Robert Menendez. Excuse me, I need a drink of water. I’m having a Marco Rubio moment. Maybe the media would like to ask him about why his family fled Cuba.

Liberals really do love Fidel. Sure, he killed a lot of his own citizens after seizing power, kept them living in fear and poverty, but look at that beautiful communist system! Look at how educated his slaves were! Granted, he only let them read so that they can view party propaganda, but they could all still read!

Of course, these same liberals wish the Bible never existed, think the Bible is evil heteronormativepatriarchal propaganda, even though the Bible was singularly responsible for hiking the literacy rate in Europe (thanks to the Protestants deciding that everyone in their religion should be able to read it, much like Castro’s literacy rate came from his campaign to indoctrinate the population, allegedly). But the Bible is evil (Islam is totally cool #MeToo), Christians are mentally ill, and Fidel is an actual God-like figure, right liberal? Remember- Stalin, Mao, Castro: these are the murdering thugs that the Leftist mobs worship. Always have, they just didn’t mob so much under Obama when Democrats controlled everything. Like Hillary said, Democrats will only be civil when they are in control.


Fun Fact: In Final Fantasy III/Final Fantasy VI, Fidel Castro was the only party member you needed in order to beat the train boss. Just like Castro is the only Party member who counts in Cuba.

Leftist mobs. They’re all trying to be Fidel Castro, whom the Left thinks of as a hero and probably have portraits of above their dinner tables. I somehow doubt it’s ignorance of his purges either, given how many liberals openly want to oppress or murder (note that those last two are teachers, as in people whom you are paying to impart their ideology on your children) their opposition. And as for the “mainstream” Leftists who worship Castro? Well, just take a listen to them once in a while and you’ll see their beliefs don’t differ much from the mobs. That’s probably why the liberal media goes to such great lengths to ignore or downplay liberal mobs. They don’t want to alienate the independents and possibly lose an election, thus they want to dismiss or downplay their true colors (red and gold) when they show through.

Whether fascists or communists, organizing a good old fashioned mob to go after your opponents is a fun past-time for a boring evening after a day of party functions.

Speaking of liberals and the mobs having similar points of view, check out this former Clinton adviser’s comments. He mocks opponents of The Revolution by saying that first they paint Leftists as snowflakes but then as angry mobs, and claims this is a confusing bit of hypocrisy, thus trying to destroy the credibility of people who point out what his side of the aisle is doing.

Of course like most things Democrats do (a stopped clock is still right twice per day, there are some areas I’d give them credit on) there is a problem with this gentleman’s statement. Democrats like to be a big tent party, so surely there’d be room for a little snow on the mob? Or is snow now an example of white supremacism? (yes, it is)

But it’s actually pretty simple: your little snowflakes have their mental meltdowns, but instead of slush they form big angry mobs for any reason that pops into their pea-brains. Including money. A box full of sweating dynamite also has the fragility of a snowflake. Sensitive, uneducated thugs that are easily triggered if someone dares divert from party lines. Take a page from Khrushchev’s book (not my copy please, I paid nearly half a cent per page)– he was not fond of the mobbish brutes who attacked anyone for deviating from Stalin’s orthodoxy, he condemned the many “good communists” sent to the “meat-mincer”, and one bit of self-deprecation he did do was criticize his own blind obedience (he downplayed it too of course, it’s HIS memoirs ya know!).

As point of fact, the emotional immaturity that leads to us calling you liberals “snowflakes” is what lets you think temper tantrums, aka mobs,  are valid ways to get what you want. Spoiled brats finding another way to cry. A very dangerous way, one which makes us go from mocking snowflakes who need to color or play with play-doh (I’d check the lists to make sure your lawyer’s law school wasn’t in this group, juries tend to judge clients based on their lawyer’s conduct) because their candidate lost an election to standing by to defend ourselves if their mob heads our way.

Also, this gentleman confirms that the DNC hierarchy loves its mobs (keep in mind how tight the DNC and Hillary’s campaign were/are, I doubt she’s letting them forget that she footed the bill for the election). Look at him covering for them and mocking anyone opposed. What a good little Democrat he is. Too bad that as a white male he’ll be first to go if these mobs get power. Such is the fate of the revolutionary.

How Real Are These Mobs?

I couldn’t find any pictures of liberal mobs, because apparently they don’t exist. Images from Fox News, AP, RWC, and Quora

First they deny that they’re paid, then they deny that they’re mobs. This is my attempt to halfway be fair to the peaceful liberals who might welcome discourse and argument.

I liked what happened here- MSNBC tried to debunk President Trump’s claim that these mobs weren’t paid off. So they interviewed a member of one such mob… who said she was paid off! As a member of a Soros-controlled organization. This is why you always tape interviews, never do them live. You’ll note MSNBC also never covered people witnessing anti-Kavanaugh protesters being paid off by people tied to Soros, nor did they cover witnesses saying that anti-Kavanaugh protesters were being given free meals and money for bail if they get arrested protesting. You’ll also note what a lefty reporter states- that some of the highlights of the anti-Kavanaugh protests were actually the result of paid professional protesters exploiting genuine frustration the media ginned up in hapless people. People only exist to be used by liberals to advance their power, an attitude you’d find liberal icon Castro nodding his bearded head in agreement with. Now, despite the admission you saw above, despite the reporting you saw above, reliably liberal Washington Post denies there’s any such thing as a Soros-funded protester, despite Soros-funded protesting groups being reported by often-left-leaning outlet USA Today as paying protesters (Women’s March got lots of Soros money, despite Politifact saying a few months prior that this was all a lie, showing just how much like Pravda under Stalin the liberal fact checkers and media have become).

That handles the Kavanaugh mobs, it’s worth noting that a lot of these mobs have signs of being less-than-spontaneous, rather than just a bunch of mad people suddenly demonstrating as the media tells you (Vice has an “article” titled “Why the Ridiculous ‘Paid Protester’ Myth Refuses to Die” that I won’t even dignify with a link because even their own editor admitted there were paid demonstrators. I won’t dignify the Washington Compost’s “The real purpose of the ‘paid protester’ lie” with a link either, because clearly someone didn’t do their homework. The Huffington Post on the other hand tries to say that there really are paid agitators, but they’re not the ones Republicans are accusing).

Rewriting The Rules

severed head

Remember women, if at all times of day you’re not dreaming of making this a reality, you’re either A: sexist against women, B: internalized your own oppression, C: stupid, D: not a free-thinking being capable of making your own decisions. ie. if you’re not out in the mobs forming against Trump, goose-stepping with your fellow liberals and blindly shouting their slogans, then you’re just not independent. Totalitarian Is Liberal, Independence Is Slavery. These ought to be the new Democratic Party slogans.

Liberals now want a Revolution of their own. Well… let’s be honest, Democrats have been demanding a revolution ever since Hillary lost the election. Just look at the post-election riots- yes, it was just a bunch of paid rioters with no message because they probably got paid per rock thrown (or they weren’t paid and just inclined towards criminal behavior and/or snowflake temper tantrums as discussed earlier), but the media tells us that they were a fierce revolutionary outcry against Trump.

They’re trying to build up such a force in the voting public at large. Identity politics is their preferred method- so far Trump has apparently shown his hatred of minorities, LGBTQ, the elderly, women, liberal millionaires, and Republicans if you listen to what the media screams.

The most recent group who should be voting as one mass because no one thinks independently of the Left- if they do they’re not a free thinker- is women. The Left is hoping that after their libelous and slanderous attacks on Kavanaugh (nothing was ever proven, all legitimate allegations against him fell apart (what Ramirez accused Kavanaugh of doing is general drunken behavior, even women do it- have you not seen a “Girls Gone Wild” commercial? I’d be surprised if Democrats on the Senate had not experienced something similar in college unless they were hermits like me) and were only continued through the hopes and dreams of liberals across the country that refuse to believe a white male conservative isn’t a sexual predator) they can regain a majority of all women in their voter rolls, having lost half of the white women to Trump in 2016 despite their best efforts to paint him as a predator (we’re told that tape NBC held onto for 10 years (because they don’t really care about women if the tape is really as bad as you guys say) was an example, though I already explained above why it’s merely the truth).

So, if liberals somehow managed to pull off such a revolution, if they had one super-Castro like we saw in the game, what would their new system look like?

Fast And Furious, Choke Point, IRS Targeting, pretty much anything involving Hillary, Wars, lying to get warrants. Even when in charge, liberals are not civil. They run Portland, but have roving mobs there suppressing anyone that liberals don’t like, even if it’s just people with the wrong skin color. And obviously having just one part of Congress as Hillary suggested isn’t enough for civility– remember Occupy Wall Street, when anti-semitic liberals mobbed together with $3 million from Democrat George Soros in liberal cities in protest of the government only being 2/3 ran by Democrats (they sure didn’t have a problem with Democrats in charge the 2 previous years, and if as they claim they were just fed up with bailing out Wall Street, why did it take 3 years for them to come together after Wall Street and big banks were the only ones saved from the 2008 crisis, why did they wait until after Republicans had a hold in the government again)?

Khrushchev talked a lot about what liberals do in power, the only difference in the USSR was that the government had a stronger role. In Portland it’s just the government ignoring protesters who happen to believe what the government believes, while in the USSR it was the government actively oppressing opponents. Letting freelance flunkies do it versus doing it yourself. And as Khrushchev noted in his memoirs, and as liberals like Fmr. Sen. Al Franken can attest to, sometimes being sufficiently liberal is not enough. Like I said- he talks a lot about “good communist[s]” sent through the “meat-mincer”. Harvey Weinstein was a good liberal too, so was Rep. Charley Rangel. Not anymore. Like Khrushchev says, real and fake opponents of the State alike met the same fate. Remember when the Left burnt a car belonging to one of those Muslim immigrants they’re trying to protect? Like Khrushchev said, “wood chips”.

The legal system would naturally need to be reformed, to protect liberal supporters. Some liberals already are cheering at the prospect of a woman being believed, without evidence, if they accuse a man of sexual assault (we already see this in colleges, where college officials believe that if a man is unconscious and a woman gives him oral sex without his consent or knowledge it is an act of rape against the WOMAN). Now think about that- there is no evidence, or even evidence against the woman’s statement (and the woman herself might even be the rapist), but the Left wants the courts to find the accused man guilty. Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI), whom I will discuss more in the section on purges below, gets a mention here: she said Kavanaugh was guilty because of his political affiliations, but that DNC Deputy Chairman Keith Ellison was entitled to an investigation before she would comment on the allegations of domestic abuse against him. So in other words- anyone she politically disagrees with is guilty, anyone on her side has a presumption of innocence, and even if guilty like Bill will probably be forgiven or ignored. Liberals have said outright they’d VOTE for a rapist if he was liberal. That’s the liberal legal system.

Their sweeping reforms won’t stop there of course. Congress would be altered so that, based on the rhetoric, the Senate would be like the House except the largest states would all have representatives of one political party- ie California would still have 53 Senators but all Democrats, while Texas would still have its 36 but all Republicans… until undocumented immigrants vote out the Republicans anyway. Or Democrats might go with Rep. John Yarmuth’s (D-KY) legislation that only the government gets to decide who can be a Senator (or Congressman or President), in which case it’d be just as Khrushchev describes in the Soviet Union where candidates are all pre-approved by those already in power. Kind of like the DNC with its superdelegates.

This argument about the Senate being changed into a parody of the House merits further examination. The reason I assumed they want it done by party is that the first branch Republicans took back was the House, which if things were more Democratic as Democrats want would mean that by their logic a majority of Americans are Republicans and so Republicans should have power. But these proposals came as sour grapes to GOP victories, so obviously they want the system skewed differently in their favor. The reason I give the statement that it merits further examination is because our Founding Fathers had this exact argument- do states get equal votes or is the public equally represented? They settled the discussion by doing both, a compromise. You might notice that the Left doesn’t compromise.


The Left believes that somehow, Republicans are a very small part of the country but control everything (we’ll discuss the control later), so I guess it’d make sense if they really did believe this game was an accurate reflection of Castro’s revolution. As you can see in the picture, just like in Final Fantasy III, El Jefe is the only Party member you need in Super Mario RPG.

Also, let’s look at the implications of what the Left wants. They want a bully-state. They want New York and California to be able to squash all other parts of the country.  The Senate keeps states like California from exploiting the workers of Hawaii. You residents of DC understand very well the importance of equal representation- the House has been bullying your tiny city for decades. And now you want to expand that bullying, you want millions of people more to be subject to that tyranny of the majority? Ie mob rule? It’s not hard to assume that the people of California would tell their folks in the House to pass a “Nebraska Redistribution Act”, where all money from Nebraska is forced by law to go pay off California’s large expenses. Remember how, after World War I, European countries imposed such punitive measures on Germany that the country was already so badly broke that the 1929 Great Depression was just a rerun of 1923 for Germans? California and New York would have no problem doing that to Hawaii or Connecticut, to pay for their lavish spending. Khrushchev talks a lot about the Left eating its own, or eating nothing (Holodomor) because its communist leaders had too much power and decided to screw over the population (Khrushchev was not anti-communist, he was just against too much power being concentrated in a small area, like was the case with Stalin, like liberals want to be done with Los Angeles or New York City). So yeah, go ahead and let the mob run the place.

You see, you keep talking like the U.S. is one unified whole. You’ll be the first to say it isn’t- if you claimed we were united, then all of your “women are being oppressed by men” and “blacks being oppressed by whites” rhetoric would fall on deaf ears. The fact is, the U.S. is like 50 countries with different cultures, structures, values, laws, even foods. Remember how bad it is according to you that the U.N. keeps bullying poor little Palestine, and bullying poor little Iran until Obama came along? Well imagine if Congress were bullying poor little Hawaii, Obama’s home state consisting of half of 1 percent of the U.S.’s population.

I suppose your next instinct is to simply remove all internal borders. No more states, all are just the nation of Central-North America. Slight problem with that- humans aren’t quite capable of governing that much land from a central location. Learn nothing from when Rome had to be split, did you? Even your heroes the Soviets had to have separate governments for territories it absorbed. East Germany was still East Germany, just part of the USSR the same as Rhode Island is part of the U.S.

Maybe you think that it’s different now, just create a website and everyone can vote on national issues as if we’re all living in the same city. Well, you yourself certainly don’t believe in the integrity of our electronic electoral systems otherwise how could Russia have broken in and changed the votes as 78% of you believe, despite what your party leaders and media organs told you?

Remember when Obama told Trump to “stop whining” over the possibility that the election was rigged? When will you Democrats take Obama’s advice?


Just who does Red think xhe is, telling Green what to do? And why is Red first? All colors are equal, Red has no right to rule the others!

Besides, I don’t quite understand why you’d want to have everyone united anyway. Or how it’d be possible. Men can’t understand being a woman, that’s why it’s called mansplaining right? So how can men represent women? Do straight white women comfortable with their birth-gender understand what it’s like to be Hispanic and trans? How could even a white lesbian represent a Latinx trans? And where do straight Baptist black males fall in this hierarchy, since they are oppressed but not nearly as oppressed as an atheist black trans? And who is more oppressed- a Hispanic trans Christian Male-To-Female or a Muslim trans white Female-to-Male? How could one group possibly claim to be able to represent another? As diverse as people are, how could one person possibly claim to represent another?

That’s what you tell us. So what you’d want is for a Party Congress where each group has a vote. Oh wait, no you don’t. Because as a member of the Democrat Party, you support a system where superdelegates, usually wealthy whites with strong connections to funding and the Party elders, get to run everything regardless of how the People vote. (To be fair, there was a reform done after Hillary’s loss, but if she’d won you guys wouldn’t have done jack, it’s only a political stunt to appease Sanders supporters, and many of your hero Democrats opposed this reform and only gave-in because of political expediency, not because they truly believe in it).

Stalin was smart about how to play identity politics- he made it so that at the various Party Congresses, delegates from each territory could not speak with each other. So each group was looking out for its own interests, unaware if they even have something in common with the others. Much like your identity-politics, where you say members of one group are incapable of understanding members of another group so they shouldn’t even bother getting together.

You should also watch out, mobby liberal, because you’ll never be Left enough. Even Stalin’s strongest, most ardent-communist supporters, men who helped him rise to power, were purged as right-wing oppositionists. Kind of like what you do to folks who don’t 100% go along with your party line today. Kind of like when you decided that everyone who voted for Obama twice but then voted for Trump was a racist.

But I ramble, there’s still more the Left wants to change. The electoral college. Even the left-leaning Brookings Institution thinks there’s merit to the electoral college. But I’ll add something to it- it’s another step in preventing a tyranny of the majority. The President has to win a majority of electors, not a majority of people. Like in the Senate, how 51 Senators can only represent 44% of the population, so is the case with the electoral college though I believe the numbers end up being closer. But it’s just another way to keep superstates like California and Texas from running the country. By the way liberal, if the superstates run the country and the rural states don’t even get to vote, don’t you think that will disincentivize people from living in the rural states? Won’t we lose farmers if they’re subject to Leftwing crackpottery, instead moving to cities where their voices will be heard? How exactly would you replace them?

The Left of course doesn’t want to stop at changing the Legislative Branch, changing the electoral college, and stopping candidates they don’t like from ever being able to run, they want to stop people they don’t like from even voting. That’s right, they say that because liberals are so much smarter, only liberal enclaves should be allowed to vote.


I would not call this a Democratic majority. Image from the National Conference of State Legislatures

I find it ironic that liberals are fighting for their minority to win all the elections forever, and then claiming that liberals represent the majority of the country. They say Republicans only have control of the House because of gerrymandering, only get control of the Senate because it’s unequal, and got the Presidency because the electoral college isn’t democratic. They claim that most Americans are liberals. They ignore how most state legislatures and governors are Republicans too, how only 6 states are controlled solely by Democrats vs 26 by Republicans, how Republicans control 31 state legislatures to Democrats’12. 34 Republican governors to 15 Democrat governors. So… even though Republicans have the Presidency, the Senate, the House, most state legislatures, and most governors, by a large majority at the state level, somehow Republicans are the minority who’ve stolen power from Democrats.


Where Will You Fall In The Revolution?


These 1890s strongmen start out as bulldozer-driving villains, but help you become Cuba’s newest strongman later by throwing you to your next destination. Twice

Liberals don’t quite get how to be good little liberals. Khrushchev and Molotov had no time even to sit and read. All waking time was dedicated to the party. Khrushchev himself noted that people who had time to read would likely be reproached for ignoring their duties to the Party. So what does that say about the above intelligentsia who have so much time to theorize and write about how we need to change the government? Will you see them in battle next to you, or will they hide in their universities and try to direct your struggle, ie tell you where to die so that they never get their hands dirty? Will you be one of the intelligentsia?

Bernie Sanders has a second house. Khrushchev points out “no one would have permitted himself so much as a single thought about having his own dacha [country house]. After all, we were Communists!” I place it here because somehow, you socialist lovers don’t quite understand what socialism is, and think it’s perfectly ok for Bernie to say “tax the rich yay socialism end income inequality” while standing on the balcony of his summer home. So… will you be a good rich person like Bernie, or will you slip and become an evil, purged, rich person like Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey?


Very few are this lucky.

I wonder who the new Left will use for its forced labor camps, ie slave labor. White males I assume. If Hirono or candidate Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez have anything to say about it, there would be a lot of false claims of sexism or sexual assault and show trials about it. Maybe you will be like Harvey Weinstein- hero today, show trial tomorrow. In case you still think the USSR is a comrade’s paradise, Khrushchev mentions forced labor and notations in the book describe the Soviet’s policies for it. Political prisoners used as a labor force, prisoners who were “good communist[s]” and didn’t deserve to be arrested.


A lot of communist Civil War veterans and communists with pre-Revolution experience were purged too, so don’t count on your current virtue signalling to get you anywhere, same with your participation in the Revolution. Maybe you’ll be one of those instead, or you might not even make it out of the Revolution alive?

Heck, to you on the Left Dr. Martin Luther King jr is no longer a great civil rights leader, his reputation has been rehabilitated because your party judges the past by the radical Leftist standards your party currently upholds. How long before your reputation ends up “rehabilitated”, in the next great shift Leftward?

The Purge


It starts against the 1% and their death palaces, but ends as far as you’re concerned with a bullet in the sloped basement of the secret police’s headquarters (Khrushchev said the floor was sloped to be more easily cleaned after an execution)

"For over three years a man had had no way of knowing from one moment 
to the next whether he would survive or disappear into thin air. 
This fear and uncertainty had undermined the morale of the Party." 
- Nikita Khrushchev

And for those who STILL don’t get it, Stalin brought in new management to kill off everyone who was involved with his purges. Purging the purgers. So enjoy your Yezhovshchina while you can.

Now who exactly died in the purges? Scientists, pianists, poets, pretty much everyone who right now in the U.S. wants a communist government. Revolutionaries who, presumably like you though I question your motives, believed in the cause.

Khrushchev describes the purges thus: “In those days it was easy enough to get rid of someone you didn’t like. All you had to do was submit a report denouncing him as an enemy of the people; the local Party organization would glance at your report, beat its breast in righteous indignation, and have the man taken care of.” Sounds an awwwwful lot like Hostin talking about how wonderful it is today that all a woman has to do is claim someone raped them and they’ll be believed (and yes, Sen. Hirono, women do that quite often (there were 135,755 rapes reported in 2017, so even at 2% of them being false that means over 2,000 men were falsely accused, and with devastating results to those victims. I know, totally alien concept that women can victimize men, in fact you liberals usually say something like Yahoo news did- “Just because the police say something is an unfounded rape, because they don’t think it happened, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen”. So men just need to shut up about this. I have a question, liberal, if you contend that this is the case, that we should judge based on the accusation rather than the evidence, that the accused is guilty until proven innocent, then doesn’t that mean we shouldn’t even bother giving lawyers to blacks accused of murder? You complain about how racist our criminal justice system is, and now you want people to be guilty merely because someone says an incident happened. I guess you never read To Kill A Mocking Bird).


Look at that big smile. Khrushchev told of a dinner where Stalin was smiling and joking with someone, and that poor fellow disappeared very shortly after. As the Ferengi say: the bigger the smile, the sharper the knife”

Speaking of Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI), she definitely would fit right in with the purgers. She stated Kavanaugh was guilty because of his political affiliations, exactly as some of those whom Stalin purged were guilty of being loyal to Lenin or to the State rather than to him, ie their political affiliation. Sen. Hirono also said men need to shut up when a woman accuses them of a crime, much as Stalin’s victims were told to just shut up and sign the confession to a crime they didn’t commit. They could either do that and get a swift execution, or refuse and be tortured, and then executed. Just like in Hirono’s world where men accused of rape can either just sign the confession, or have their family (wife and daughter in Kavanaugh’s case, though to be fair they attacked Kavanaugh’s wife before the allegations came out) become political and assassination targets and then still be found guilty by Hirono’s Stalinist cohorts and executed. In Kavanaugh’s case, they tried for a professional execution (Hirono used the Stalinesque euphemism “job interview“) though plenty of liberals want the real thing to happen (I’ve linked to them already in here, the teachers and writers). And just as Stalin, and liberals, denied the purges were happening, denied that the charges were false, and tried to say it was merely justice to enemies of the people, Hirono denies women can fabricate charges and tries to claim stopping Kavanaugh is justice to enemies of the people.


Now granted, the modern Left would side with four aspects of Stalin’s purges (if they even believe they happened, if they read the New York Times from any point in its history they’d never know that the purges happened thanks to its Pulitzer Prize-winning reporting). 1. Show trials (cough Kavanaugh cough– need more water!). 2. Accusing Stalin’s alleged enemies of being foreign agents (Remember: they say Trump is an agent of Russia). 3. Killing off half the Red Army’s officer corps. (and then going into World War II and only winning by sheer numbers and weather since the tacticians that led them to victory in the Russian Civil War had been shot as enemies of the people. Liberals HATE the military, as I may have mentioned before, and they certainly hate members of the military, to the point they’ve tried to disrupt their ability to vote while giving felons the right to vote. The Left prioritizes rapists over the military, remember that next time a liberal yells #MeToo.) 4. Forced Confessions (for crimes or things that are only crimes to the Left).

Why Do American Revolutionaries Think They’re So Good?


Not quite…

Of course this discussion must lead to the whole question of why white communist liberals in America think they’re smarter than South American, African, and Asian communists. Why Ocasio-Cortez thinks she, as a Hispanic woman who grew up wealthy, is smarter than the many other Hispanic women who grew up poor, the many poor African women, the many poor Asian women who endorsed communism and suffered from its failures. And why are American commies so racist and classist that they think they can do this better than the many poor peoples of color before them? Are they saying those races are inferior?

Interestingly enough, aside from blaming local party leaders for communist failures (much like how Democrats blamed election losses on insufficient messaging), Stalin also blamed counterrevolutionary forces for sabotaging his work, despite no such forces being in government (with one leader, Trotsky, having been exiled already). Kind of like 78% of Democrats blaming Russia for altering vote counts despite what their leaders said, as mentioned above. How come Democrats oppose Voter ID laws if they think our electoral system is so fragile?

What Do You Think?

Sounds like a fun game? Vote Democrat and make it so! I’d suggest finding the nearest hole and hiding in it for 30 years though, that seems to be the best way to hide from the purges. Trotsky tried moving abroad after the disaster he helped create went out of his control, but ultimately his spawn caught up with him, upon which in a fit of Oedipal rage it killed one of its fathers (can’t resist the other Oedipus pun here, you could definitely say that the Revolution screwed Mother Russia).

Though honestly, given how the Left already turned into the Sour Grapes Bunch after Kavanaugh’s loss, I can only assume a midterm defeat will send them over the edge. They’re already over the edge, we’re having to imagine new edges for them to go over. They rioted after Trump, they want to replace the government after Kavanaugh, what would a midterm loss do to their fragile psyches?


After Burner I, II, and III (Various, 1987-1991. Part 5 of the War Games Series)


Arguably, your 1987 game appearing in a 1991 hit movie is better than a certain arcade game from 1983 appearing on a certain hit show in 1986. Terminator 2 Screenshot From Electronic Playground.

As we watch the Democrats peddle their warmongering interventionist and laissez-faire let’s-wait-for-war attitudes, ie as they play their war games on their way to the fall brawl known as the midterm elections, where voters will probably vote Democrat to bring us nookular annihilation, I’ll take a look at some literal war games. Cold War video games, anyway.


Image from WWE Network

Today, we briefly address no-fly zones and Leftwing swarm tactics, looking at various entries in the After Burner series.

The Game


You fly an F-14 in all versions of the game, but the more astute among you may notice that’s an F-15 on the Sega Genesis cartridge. And yes, on the lower left that’s an NES cartridge. I’ll explain later.

The difference between After Burners I and II was unknown to me, based on my experience with the home ports. Turns out there’s a good reason for that. The sequel’s biggest change was adding 3 levels at the end. Makes no difference to me, out of 18 levels in the first and 21 levels in the second I only managed to get to either level 4 or 5.


Can you guess which is After Burner II and which is After Burner? Yeah, me neither. Clockwise from top left: After Burner Complete (Sega 32X), After Burner II (Sega Genesis), After Burner (Sega Master System), After Burner (NES)

There are more ports than these, and in fact more After Burner games than these. Some games that aren’t titled After Burner apparently are considered by fans to be part of the series. Phooey on all that, my focus is on the After Burner games in my possession, the ones that just so happen to have been released during the Cold War (except number III, that was 9 months too late).

What Do You Do In The Game?

You move your plane around the screen trying to avoid enemy missiles. You hold down the button for the machine gun in some versions (it fires automatically in others) and fire missiles at planes when you lock onto them. You do that by moving your crosshair over an enemy plane. The gun isn’t totally useless, it does destroy planes too.

Yeah, that’s it. It’s an arcade game, what did you expect?

There is some small variety in enemy planes. While you fly an F-14, in the first two games your basic enemies look like… I don’t know what the hell those are. Single-engine F-5s (not a real thing). An F-16I but without the intake underneath? The enemies that shoot back at you look like maybe MiG-25s. There’s another enemy that


How a B-1 re-arms you is anyone’s guess.

looks like it could be a MiG-23 if you squint… or a Harrier. It will also shoot you. And then you get re-armed by a B-1 Lancer. The “B” means “Bomber”, not “Boy I sure have a lot of weapons to share”. Look, you’re not in this game to be technically accurate, you’re in it to destroy anything that isn’t the ground.


Being re-armed is significant, though it may not seem that way. You do not really have infinite missiles, just a lot of them. I’ve run out before.


After Burner Complete (Sega 32X)

After-Burner-Complete-II-Sega-32x-TitleAfter-Burner-Complete-II-Sega-32x-gameplayThis version was as near-perfect an arcade port as had ever been made to that point. Too bad it was 7 years old by the time of its release. From my understanding, the only difference between this and the arcade is the frame rate, which was cut in half though it still looks pretty smooth. As the title screen indicates, this is pretty much After Burner II despite the title being only “After Burner Complete”. Maybe that was just Sega admitting that they’re the same game. Out of the versions reviewed here, this is by far the best, though not the best available. After Burner II was ported more faithfully than this to the Sega Saturn, and later appeared on the PS2.

Still, I like this one. Maybe because I saw too many Sega 32X commercials and was brainwashed by them. I’m pretty sure they’re over-selling what the 32X can do. In reality it came off as being a slight improvement over the SNES. The SNES version of Doom packed in more enemy types and more stages than the 32X version. And didn’t end with a DOS Prompt. The SNES Doom levels were also complete, whereas the 32X has sections cut out of some. As for games like Shadow Squadron and Star Wars Arcade, those just look like graphically-improved versions of Star Fox. Not even next-gen really, just a little better and they ran a little smoother. And then you have Mortal Kombat II, which on the 32X was barely equal to the SNES version.

After Burner II (Sega Genesis)

After-Burner-II-Sega-GenesisAfter-Burner-II-Sega-Genesis-gameplayThis is a step down obviously, despite the “II” in the title. It’s still quite playable, don’t worry about that. Fewer enemies on screen, fewer colors too so the backgrounds look different. It’s also a little slower, or at least choppier than on the 32X release. I still got my butt kicked by the enemy, because I suck at this game. They just keep coming at you until you’re blown apart. The game’s designed to eat quarters in the arcade so it makes sense that it’d be so darn hard to play.

After Burner (Sega Master System)

After-Burner-Sega-Master-System-TitleAfter-Burner-Sega-Master-System-GameplayThis was a bad idea. Very slow and choppy. Very few enemies on the screen. The unresponsiveness makes it hard to dodge missiles and aim at enemies. This is what happens when your arcade machines are a generation ahead of your consoles and you don’t know how to work around that. They can get an ok version of Commando and Zaxxon on the Atari 2600, why can’t they get this right?

After Burner (NES)

After-Burner-NES-TitleAfter-Burner-NES-GameplayEverything wrong with the Master System version, but worse. This scene might as well be actual gameplay footage. You’ll also notice that the sprite for your jet is smaller, and you’re now shooting down F/A-18s rather than Russian jets.

You might also have noticed that this is a Sega game on the NES when the two companies were in direct competition, just as I’m sure you noticed the black NES cartridge in the picture near the top of this piece. Look at you being so observant! The story goes that this is an effort to create games for the NES without dealing with Nintendo’s harsh policies (only Nintendo can publish the game for 2 years, and you only can release 5 games on Nintendo consoles each year). Tengen produced their special games like After Burner in special cartridges with the right anti-copyright chips to play on regular NES systems with no modifications. However, folks who own a Retron console will find that these games don’t work on those.

After Burner III (Sega CD)

After-Burner-III-Sega-CD-Title-ScreensI know, I know. It differs from the other games here and did not come out during the Cold War. But it felt weird not including it since it was the only After Burner game I owned that didn’t fit the mold.

After-Burner-III-Sega-CD-gameplayAnyway, in this game you take a cockpit view, and occasionally get into a third-person view, but otherwise it’s pretty much the same game. Fire your guns and missiles at a never-ending stream of enemies. Being on the Sega CD allows for better sound effects and music. But you are shooting at what appear to be F/A-18s, and occasionally an F-14 gets behind you. At that point the game switches to a third-person perspective to help you lose the enemy. Another unique feature is that every so often you switch from shooting enemy planes to shooting enemy bases on the ground.

After-Burner-III-Sega-CD-enemy-on-your-tailThe intro tells you that the enemy is building bases and airfields all over a desert, and in the game they use F/A-18s and F-14s. Did Iran and Kuwait become allies? Did Australia buy the remaining Iranian F-14s?

For those not getting the joke, Iran was an American ally, so close that they’re the only country we ever gave F-14s to back in the 70s. Then the government was overthrown, hostages were taken, and then President Jimmy Carter was overthrown, becoming the last Democratic President to serve only one term.

On To War


Endless war seems like a very liberal thing to do. To be fair, war is now in vogue with feminists (heh, get it?), so they were right when they said she was a feminist icon. Image from the Associated Press

Maybe the foreign policy adviser to Hillary’s campaign was playing this game when he or she told Hillary that a no-fly zone over Syria, in which we’d shoot down Russian jets (and they’d shoot down ours), was a good idea. How hard could World War III be if one jet can knock down hundreds of enemy jets? Look at that score of over 3,000,000! Let’s just hope it’s a non-nuclear third world war like in Tom Clancy’s Red Storm Rising. (I had considered buying an old computer and reviewing that game, by the way, but it looks boring. Yes, they did make boring video games about World War III.)

And when it comes to war, Democrats want anything but boredom! Heck, Democrats got so mad about Vietnam being boring, not having the glory of World War II, that they decided to start a war in Chicago. And when the war dragged on too long, Democrats got bored and moved on to being mad at Nixon, and cut funding to South Vietnam (Dems controlled the House that year) which led to their surrender when otherwise they could’ve at least stalemated. Just like how Democrats got bored of that thing in Iraq they all were excited about at first, and moved on under Obama, despite warnings that something like ISIS would happen if the U.S. left.


“Woo yeah! Libya was a great war! We was all pew pew pew ‘Murica!” Image from evil.news

Now Libya, THAT’S how a real Democrat war would look! Bomb the crap out of them, remove the government, then pack up and leave. So what if the country fell apart and is now a hotbed of terrorism and slavery? So what if they had to tell little white lies about Gaddhafi, who was actually very cooperative until Obama and Hillary stabbed him in the back? You see, Obama and Hillary lying to get us into war with Libya (saying the government was responsible for mass killings), to collapse Libya and leave, was ok because they knowingly did it, whereas when Bush “lied(the assertion that he did not is coming from Bob Woodward, whom you guys on the Left are currently worshipping after his anti-Trump book Fear was published) to get us into Iraq and try to rebuild Iraq, it was wrong because he was just going based on the faulty data he had at the time, which even liberals eventually admitted was accurate. Makes sense.

A Pattern Emerges

Run in, shoot them up, run out. The media does that to Republicans, tried to do that to Kavanaugh. You might have heard Rush Limbaugh’s term “drive-by media”- it’s because they drive up, fill you full of bullets, then quickly move on, leaving you for dead. Kind of like how Democrats pursue their little wars. Why do you think Obama was so reticent to attack ISIS? A: it was not going to be a quick and glorious victory like toppling Gaddhafi, and B: acknowledging their existence would be pretty much admitting that leaving Iraq was a bad idea, that it had consequences that were worth our time and money to deal with. Well, the DNC’s media is pretty much the same way with its attacks. For all of those reporters and pundits who occasionally forgot to use the word “alleged” or something similar with Kavanaugh, do you think we’ll be getting a retraction? Nope, their clips were emptied and they’re moving on.


Liberal protesters demonstrating their strong-style. Images from AP, RWC, Fox News, and Quora

You’ll notice a pattern with some of these games too that I’ve been looking at for this series. Missile Command, Battle Zone, and this one. Never-ending waves of enemies. MAS*H gets partial credit because it never ends but you’re not fighting anyone. I guess After Burner gets only partial credit too, since even though you’re fighting enemies it does have a finite number of levels.  So it is beatable, eventually. If you have too much time on your hands to perfect your skills.

I digress. My point is you’re resisting wave after wave of attacks, this strong relentlessly aggressive style that the Left employs for its wars both abroad and at home against Republicans. Much like how the Soviets fought their wars- overpower the enemy with sheer numbers. How appropriate, given the Cold War tone of the games we’re looking at, that we’d find such a connection between the USSR and modern Left.

What Do You Think?

Sounds like a fun game? Vote for the Left and make it happen! War may be a fun video game, but Leftists calling for it or Civil War because they’re drive-by tactics failed have no idea what they’re talking about. If this writer is shaking with rage right now, just because Senators representing 44% of the country made a decision affecting 11.1% of the Supreme Court, having only altered 22.2% of it since Trump took office, how will she feel when the bodies of her revolutionaries are in the streets? By the way- as for that 44% meme other liberals have propagated, while technically true, polls actually show a slight majority (46% to 45%) supported Kavanaugh just before he was confirmed, and another poll saying 60% of the country wanted Kavanaugh confirmed if the FBI cleared him (and sure enough the FBI found nothing backing the accusations). And how’d the vote go? 50 Senators for, 48 against. Seems right to me, even a little under what should be expected based on that 60% number. But not to the Left, because Kavanaugh was guilty, not even “until proven innocent”, simply “guilty but we never found evidence“. Go ahead, vote for witch hunts and kangaroo courts.


M*A*S*H (Atari 2600, 1983. Part 4 of the War Games series)


The artwork features such familiar characters as that guy on the left, that nurse in front, that guy on the right… who the hell are these people?

As we watch the Democrats peddle their warmongering interventionist and laissez-faire let’s-wait-for-war attitudes, ie as they play their war games on their way to the fall brawl known as the midterm elections, where voters will probably vote Democrat to bring us nookular annihilation, I’ll take a look at some literal war games. Cold War video games, anyway.


Logo property of WWE, Image from Uproxx

Today, we address the personal toll the Left’s warmongering will take, butchering narratives as their war would butcher Americans, by taking a look at the game MASH (I can’t use the * symbol because it does not work well, this is what the word ends up looking like: MAS*H) on the Atari 2600.

And no, despite the smokescreen of the Kavanaugh coverage, the Left still wants its war. Even if nothing had been said this past week, it’s not like 3 months is enough separation to allow us to dismiss this rhetoric.

Surgical Strikes


Gonna go ahead and say the programmers never watched the show. Or read about what tanks are capable of doing with their cannons. Just a hunch.

Ooooooh boy, where to start? I’ve seen every episode, been watching for 15 years. I’ve seen the movie at least 4 times. Hawkeye Pierce, played by either Donald Sutherland or Alan Alda, never piloted a helicopter. He’s driven jeeps, offensive lines on the gridiron, maybe driven a bus, drove people crazy, went crazy and drove a tank, but he never piloted a helicopter.

Colonel Potter never had a team of skydiving medics. Aside from corpsmen among the paratroopers on the two combat jumps made during the war, there wasn’t any such thing as a skydiving medic. This whole premise is weird.

Hawkeye never competed with his fellow surgeons either, except maybe Frank Burns and Charles Emerson Winchester III, though not so much with the latter because Winchester was a skilled surgeon while Burns wasn’t so great. I notice that Winchester wasn’t mentioned in the manual, even though this game came out the same year the show ended its run, with Winchester having been on the show since 1978.

Tanks, by the way, never shot down helicopters with their cannons. Anti-air tanks that may have had that role were not deployed by the North Korean/Soviet/Chinese forces in that war. And I’m pretty sure that’s just a picture someone drew in the manual, not an actual screenshot.


Apparently in the Korean War, UH-1 helicopters were shot at by the Uralmash-1 self-propelled artillery prototype while an A-4 Skyhawk (with an oddly placed refueling probe) flew overhead.

As the manual states, you pick up the wounded. Fly your helicopter to a wounded person, they disappear once you make contact, then fly back to your hospital tent and deposit your wounded by rubbing up against it. You can carry multiple wounded, picking them up until the hole in the middle of the helicopter (presumably the open doors) is filled. This is a timed round. Once it’s concluded, Hawkeye stops piloting and starts operating.


Looks a little fat for a soldier, particularly around the thighs. Too many Krabby Patties I guess. Or he’s a German soldier.

This part was programmed long after the release of the board game “Operation”, so they might’ve ripped it off. But there is a twist: you don’t touch the shrapnel (the little metal dot inside the maze-like body cavity, presumably a horrifying wound) and automatically pull it out. You have to guide it through the wound and out the hole. The placement is random, but it can be a little harder than shown here. You have a set amount of time to remove the shrapnel.


My Take

The game passes time. It’s just a series of minigames, probably enjoyed more with friends which I had done once or twice many, many years ago. Once the games are complete they start over in a neverending cycle, so in that sense it accurately simulates the life of someone at a MASH unit. I can’t really comment much on the game, given the tech they had to work with. It’s not the worst game on the Atari, and you can easily pick it up and figure out what’s going on without a manual. Unlike say E.T. or Superman. Graphics aren’t so bad, certainly not as bad as Pac Man, and have more variety than other games like Asteroids or Yar’s Revenge.

I don’t see why they had to just invent skydiving medics to rescue, or give Hawkeye and the other surgeons pilot’s licenses. Well, I take that back. They probably had only enough time/cartridge memory/whatever to program two settings to the game (unlike Pigs In Space which gave you 3). You’re either picking up wounded outside or inside operating, maybe they just didn’t have enough room to program a third location, instead inventing the skydiving medic thing as a way to repurpose the outside area so that they can allege there are 3 different ways to play.

It’s pleasant to look at and plays well. Not too shabby for a very early movie/TV show adaptation, considering how horrifically botched these can be.


MASH’s cast at the time the game came out. Notice how none of the characters from the video game’s cover art appear here. At least they got the sign right.

Onward To Politics

MASH is obviously a Cold War product through and through. It’s set in the Korean War. We were in Korea to stop the spread of communism by the Soviet-backed North, but supposedly also to stop the North from slaughtering the people of the South. The movie and TV show came out during the Vietnam War and mixed humor with the horrors of war. Then after we pulled out of Vietnam, the series became less funny and focused more on various issues from old friends gone bad to adultery to claustrophobia to why Alan Alda shouldn’t be allowed to write an entire episode that’s just him delivering a monologue. The whole affair, whether movie or TV show, had an anti-war flair to it.

War Is Heck

severed head

This much rage doesn’t just disappear y’know. And don’t expect her to be demonstrating why women are better at being compassionate than men. I’ll note here that I include links such as the above to show that I’m not making some kind of strawman argument.

This anti-war message seems to have been lost on modern Democrats. However, I can’t help but notice that under the cover of the Kavanaugh hearings and allegations the news cycle provided, the widespread cries for Russian blood have dissipated. At least for the moment- expect everything from Russians to sexism to be behind Republican victories this fall, and expect riots if the predicted Blue Wave doesn’t surface.

The Russia narrative didn’t die, it just slowly faded away, to be pulled out of mothball when needed. Covering old ground, I’ll take another moment to stab at how the Left wants to fight this new war. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, my favorite strawgirl because her proposals didn’t even pass CNN’s smell test (despite DNC Chairman Tom Perez labelling her the future of the party), suggests cutting military spending to help fund her $40 Trillion spending package (she also suggested in that Jake Tapper interview that once millennials lose the shadow of $1.5 trillion in student loan debt, somehow they’d be able to fund the rest of her scheme). In fact, leftwing organizations have said that her plan only accounts for $2 Trillion of the funding (check the CNN link). U.S. GDP in 2016 was about $18.5 Trillion. Since we’re talking about funding over 10 years or so, imagine if 20% of your paycheck suddenly disappeared. 20% of what you have now. That’s what Ocasio-Cortez wants.

Oh yeah, did she mention that even without her program, our debt is projected to be $34 Trillion by 2028? And she wants to double that, as if your taxes weren’t high enough. Beyond that, as of 2016, the U.S. was committed to paying $210 Trillion over the next 75 years in social security and medicare benefits alone (an extra $2.8 Trillion per year, and over that 75 years it’s predicted that we won’t be able to pay about $47 Trillion of this already, and Ocasio-Cortez just wants to add even more to this crisis… but it makes sense she’d be naive, sheltered life she had growing up in a wealthy liberal haven. She lied about her working-class background and didn’t want for money, at least until the battle over her father’s estate once he died in 2008, her father having been CEO of a company. Even after that she, despite allegedly being working-class, found time to visit Flint, MI to protest or whatever. As someone with a real working-class income who is roughly her age and has been working steady for 4 years, allow me to enlighten you: PEOPLE BARELY GETTING BY DON’T GO ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO PROTEST! If I were flying from NYC to Flint, it’d be 20% of my monthly income round trip. If I lived with my parents and pulled a stunt like that, they’d say “well you can afford to do that so you can afford to pay your own rent”. Heck, even driving there and back would cost no less than $320).


Tortuga tanks, because Venezuela was always the model of success to be emulated. Image from MilitaryMachines

Tax the rich to get that money? Are you reading what the GDP was? We don’t have enough rich people’s money to tax! They’ll leave (yes I know I keep referencing my previous posts, but I already elaborated on this point in it) anyway if she does go after everything they have. Remember Venezuela? Had booming industries, was a great place, then socialists like Ocasio-Cortez took over and now toilet paper is a luxury while they eat their pets? Sean Penn and Danny Glover sure remember Venezuela, because it is paradise to them. And if it doesn’t work out they’ll just move somewhere else and leave the rest of us to die from their mess.

Conflict Of Understanding

Another area the Ocasio-Cortezes of the world are insensitive to human nature and suffering in is war. As you may have noticed above, she wants to defund the military. But as a global citizen she’d totally send it out to war if the U.N. asked. Send it out underfunded, understaffed, and with equipment that isn’t even safe to train in, let alone enter a war zone in. But folks like her don’t really value the military anyway (the communist Soviets are a great example, they just threw waves of men at enemies, and liberal communist hero Chairman Mao was happy to lose 300 million of his people in a nuclear war, and even liberal professors and leaders in America today think millions of Americans are untermensch to be slaughtered as they choose, the same liberals teaching tomorrow’s leaders that white people are evil, the same liberals supporting Ocasio-Cortez), they see soldiers as either toxically masculine (thus evil), see them as conservatives, see them as potential terrorists, or in Hillary’s case see them as pawns to disrespect at home while sending them abroad to die for whatever she feels like because she’s not one for refusing wars. Since Hillary was the most qualified candidate ever, this must be what Democrats would do with our military even after gutting it.

To be fair, I think Ocasio-Cortez’s solution to end American Imperialism as her clique calls it would involve us ending our nuclear deterrence program, at which point any of our adversaries like China and Russia (or Iran or North Korea) would casually threaten us into compliance with such demands as disbanding our military. We’d certainly be leading from behind- we’d be the only major power without nuclear weapons. And with other countries ordering us around, we’d have as much use for a military as Cuba, whose greatest military victories since Bay of Pigs have been whenever their gunboats murder refugees. Refugees Obama said were no longer welcome in America, while happily letting MS-13 rapists in.

Any Compassion?

MS-13, and Nancy Pelosi saying that they are divine (you’ll notice how Pelosi defends murderers and rapists, but does not extend that courtesy to the “legislative arsonists” across the aisle), brings up another point. One thing MASH did as a series was to humanize the enemy. The doctors spent all day patching together wounds caused by enemy gunfire but were still fine with treating North Korean patients and even protective of them. One episode in particular had the doctors try to sneak a P.O.W. out of the hospital because she would have faced torture if the South Korean M.P.s were allowed to take her. She was totally unrepentant, told the doctors she’d have killed them if she could, but our lead character Hawkeye still thought he’d done the right thing. And actually, you have no clue in the video game whose side the


That blindfold on Lady Justice is also traditional garb for victims of firing squads, something liberal concepts of justice tend to involve.

wounded are on, so except in that operating table minigame there’s no way to tell whose life you’re saving while playing. Kind of like how the Hippocratic Oath is supposed to work. And Justice too, but Senator Mazie Hirono (D-HI) and Senator Corey Booker (D-NJ), and the mobs of their supporters, don’t believe this.

Where is this humanization from liberals? Let’s look at the Kavanaugh allegations and gender/race relations in light of those. Kavanaugh is a M-A-N, which somehow makes him subhuman. Life unworthy of life. In other words, he is evil.

To be fair, liberals have a very low tolerance of anyone, even liberal women, that disagree with them. It just happens that their main devil, Republicans, are largely white males. And the Left has hated men for quite some time.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the aisle, we have Republicans trying to empathize with Dr. Ford and give her the benefit of the doubt (granted, some Republican women who are sitting in judgment of Dr. Ford, and if men AND women can’t judge a female then who can?), saying maybe she really was sexually assaulted but not by Kavanaugh (interestingly enough, it’s entirely possible that the memory was fabricated from her


NASA has A LOT to answer for. Image from Trekcore

therapy sessions, to where she believes it really happened despite Kavanaugh not being a part of it as witnesses Dr. Ford herself cited have claimed- afterall, people can believe they were sexually assaulted by Bugs Bunny in Disney World or in one case I read about years ago someone’s therapy to reconstruct a trauma led to them believing Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock abducted her and took her to the Enterprise… not the actors or the Navy ship, the characters and the starship, so there’s no telling what false memories might surface. Dr. Ford herself would agree; she wrote a paper on how to create false memories (and coached a friend on how to pass a polygraph like she did, but that’s a different matter). Granted, if Dr. Ford said Kavanaugh took HER to the Enterprise then Democrats would be calling for an investigation into NASA for allowing Kavanaugh to misuse their equipment).

Michelle Remembers, But Democrats Don’t

Women aren’t credible when accusing Democrats, just ask Hillary Clinton or Keith Ellison (the Deputy Chairman of your party is accused of beating a woman, the woman has a doctor’s report, and only 5% of you Democrats who want Kavanaugh drawn and quartered believe that Ellison is guilty, meanwhile Hillary who as you saw above referred to her husband’s accusers as “bimbo[s]” now says such accusations are credible).

So in summation: Dr. Ford looks like a liar (not saying she is one, lying connotes deliberate deception, just saying her accusations og Kavanaugh aren’t holding up to scrutiny) because the only witnesses she cited say the event never happened, and those witnesses were the extent of the evidence she had for her claim (though we’re being told that merely claiming is enough evidence, and that a lack of witnesses corroborates her claim).

Kavanaugh, on the other hand, has Dr. Ford’s very own witnesses proving he was not involved, plus a clean record outside of these allegations all centering on the same 30+ year old time period (otherwise one of the FBI’s 6 background checks surely would’ve found something, the FBI is a very credible group according to liberals) which is highly unusual for people who go around with rape gangs as another accuser is alleging.

First Democrats said they’d never vote for Kavanaugh. Then they said they wanted all of Kavanaugh’s documents despite an unprecedented number being released- remember when “unprecedented number of stuff released” showed how great Hillary was? Then they reveal Dr. Ford’s allegations, which they’d been sitting on for 45 days, and demand the FBI immediately investigate them, as if they weren’t important enough for that in July. When they finally get that investigation into Dr. Ford’s allegations, they say it is a total farce within 48 hours of it starting. They now say that ALL allegations need to be investigated, the less credible accusations too (note that Senator Hirono says the allegations are credible, which means she must have some evidence, which means she is guilty of obstruction of justice by not releasing that evidence, or she’s just going by her definition of credibility which she already explained when she said Kavanaugh is guilty and has no credibility because she disagrees with him politically, so at least she’s consistent with the opposite being true- that she would find the accusers credible because she agrees with them politically), the ones so weak that the liberal New York Times didn’t even bother publishing them (try around the 96 minute mark in the link, Lefty NBC even found that one of Senator Hirono’s so-called ‘credible‘ accusers wasn’t particularly credible). Once again they took forever to make these allegations public, apparently they knew about it for at least a week during which they still demanded only Dr. Ford’s allegations be investigated (check the date on that NPR article- 5 days before the New Yorker published its piece on the second accuser, in which it’s mentioned Democrats already knew of them. It’s also interesting that Senate Democrats would investigate THESE allegations, but refused to look into Dr. Ford’s.), and they hunted for Ramirez too, trying to bring her out during this time they could’ve been asking the FBI to investigate. Worse, they refused to participate in the Senate’s Dr. Ford investigation (which could jail people for lying and could be like an FBI investigation), were reluctant to interview her, and refuse to get the one law enforcement body involved that could’ve acted instantly- the local police in the area where Dr. Ford’s alleged event took place (there is no statute of limitation on this crime in that area, they urged Dr. Ford to get a lawyer but never urged her to file a complaint with the police who’d have already finished their investigation if they’d done this when Feinstein first heard about it). I guess they were too busy trying to find new accusers to be bothered with the old ones. Now Democrats just say ditch Kavanaugh because it doesn’t even matter if he’s guilty or innocent. Democrats kept getting what they wanted, and kept demanding more once they got what they wanted. Appeasement never works with bullies.

They got the documents they wanted, which they hated. They got the Dr. Ford hearing they wanted, which they hated. They got the FBI investigation into Ford’s allegations that they wanted, which they hated. Now they say just dump Kavanaugh, repeating the tired line they’ve been using since Kavanaugh was first announced months ago, so long ago that Sen. Feinstein didn’t even know of the sexual assault allegations yet when they first started saying it.


I don’t recall scenes about treating enemy soldiers in the movie, but I also don’t recall any of the characters on the Atari 2600 cover art being in the movie.

Despite this, despite the total lack of evidence for Dr. Ford’s testimony, we find that more Republicans are doing their best even-handed MASH impression than Democrats, while most if not all Democrats as far as I can tell from the media coverage are acting like the South Korean torturer and the P.O.W. in the episode mentioned: only concerned with getting his hands on his latest victim, or in the P.O.W.’s case only concerned with trying to kill the people that want to help her. Remember: Democrats are supposed to be the fair-minded party, the party of intelligence, the party of reason, the party of compassion. I have yet to see this demonstrated, but I’m sure a pack of wolves tearing a sheep apart think they’re pretty intelligent and compassionate too.


So, what happens to kids now? What do we tell young boys if Kavanaugh is ousted? “Don’t bother planning for your future because a woman can come out of nowhere and destroy you”? If unsubstantiated claims become a valid assault tactic, does this mean next feminists will cheer if women in the workplace use it? “Oh he got a promotion I wanted. so I told my bosses he raped me”. Because it doesn’t matter whether you’re guilty or innocent, it just matters that you’re a man. Judge you by your gender rather than the content of your character.

We’ve seen many false accusations by women (the media picked some big losers to sensationalize, since only 8% of rape allegations turn out to be false, but even ONE false accusation destroys Senator Hirono’s statement… I think I’ve found someone in Congress who gets me madder than Adam Schiff makes me) who wanted either to get back at men or avoid looking bad for things they voluntarily did. Or just wanted attention. Or were insane. But we’re supposed to believe each and every rape accusation and deny due process to men because they’re all guilty anyway.

What Do You Think?

Looks like such a fun game, vote Democrat and make it happen! Democrats want to send young men to die, and then imprison the remaining men over false accusations of rape. Think that’s hyperbole? Have you been paying attention, to your leaders, to your media? Havent you been paying attention to women at all, you sexist pig?


MASH doesn’t come with a Game Over screen, the game just starts over. An endless cycle. Appropriate for our concluding quote:

"“If the classroom situation is very heteropatriarchal—a 
large beginning class of 50 to 60 students, say, with few 
feminist students—I am likely to define my task as largely 
one of recruitment…of persuading students 
that women are oppressed" 
~Professor Joyce Trebilcot of Washington University, 
as quoted in Who Stole Feminism: How Women Have Betrayed Women.