Top Gun (NES, 1986) – Part of Tomcat Tuesday

Top_Gun-NES-titleDidn’t I mention that I’m bad at this kind of game? Why do I keep doing this to myself? And to you, for that matter.


The movie was better known for its taking-off sequences, rather than landing.

Yes, I’ve seen Top Gun from the top. I know because I recognized the title screen music from the game as being the music from the movie just after Tom Cruise starts World War III by downing a Soviet jet. Of course I liked watching the pretty planes flying, but the rest of the movie was crap. Who wants to watch a bunch of sweaty men spend half a movie shirtless… oh. What I don’t get though is how the Navy has supercarriers but not one building or aircraft carrier in the movie has a basic air conditioning unit. This game also does not feature an A/C unit, and it is probably all the more difficult for it. At least as difficult as staying hydrated wherever any scene in Top Gun takes place- the characters in Jarhead didn’t sweat as much!

Tomcat! The most effectual Tomcat! Whose intellectual pilots get to call her Turkey, provided it’s with dignity!


You can shoot down the enemy missiles.

This game is more like After Burner than Turn And Burn. You have wave after wave of enemies that you must destroy. Like those other games, you also have limited missiles, and like After Burner and the GBA versions of Turn And Burn you have unlimited bullets. Also like Turn And Burn, you go on missions and have to take off and land your ship. So it’s Turn And Burn that plays like After Burner.


When an enemy is behind you, an outline of an F-5 appears because that portrays the MiG in the movie. But it’s not any of the aircraft you fight in the first two missions.

I only got to level 2, but I guess the plot is that you and your lone F-14 with up to 40 missiles equipped set out to sink your allies. The first mission says it is a training exercise, but it looks like you’re shooting down your comrades in their F-14s. The second mission is you versus a bunch of Harrier jets, blasting them and battleships (not aerial ones, mind you) as you make your way to an aircraft carrier through its escorts. I assume it is a British aircraft carrier, or that “training” mission was you making your way through the U.S. Navy’s fighter cover before the Marines had a go at it with the Harriers in mission 2. Either way, it’s not a good day to be a NATO member and the commies must be roflmaoing.

Top_Gun-NES-Mission_1Taking off is done automatically, while landing and refueling are done by hand. The mechanics behind refueling and landing are about the same, though refueling kicks the difficulty up a few notches. This involves you obeying the computer’s prompts of “speed up”, “speed down”, “up”, “down”, “left”, and “right”, making full use of the controller’s buttons. It wasn’t so bad landing once I figured out that A and B sped you up and slowed you down, but refueling was a different matter. You have to hold the fuel probe in a certain pixel-perfect position that your ship constantly overshoots. If you don’t get it right, you don’t refuel and can’t try again, meaning you crash.


My R.I.O. was about as useful as a dead Goose.

Like After Burner you’re only given three lives and no continues, but I should note that this came first so After Burner can be considered a possible- better- copy of this. After Burner clearly was inspired by the movie if nothing else- you even take off from the same aircraft carrier (sort of- in the movie Top Gun they call it the USS Enterprise, but like with Star Trek IV it was really the USS Ranger, while in After Burner the ship your F-14 takes off from is called the SEGA Enterprise. That would be a rather fanciful embellishment too; the only corporation to have its own navy was Pepsi when they had the sixth largest navy in the world and even they did not have an aircraft carrier).


Not really much else to say, it’s not that deep of a game for those of us that suck at this kind of thing. I guess this is why it only has 4 missions, they figure you wouldn’t last beyond that. I’ve complained before about the lives-to-difficulty-to-game-length ratio in other games, but here I suppose it strikes a better balance than other efforts. I mean, let’s be honest: unless you had no life, then the SNES would’ve been out by the time you mastered this game.


Yes, it was released for computers too.

Commando (Various, 1985-1989. Residual of the War Games series)

CommandoYou guys remember this series, right? From before the midterms. Well, the Left has been at it again this past month or so. Let’s take a look at Commando, some comments I had originally planned, and of course the principle topic at hand- Iran.

The Game


From the Atari 7800 version

It’s basically the same on every system: a vertically-scrolling shooter that is very hard to play, like all arcade games- remember, these aren’t designed for you to beat, these are designed to eat your quarters by killing you early and killing you often.

It’s much like Guerrilla War, except Guerrilla War came second and it was fun because I didn’t have to worry about running out of lives. Dying every 5 seconds, meaning a total of 15 seconds of gameplay, isn’t conducive to a good time. As I mentioned in Guerrilla War, these games about wars of attrition were designed to bankrupt you through attrition- depleting your supply of money until you had none, never letting you actually win. When translating this from arcade to video game system, the developers decided that they’d just give us a ludicrously tiny amount of lives to get through the game since we can’t pop quarters into our console. So while in the arcade you might’ve been able to beat the game after spending $50 worth of quarters to get 200 lives or whatever, at home you have 3 or so. Now you see the problem?

Maybe that’s a lie for the Atari 2600 release- this looks like a desert. This is  almost the same scene as shown above in the Atari 7800 release, just scrolled a little farther up.

Anyway, the story of the game is that you’re a soldier in a jungle shooting enemies and rescuing your allies. That’s about it. I guess it’s a video game adaptation of Rambo: First Blood Part II, except you weren’t sent on this mission by one of the space hippies from “The Way To Eden“.

I can’t really say much more than that, because I am not a skilled enough player to make it to the end without a code for more lives. I do not know how a mortal human would be able to do that, on any release of this game.

The Jungle

When I was first writing this pre-2018 midterms, I had a vague idea about mentioning the Left loosing Vietnam for us 50 years ago, and then demanding we fight another war that they’ll make us lose- with Russia this time. Democratic Presidential hopeful Eric Swalwell made it clear last month that they still view what Russia did as an act of war, at the very time Swalwell’s fellow House Democrats wanted to cut defense spending, a move which fellow Democratic Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders supports (the cutting part, not necessarily what to do with it).

Now you may ask yourself– why would a political party want to cut military spending while demanding a war, so that we are assured a loss? The real reason probably is due to the following:

  • Democrats usually are all about cutting the military.
  • The Democrats talked themselves into a warmongering corner when trying to stir hatred against Russia as a scapegoat for Hillary’s pathetic 2016 performance (she lost again to a first-timer, a much-maligned first-timer, in fact more people voted for the Republican and Libertarian candidates than the Leftwing ones).
  • The “America is evil” Progressive Caucus is running the show, and they’re the totally oblivious (I am starting to want to go easy on Omar, because I’m wondering if her rampant anti-Semitism really is just stupidity) sloganeering socialists that Nikita Khrushchev warned us about, so they don’t even pay attention to what their moves are doing in relation to policy overall or the rest of the party (or they do, and they hope we lose a war). Seriously, they think that causing economic turmoil and then printing an infinite amount of money is the best way to pay for their big spending plans, so either they have less understanding of the economy than Homer Simpson or they are looking to sabotage it (which if true could mean they also are onboard with the idea of forcing the U.S. to fight a war that their legislation ensured we’d lose).

This is from the PS2 release, as part of a collection of other arcade ports. I suppose it’s “arcade perfect”.

Of course the most likely reasons are no fun. Let’s run with the speculative reasons- let’s assume that the Progressive Caucus is smart and trying to destroy the country to make way for globalization or Latino Supremacy or to create a socialist paradise or whatever, and their beliefs are what Democrats themselves believe as a whole, but which the party sweeps under the rug when it comes time to woo independents for elections (kind of like when they promised (over 50 on the campaign trail, yet only 15 didn’t vote for her) on the campaign trail not to elect Pelosi as House Speaker). Remember- Vietnam was only unwinnable in the eyes of the media (I assume Lefty Cronkite lied about the Tet Offensive, rather than merely getting it wrong) and Democrats in Congress, who stabbed our South Vietnam allies in the back with specially-made punji sticks of betrayal. Also, remember that it reeeeallllly looks like the Left sank our economy just to win the 2008 elections. Making us lose a war so that their communist buddies look more appealing on the world stage, sinking capitalism leading to the rise of socialism amongst millennials: like I said, it’s fun to speculate, and it sure looks right (unless you’re a real Leftist, because I’ve talked to one who’s active in the community and it was reported to me that Bernie and AOC are too far to the Right and thus not true Leftists).


The Desert


The NES version. The ground at the top is darker than it should be; it should be the same color as the ground at the bottom. I may have mentioned before that my HD screen does this when I take pictures of it while using it as a TV.

Checked off Russia and Vietnam and wildly factual speculation, so now we move on to something thematically similar: Iran. Democrats figure that Trump is evil for backing out of glorious Obama’s deal to pay Iran $1.7 Billion up front and a few billion down the road in sanctions relief and corporate opportunities in exchange for Iran building a nuclear weapon around 2028 instead of in 2016. We’re told that the Iran deal was working even though some people on the Left (I just assume offhand The Atlantic is Left, based on stuff I’ve seen from them, and Alan Dershowitz is on the Left- he voted for Obama and Clinton) are saying it wasn’t.


On the Iran question, Democrats want to remove Presidential powers in the area of armed conflict, to prevent Trump from going to war without consulting Congress. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer made an extremely wrong statement about Congress’ role. He said that Congress wants legislation passed so that the President has to consult with them, and states that such a thing would have prevented us from getting into the Iraq War. Several issues came to mind off the top of my head:

  1. Congress was all-in on the Iraq War, so even with more power then we’d still have seen Senator Chuck Schumer vote to support it as he did in 2002.
  2. New York Times and Washington Post both reported that Iraq actually had WMDs, and an Obama Administration official thought that it’s possible that the Syrian chemical weapons Obama/the world/Obama again (depending on when you asked Obama) set a red line about were the missing ones from Iraq.
  3. Why is Schumer taking a stand now? Obama and Clinton misled us into a war with Libya, without Congress. Why wasn’t Schumer so hot on repealing Presidential powers then?
  4. Why was Schumer quiet when Obama talked about striking Syria without Congressional approval?

Obviously Schumer’s views are shared by his Democratic colleagues, otherwise they wouldn’t have made him their leader.

What Do You Think?


Here’s the bridge in the Atari 7800 version. Either I didn’t get to it in the 2600 version or I couldn’t find the pictures.

Uhhhhh… yeah, I can’t really do the usual response this category of post ended with. The Left is too confused on what it wants. It wants the U.S. to disarm and stop with these imperialist wars, so it backs warmongering liars who supported said imperialist wars, but then oppose a war in Iran even though it’d be the same as the Syria and Libya strikes they loved under Obama. Is their aim to have endless (Democrat-caused) wars? Is their aim to disarm us so we can’t fight wars? Is their aim to disarm us so that we’re conquered during one of the wars they start? Maybe they don’t have any aims, maybe they’re just saying the first thing they think of that sounds good. Or maybe the party is fractured and only acts unified when it comes time to win elections.

Nah, it isn’t that last one. The House has been pretty unified when it comes to measures aimed at destroying America, like their bill that forces taxpayers to fund Democrat campaigns (and Republican campaigns allegedly, but since when have liberal bureaucrats applied the rules equally?) whether they want to or not (and do a bunch of other stuff, like more easily send mobs after people that donate to the wrong organization). It reminds me of something Khrushchev said, about how candidates for elections weren’t chosen by the people, but rather by the secret police. And we all know how liberals love Stalinism.


I forgot to get the “Game Over” picture, and I spent 45 minutes going through my picture folders earlier trying to find all the ones for these games. I don’t have the ability to do that now, so please settle for this image of the government guy that was ordering Rambo around and then abandoned him in First Blood II. Image from Memory Alpha.

Stealth ATF (NES, 1989, residual from the War Games series)


Is it really “ATF”? It looks like “ACE” to me.

I don’t know what the “ATF” means. “Absolutely, Transparently Fictional”?


I don’t even know what jets these are supposed to be. They kinda look like Tornados but with just one engine.

In the game, you play as an F-117. The “F” stands for “Fighter”, but that was a bit of gimmickry to attract pilots since bombers and attack aircraft are for Herberts. Depending on who you ask, the “F” was also a bit of legal finaglery due to arms treaties controlling the number of bombers, or because Congress might’ve had a hard time approving a lightly-armed attack aircraft given that a bunch of better-armed ones were already in service and working just fine. The F-117 is designed solely to attack ground targets- it does not have any guns or air-to-air missiles. So… nothing in this game could possibly happen, but I guess in 1989 the publishers wouldn’t really have access to that info. They sure as heck WOULD have known that the ship can’t land or takeoff from an aircraft carrier!


I do not know what the hieroglyphs at the bottom mean.

Otherwise this game plays like any other fighter simulation that isn’t After Burner, meaning that when it comes time to land the aircraft I fail miserably. I apparently cost the fictional in-game U.S. government $255,600,000. They let you wrack up a tab of $127,800,000 before you get a game over. $213,000,000 was because I did not know how to land the plane, $42,600,000 is because I didn’t takeoff right on the first try. Every welfare recipient in the U.S. lost a dollar because of me.

The Political Stuff

Being a 1989 simulation, this certainly had Cold War potential. I didn’t get to the level, but there’s one set in Alaska so I can only assume the villain there is the Russkies unless the Eskimos allied with Snow Miser again (that’s what the REAL Aleutian campaign in WWII was about). Had I written for this instead of After Burner, it might’ve gone the same way as that, or the same way as the aforelinked “Flight of the Intruder” went. I’m just speculating; I don’t know where I would’ve gone with it. I know where I can go with it right now though.


This mission is no more real with Democrats than it is in the game… because you’d never send an F-117 to do that while sober.

The cries to bomb Russia have disappeared. The Left still believes Trump simultaneously exists in both a state of being an intellectually disabled failure of a businessman and a cunning Russian superspy who’s blood kin of Lavrentiy Beria.

In fact, the Democrats want us to be subservient to the Russians. They want Russia (or China, though as predicted that distinction is rapidly disappearing) to be the world’s only superpower. Their words of yore and actions at present bear this out.


  • Russia is not a threat.
  • We should reduce our missile defenses against Russian aggression
  • America needs to invest in Russia’s tech industry and help Russia dominate Silicon Valley
  • Uranium One
  • Paris Climate Agreement, which Democrats would adhere to by imposing its crippling effects on the U.S., at the same time as Russia and China (and other nations on it) would ignore the treaty they backed and fill the economic void left by our absence as producers.
  • It’s ok for Russia to interfere in our elections
  • It’s ok for Russia to take the lead in Syria
  • It’s ok for Russia to violate treaties.

At Present:

  • America should stop building and modernizing its nuclear arsenal as Russia expands its own, in violation of an Obama-era treaty which Democrats tell us our participating in would stop Russia from violating- in other words, Democrats tell you, as Russia violates the treaty, that Russia will only violate it if America stops adhering to it. Liberals are smarter than us, so this can only mean Democrats want Russia to get away with illegally expanding their arsenal while we continue to limit ours.
  • We should make it illegal for America to launch a first strike, a very peaceful and conciliatory move from the same Russia hawk party who claim they want a war, a move which would embolden Russia to attack in any non-nuclear way they can think of knowing that we’d never respond with something that mattered.

In other words, Democrats openly want to strip America of its defenses and economy while allowing Russia to expand its arsenal and polluting power. Does that sound like the same outraged anti-Russia party from 2 years ago, or the same pro-Russia party from over the past 100 years that I’ve discussed before?

Pro-Russia Side Effects

Not speaking to Russia directly, but we also  have the Green New Deal, which in one fell swoop with its extreme expense would eliminate the United States as a world power, or even make us a debt slave of China much as Africa is slowly becoming. But it gets better- Environmental groups are beholden to Russian and Chinese interests. Groups like the Sierra Club, National Resources Defense Foundation, and the League of Conservation Voters. Even without the Green New Deal, these groups are seeking to disrupt our energy industry’s challenge to Russian and Chinese dominance. In other words, liberals talk of war with Russia while trying to increase Russia’s income and decrease America’s fuel reserve which would be much needed for a war.


Not really relevant except that I link to more anti-Left stuff, but you’ll notice a familiar name for the director and programming.

And why do I say this is all deliberate? Well, liberals like to boast of their superior intellects, so if a knuckledragging nitwit like me can figure this out then most assuredly a liberal knows this is happening, thus they either do not care or even want it to happen. This is further easily merged with the Left’s attempts to strip America of its defenses as I’ve discussed before to create a terrifyingly obvious portrait of a political movement serving Chinese and Russian interests far better than Trump ever has, even if we hold the notion that he’s a Russian plant.

Democrats spent years allying with Russia, asking Russia to interfere in our elections, whitewashing Russia’s evils, destroy our ability to deter Russia or fight them, and even now are outright on Russia’s payroll to destroy our energy industry, at a time when Democrats promote agendas that would devastate America and leave us as a country worse-off than Russia, thus by default elevating Russia’s status in the world. They do all of this, and then you turn the TV on and hear them complaining that Trump is the real Russian agent.

Let me put it another way: we have messages sent to a hitman about a job, we have paychecks sent to a hitman to carry out the job, we have the hitman boasting about how smart he is, we have a history of the hitman saying they wanted to do the job, we have the hitman’s arsenal in evidence, but whenever the hitman is asked he says those weapons are for something else and the hitman regularly and publicly says that the guy paying him is really paying his target to kill himself. Would you believe it? If you vote “D” but don’t hate America and don’t have a taste for borscht, you sure seem to.


Flight Of The Intruder (NES, 1991, residual from the War Games series)


It was ported to the NES in 1991, but still says 1990 on the title screen. Believe it or not, I played this game in July of 2018- it took 5.5 months to review it.

As promised, here is one of the leftovers I mentioned from the midterm series I did. I suppose I should’ve just finished up on a current events post I was working on, but I have less than 3 hours and my day job to do, so here we all are. Lesson learned: don’t gamble on your sleeping schedule.

The Game

It’s a fairly generic flight sim. It didn’t seem appreciably different from games like F/A-18 Hornet on the Game Boy Advance or G-LOC on the Game Gear. A step up from After Burner, but a step down from full-on flight simulator.

You takeoff from an aircraft carrier in an F-4 Phantom II, your thrust readout looks like the silhouette of a Harrier, you fight what appear to be F-18 Hornets, and then you bomb surface targets and land your airplane as the titular A-6 Intruder. Take a look at the pictures and tell me that I’m wrong.










I’m willing to allow for the possibility that in this game you start as an F-4 to soften the enemy’s defenses, and then come in playing a separate pilot in an A-6 to attack surface targets. It would be nice if there was a definite transition indicating this was the case. Perhaps it was in the manual, I don’t know because I bought it used.

Flight_Of_The_Intruder-NES-Mission_MapThe first mission, the only one I could play because I could not land my plane, has you in the Gulf of Tonkin, so presumably this is happening during the Vietnam War, back when F-18s did not exist.

Aside from magical transforming aircraft, there isn’t much of note here. If you want a slower paced version of After Burner, this will work alright if you figure out the carrier landing portion.

Brief Background On The Game

It was released for computers first, and was almost as loosely based on the book it takes its title from as the movie “Battle of the Bulge” was based on the real event (I just watched it again last Sunday, so bear with the references to the 167 minute time eater).

What Would You Have Said If This Were Part Of The Midterm Stuff?

I would’ve lumped it in with After Burner, but then that post might have turned out way different. Granted, Vietnam I suppose was the prototypical Democrat war in some respects. The Democrats in Congress decided to bail on South Vietnam when a Republican was in office advocating continuing funding for South Vietnam, which as I mentioned would’ve led to a different outcome. We would naturally see this Democrat change on war with the Iraq War, which was fantastic when it started but quickly denounced by Democrats.

So that’s what they do when they have the advantage of not being in power- they support the war until it becomes unpopular in the public, or perhaps until they themselves make it unpopular just to score points against the Republican Administration. Then they denounce the war they once were united behind.


I suspect she will run for President again in 2020. Conditions are favorable for her to win the DNC nomination- the media has a shortlist of 40+ candidates that will run for President. All Hillary has to do is win a little more than the others, which shouldn’t be a problem even if it’s her winning 5 votes compared to 4 for everyone else.

Democrats also learned something else- make your wars short. Even though Eisenhower started sending advisers, it was Democrats JFK and Lyndon Johnson who escalated our involvement. So we ended up with 18 years of Vietnam in one form or another, trying to save a friendly regime (and topple it to replace it with another friendly regime, because CIA or something). Now with Libya, Democrats showed they had studied well. Go in, destroy the guy you inexplicably hate after lying about what he’s doing (actually doing what they alleged George W. did), and then hurry on to the next headline.

No wonder Hollywood votes Democrat- it’s like a war movie to them! In “Battle of the Bulge” we don’t see the months of training or Nazi staff officers sitting around for hours doing the calculations about how much fuel a Tiger tank guzzles, we don’t see the rest of World War II up to that point, we just see a vaguely accurate dramatization of the battle (“vaguely” in the sense of if you squint real hard at a Ferrari Testarossa it will look vaguely like a Ford Focus). We don’t see what happens after the battle either- the fall of Berlin for example. Just like in Libya- Democrats hid the buildup with their shroud of lies which ignored how Gaddhafi was actually playing nice for years, and Democrats didn’t bother filming the aftermath either. Like anyone viewing “Battle of the Bulge” where everything not in the movie was ignored, everything not depicted by Democrats with Libya was ignored. At least until Trump came into office and they could finally start yelling at a Republican about the chaos Hillary Clinton created.

So… I guess I’m saying it wouldn’t look much different to what I said in the After Burner post afterall, since I covered the same Vietnam and Libya ground.

Anything To Say Now?

Not really. Hard to make this apply to Trump backing down on the border wall, Comey yet again saying nothing to Congress, Trump still not ordering unredacted FISA warrants on Carter Page be released, and noted liar Michael Cohen getting tangled in his own web. Look forward to me touching on some of these items coming up.


You’ll be seeing this a lot if you can’t figure out how to land. I heard that Top Gun on the NES was quite similar to this game.

Children Of Battlezone (M1 Abrams Battle Tank, Battle Tank, Super Battletank, T-Mek, 1988-1994. Part 9 of the War Games series)


It’s because they’re obvious Battlezone knockoffs.

.Well, the elections are over so that makes this the last of this particular series, though I’ve got a few more games to review out of all this. A fitting way to end would be to revisit the follow-ups to a game covered in a previous entry, while also discussing a game that covers the last battle of the Cold War

Battle Tank


That enemy tank looks like an American-made M48 or an M60. Which is odd, because the only tanks with anything approaching a 150mm gun like the tank you drive in this game has are the American-made M551 Sheridan and M60A2 Starship, which mount a 152mm gun. The next closest gun on a tank is 128mm. You also fight Apache helicopters. Is this like a second Civil War?

Battle Tank on the NES puts you in the driver’s seat of a tank of some fictional variety. Ostensibly you’re playing as an M1 Abrams affiliated with NATO, but what you drive is not an Abrams and it looks very much like you are fighting NATO, based on the vehicles you encounter.

Battlezone already gave us first-person tank combat, and with its simple interface Battle Tank seems to follow-on in the Battlezone spirit (unlike one of the other games we’ll be getting to). Upgrades from the Battlezone formula include health, multiple weapons, and a better radar screen, as well as more enemies and actual missions to conduct. Rather than flying saucers, tanks, and missiles, in Battle Tank you face tanks, helicopters, random objects to destroy, minefields, and fortifications.


M60A2 “Starship”, the tank I assume you play as because the Abrams just isn’t as well-endowed with its barrel size. Image from the Danville, VA tank museum

It looks alright, and plays good especially compared to a game I will review in a moment. I found the controls awkward because I grew up with the many more buttons on the Super NES controllers, playing Super Battletank 2 (occasionally, but enough to build habits).




M-1 Abrams Battle Tank


A Soviet T-64, with the Soviet’s well-known trapezoidal prism chassis. The bright red feather at the top indicates it is a male. Female T-64s are attracted to the tank with the brightest feather, as they know that a T-64 with such distinct plumage must be a strong warrior to have survived natural predators like the M60.

It might be unfair to say these are all knockoffs of Battlezone just because Battlezone came first and was pretty much the same game. But even if such a statement were fair, Abrams Battle Tank would be an exception. It’s more of a simulator than a game. It was originally released on one of them thar 1980s computers I can’t be bothered to look up the name of. I never played the computer version, but my difficulty with the controls makes a lot of sense if the game originally took advantage of the many more buttons a keyboard offers.


First of all, I hate simulators. They’re dry and unfun because of their focus on realistic controls. One glaring flaw in that notion is when the simulator is of a vehicle that requires more than one person to operate it. 4 people are needed for an Abrams. So you simulate handling 4 positions at once. Could be worse, Star Trek: Starfleet Academy on the PC is a simulator where you simultaneously must manage the jobs of anywhere between 80 and 430 different people.


Is that supposed to be George H.W. Bush in the upper left? It looks like they shrank George W. Bush’s face and pasted it on Richard Nixon’s head.

Second, Abrams Battle Tank does it poorly. They should not have taken the 3D polygon approach. The game did not have a smooth framerate, which only exacerbated frustration caused by odd controls and needing to control so many positions at once. And controlling the tank gets very awkward. While Battle Tank had the turret move with the tank, always facing forward (with limited traverse to target the enemies in front of you), in Abrams Battle Tank the turret (and any point of view you scroll to that is based on it) could be facing whatever direction. So you could be facing front with the commander or driver perspective, but then end up staring in the turret’s direction from the gunner or cupola positions. And re-orienting the turret to the front is a bit difficult.


Third, it might’ve been easier on the computer but is really lousy on the Genesis. The buttons could certainly have been better- instead of scrolling through the different perspectives in the tank with a pop-up menu, you could do it with the number keys. It’s like the pacing was slowed by that, but they either didn’t care to change the rest of the gameplay accordingly or they just assumed the naturally slow nature of polygon graphics on video game systems at the time compensated.

Super Battletank


“…looks so real that you’ll wonder if it’s Super NES or CNN.” If it looks real then there’s no way it’s from CNN.


Back when “VCR-quality video sequences” was a selling point. Also, I think you are fighting T-72 tanks in the game. While Iraq did have T-62 tanks, most of the Iraqi heavy divisions had the T-72. Not like I can tell the difference.

Super Battletank isn’t simulating a fictional war between an M60A2 and the rest of NATO. Instead, it simulates the First Gulf War. It’s basically Battle Tank but with spiffy new graphics… and actual enemies that the U.S. fought. You still meet minefields and fight helicopters, tanks, fortifications, and have to blast various static objects.


From the Game Gear version.

You actually do get to drive an M1 Abrams in this game… I think. I’m pretty sure a real Abrams doesn’t have these big windows immediately under the cannon. Anyway, there are only 10 stages. I managed to get to stage 9, before being defeated by my own ignorance. You do I have a set amount of lives, but I was not counting so I don’t know how many.

You have I guess pretty much the same weapons in Battle Tank on the NES, and the same number of things you can control. You just have more buttons with which to control things.


This is what a Wii-U would’ve looked like in 1995.

This game came out across multiple platforms. No computers, but we did see it on SNES, Sega Genesis, and Game Gear. The Game Gear version looks pretty good, fairly similar to its console counterparts. I tried to get pictures from each, but it didn’t go too well with the Genesis version. First, my original copy simply didn’t work. I tried to find one in a used game store, and went to half a dozen but didn’t find it. Finally I find it and try it on my Sega Nomad (because my Genesis is 200 miles away), and sure enough my Nomad doesn’t work. I probably should have tested that console in the last 5 years, and maybe brought its battery pack too (without it, you can only power it via an outlet.


You’ll notice in the graphics for this game that they went for the best realism the console at the time could offer, achieved by scanning images for sprites rather than 3D polygon work. And it looked great; flowed smoothly, gave a level of realism within technological limits that worked well. Hear that guys behind M-1 Abrams Battle Tank?


that’s totally a T-72

Yes, I understand games like Star Fox on the SNES are meant to push the envelope of what the console can do, and not necessarily go for great artwork, but M-1 Abrams Battle Tank puts too much effort into being a realistic tank simulator for me to let them get away with lousy graphics when superior options were available. In other words- their controls were so bothersome and intricate and distracting to me that I want to complain about everything I can from that game. Hmph!

The Last Major Cold War Conflict

The Cold War still had 10 months left when the Gulf War wrapped in February of 1991. So while the Soviet Union was still around, they were able to see how their equipment faired against the West. While the Soviets had a few valid points in their post-Gulf-War review, sometimes they were just laughable. In comparing the T-62 and the M1 Abrams, a Soviet General said the T-62 was perfectly acceptable because the Abrams kept needing to have sand cleaned out of its filters. Which did nothing to affect how the gun works, and the gun of an Abrams routinely blasted Iraqi tanks before the Iraqi tanks could even get into firing range. However, as the article referenced above states, this was not a battle of Soviet vs American weaponry like the Korean War. Iraq’s military and training were mixtures of Soviet and Western practices, plus whatever they learned from their recent war with Iran. Iraq barely had Soviet advisers to tell them about what weapons they did have, and their technology was far behind what the West and even what the Soviets had (as you’ll see in the NYT article, Soviet leaders did admit to some inferiority).

But the Soviets seemed to have a bout of Multiple Personality Disorder when dealing with the Iraq crisis. Aside from “we have no advisers yes we do” schism, they also started by breaking with Iraq and condemning them both for invading Kuwait and wiping out Iraqi communists over the years. Yet they still kept their advisers and the like in there. Then of course the Soviets were/weren’t sharing their intelligence on Iraq with the U.S. Yeah, it was a mess and this fractured response was symbolic I guess of the Soviet Union’s dissolution.


Moving Right Along

Alrighty… maybe later I’ll cover Super Battletank 2. That had a fun new gameplay mode, but otherwise was fairly identical to Super Battletank.

As for this next section, since there is no way I could possibly write this after knowing how the midterms turned out, I wrote two different sections. One for a Republican victory, one for a Democratic victory. The first covers Republicans, the second Democrats… even though I wrote the second first because that’s what I expected, a Democratic House and another 4 years with Nancy “Hamas Is A Humanitarian Organization, MS-13 Are Divine Beings, and Republicans Are Legislative Arsonists” Pelosi as House Speaker because she is so connected in the Democratic Party that removing her would be like removing the screen from your monitor and expecting it to work. If Democrats sweep the House and Senate, section 2 is still mostly valid, just figure that they’ll have more progress in trying to impeach Trump but will still be wasting everyone’s time. Also, if section 2 is true, where the hell was Russia? Didn’t they hack the election already? Trump will be sending Putin a nasty letter for sure! And I guess the GOP kinda sucks at suppressing voters.

By the way, no better place to note it I guess, but Trump has actually been delivering on his promises. So with all the negative coverage, accusations of hatred that have led to no tangible policy measures (I’ll stop you right here- children in cages was Obama’s fault, and the liberal 9th Circuit Court’s ruling made child separation into law, and the travel ban was something Obama considered. Are liberal black Obama and the liberal 9th Circuit Court racists? Oh yeah, and to you folks at Vox, with your 2017 headline “Trump says Obama banned refugees too. He’s wrong.”, I guess since you liberal reporters gloat over having sex with mass murderer Fidel Castro you would not see Cubans as refugees, so you would not believe that the many Cubans who Obama banned from entering the U.S. were refugees.), it’s all aimed at carrying Democrats into power. Proof positive whose side ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, CNBC, MSNBC, NPR, PBS, Univision, Telemundo, and Hollywood are on. If any were impartial, this would’ve been reported. If you only had those networks for reality, America would right now be a place where a white male can go out and rape the first woman he comes across and gut the first black or Jew he sees, all while the economy is failing and Trump is sending illegal immigrants to concentration camps. That’s what the Left believes is happening. Depending on how the election went, I guess Americans might believe it too.

1. Communism Fell… Or Did It?


A mighty T-72, symbol of the USSR and communism, late of the Iraqi Army, crushes an unsuspecting car at the Danville tank museum.

The Midterms showed that the American voters were willing to put off communism for one more election cycle. But DNC Chairman Tom Perez noted that there weren’t any moderates left in the party, that socialist Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez (who believes you have no right to question her, your only role is to obey her commands; who believes that a male challenging her to a debate is sexual harassment, a belief which the Left immediately claimed was true as indicated by Jessica Valentine at Medium with her headline “Yes, demanding women debate you is like catcalling”.) was the future, with her unfunded policies and hatred of the liberal media because even they can’t make her interviews look good (She’s one of those slogan people Khrushchev was critical of in Khrushchev Remembers– the type of person who can spout Communist slogans, would give their life for Communism, but has no clue what they’re fighting for or what their slogans even mean… I like this, I wrote this line BEFORE I knew of how when asked how to pay for medicare her response was “you just pay for it”). So… some future for the party.

And the more they lose, the louder the liberal media screams. Until eventually the public thinks that so many screaming people can’t be wrong, or until the voices of m

oderation are drowned out by the screams. Or until the folks our liberal schools and colleges have been grooming to be good little Stalinists takeover.

So with another election not going the way they planned, what else can we expect from the Left? They still have two largely unassailed bastions of liberalism- the courts and the Deep State. Like with the many 9th Circuit Court cases, and the many Deep State acts of sabotage, we can expect this to be the crutch the Left leans on to get what they want.


The Left is being stubborn as a… as a… did I make this joke already? I’m not a fan of this symbol of communism. Needs less blue, more red, and change white for yellow.

But don’t be fooled by the crutch. The reason the Left isn’t using its left leg to walk is so that when they kick you with it you’ll be all the more surprised. I’m thinking of the mobs here. Like a faked injury, liberals in power and in the media claim that mobs aren’t a working part of their group. But they encourage the mobs, sic them on targets, and then liberal leaders claim that the threat of the very liberal mobs they encourage is enough to stop conservatives from entering their town. Mob rule, in other words, as we see in Portland. As we saw in Baltimore when the mayor told police to stand down.

My prediction, in other words, is the same five tactics the Left has been using since Hillary lost, except much more intense: officially smearing anyone disagreeing with them as being racist/sexist/Nazis/etc because liberals (much like their face of the future Ocasio-Cortez) can’t be bothered to argue their points and instead think you should just believe them merely because they tell you to, and if you don’t believe them then it’s not  because the liberal is wrong, it’s because you’re wrong, ie racist/bigoted/Nazi/or just stupid. Tactic 2 would be liberal courts passing the liberal agenda into law on their own, 3 would be the Deep State doing that as well, 4 would be mob violence, and 5 would be censoring opposing viewpoints while claiming to be a neutral centrist group- like liberal Google censoring Republicans and then claiming they’re not politically biased, with no Democrat talking points regardless of how extreme they are being censored.

And remember- the culture wars are ongoing. Communism has repeatedly failed, but the Left still wants to bring it to you. The idea keeps coming back. American youth now want it, badly. The media is happy with it too- even in 2009, Newsweek proudly declared that under Obama we were all socialists (which is ironic given how one of my college professors insisted that we didn’t have socialism, and given how many times the media claimed calling Obama a socialist was fearmongering). The Cold War ended, but it was not the end of history. We haven’t run out of history quite yet.

2. So… The Soviets Won This Cold War


Kiss it goodbye. Well, not literally unless you want a smear on your monitor, but you get the idea. Image from National Conference of State Legislatures.

Yup, even though Republicans kept the Senate, Democrats gained a majority in the House. We know what to expect- votes to engage impeachment hearings (on Trump and Kavanaugh) that will be just as futile as Republican votes to overturn Obamacare when Obama was still President. You remember- those safe ones that allowed RINOs to hide, until they had to put their money where their mouth was and we learned that fair-weather rightwingers were at best center-right, maybe center-left.

I don’t at all believe that the Democrats will have invited such people into their ranks. The most we could hope for there are 2016 Clinton liberals masquerading as Ocasio-Cortezes. I’ve been watching this circus closely for four years- it always seems like Republicans are the ones trying to hold themselves together and get the party to vote as one organ, while Democrats seem to do that every time it’s not just before an election (at which point those in red states have to pretend they’re just as red to keep their jobs).

I’ve already shared what liberal rule looks like. We all hope I’m wrong and that things will go alright, but as you’ll recall last time we had a Republican President, Democrats in Congress refused to let him stop the Housing Crisis, and Democrats just let the Housing Market burn, and then used that to win the 2008 elections. What will they do to regain the Senate and White House in 2020?


As you can see, white is not present on this flag. Image from wikimedia commons.

We’ve seen them attack people wholesale based on race and religion, we’ve seen them say people are guilty of crimes solely based on party affiliation that had nothing to do with those crimes (both with Kavanaugh and, let’s be honest, that whole Russian Collusion thing), we’ve seen them protecting Deep State swamp creatures (even going so far as to offer to hire them). So in all honesty we now have 4 years of corruption, gridlock, and destructive policies, while anti-White/anti-Capitalism/anti-American rhetoric will fill the airwaves even more since liberals will believe Democrats regaining the House was more than just a pattern as they dismissed it in 2010. They will tell America, as they have every day since Trump was elected, that we need to end our system of government and that anyone supporting Trump or Republicans is in the minority, and that what was a pattern merely 8 years ago is now a referendum.

They want to destroy white people, want white men GONE. They want to destroy males. They want to destroy our economic system. They want to destroy our economy. They want to destroy our position in the world, leaving power vacuums that countries like Russia can fill, much like ISIS filled the void Democrats were warned about. Which means these lines of thought are what Americans voted for. While it fits the pattern that we’ve seen for decades, as the media has conveniently forgotten with their “referendum on Trump” talk, in today’s political climate a very dangerous thing has been unleashed, like with Obama’s Presidency. Bouncing between Republican and Democrat is normal. But Obama came in and left us with a radicalized Democratic Party out to destroy the country. Now the tide is bringing that party back in. The anti-Trump, anti-America, anti-White, anti-Law screeching the media is prone to on every issue from terrorism to the economy will only increase now that they believe the public is listening. They’re not going to shut up, they’re going to rightly believe what they’re doing is working.

An undated picture shows German Nazi Cha

Pictured here is a gathering of America First and MAGA supporters, according to the Left. They had an odd way of showing it. Image from National Post

Democrats think you are a Nazi for supporting America, but Democrats also believe that joining the Taliban to kill American soldiers is perfectly acceptable. You’ll note in that link that the Democratic candidate for Arizona Senate believes Americans are the terrorists, like Don Lemon as you’ll see in a moment. Nicholle Wallace stated in the Nazi clip that to love this country is to be a Nazi, to put the interests of yourself and your home country above those of others like say China or Syria makes you a Nazi, while another Democrat says that it doesn’t matter if you join the Taliban to kill Americans. These are the people that just gained power in Congress. Elected officials sworn to serve America’s interests who think that doing so makes them Nazis.

What do YOU think they’re going to do? Democrat Don Lemon says whites are the largest source of terror, but Democrats have no problem if an American helps foreign Muslim terrorists kill Americans, in fact Lemon says we should not take action to stop Muslim or any other foreign terrorists from entering the country. This is mainstream thought on the Left, coming from candidates and mainstream media outlets. They dehumanize people they disagree with. They hate America (look here- Farrakhan, who Democrats love, is even chanting their party line that Obama‘s team tried to downplay as meaningless), hate Trump, hate white people, so they dehumanize them by equating them to pretty much the only villain’s they acknowledge in history aside from Confederates: Nazis. It’s ok to punch a Nazi, it’s ok to punch anyone who likes America, it’s ok to chase them out of public spaces (coming from the Washington Post no less), it’s ok to censor them, it’s ok to ban them, it’s ok to form mobs to attack them. How long before it’ll be ok to load them into boxcars (it’s already ok to try to assassinate them)? Seems like the Left is the one leaning towards Nazi ideology.


Maybe they made that statement after playing From Russia With Love, where Bond is a mass murdering terrorist who mass murders white terrorists and innocent Soviet soldiers.

So if you think Don Lemon declaring on CNN that white male Republicans are terrorists, that we don’t have to worry about terror threats from around the world and thus should open our borders to the next band of 9/11 hijackers, if you think Don Lemon, a mainstream thought leader listened to by mainstream allegedly centrist Democrats, if you think that rhetoric from him is outlandish, by the time 2020 rolls around you’ll be looking back and thinking he was very tame and controlled. Just like you’ll be looking back at the mobs in Portland, the mob that chased Milo Yiannopolous out of Berkeley and left injury and fire in their wake, and the mobs that chased Republicans out of restaurants and thinking how restrained they were. The mobs saw you vote the way they wanted you to vote, and realized their thus far non-lethal terrorism is working, and so will continue with it, maybe even intensify it. Afterall, with liberals dismissing mob violence, it’s not so crazy an idea that liberals will dismiss any charges against mobs once they’re in power. Like whites in the south not charging lynch mobs.

Liberals in power will not be so merciful or tolerant as conservatives. (Honestly, if they win enough seats to impeach Trump and make it stick, I would not be surprised if they acted on America’s “it’s legal to forcibly sterilize people” rule, and start sterilizing conservatives, probably in the name of fighting global warming. I did mention that some not-very-far-left figures wanted us to stop having babies to save the Earth, and since liberal scientists already view conservatives as inferior, genetically different with liberals having a liberal gene that makes them more open to differences despite the many displays of rancid intolerance you’ve seen presented to you here and in my past posts, it stands to reason that with the entire party radicalized -as party Chairman Tom Perez stated- anything can happen. The ideas and legal groundwork are all there, you can hardly call it paranoid ranting if they keep telling us this is what they want to do and already have the ideological, legal, and scientific infrastructure in place to make it happen. Remember- all rightwinger white males are terrorists, Lemon isn’t the only one who says so. Mainstream thought. If it’s ok to punch a Nazi, isn’t it ok to experiment on one too? 5 years ago you would be shocked to hear mob violence, and punching people, be considered good behavior and condoned by a mainstream political party, so who’s to say in 5 years we won’t be at this point either? It only took 10 years for Jews to go from discrimination to mass extermination, at the hands of the National Socialists. What will Ocasio-Cortez’s breed of Democratic Socialists do?)

Just an aside to debunk Don Lemon’s remark- he cites how jihadists killed more, but white male terrorists had led more attacks. This stat debunks his argument: those jihadists are a very small percent of the population. Just a couple of them in the country.



They launched fewer attacks. Yet more died. Meanwhile, whites are the MAJORITY race in this country. Statistically, if the terror statistics reflected the population, whites should have killed WAAAAY more than those few jihadists. But they didn’t. Whites killed fewer. Jihadists, even at the small fraction of a percent of the population that they’re at vs whites at’ 60%, are clearly more dangerous. Or to put the argument into language the Left understands: guns (whites) are big and scary and so widespread in the country and so prolific that we have a 1 in 315 chance of dying from them every year, while the chance of a car accident (Jihadists) killing you is  1 in 491. But only 38,000 people died from guns in 2016, versus 40,000 dying from cars. You, liberal, want to ban the gun (whites). So at least you’re logically consistent- you want to liquidate the lesser of two evils because it happens more frequently, and claim that you’re saving the world and ushering in a peaceful utopia by doing so. Also, like Don Lemon, you claim it’s a false comparison, that cars are above criticism, like how Don says he tells people not to criticize any ethnicity that isn’t white, according to his own words.

Also, let’s turn the Left’s word association games against them on the Lemon issue. Blacks are the largest bloc of terrorists in the country, exponentially moreso than whites. How? Only 106 deaths, according to Don, came from white terrorist attacks over many years. Blacks killed 7,405 other blacks in just one year, 2016. 17,250 people were killed that year. Blacks are 13% of the population, but responsible for 42.9% of the murders. We have statements along the lines of “most black killings in Baltimore were gang-related”, and if we are to believe Don Lemon and his ilk’s gun control meme then every shooting of a black person is by a gang member who illegally got a gun, or at least a black person who got a gun from a gang member. So what is a black gang? A local political group. What is a political group? People who come together to exert control over a region or a group of people or both, ie a gang. So when gangs use murders to intimidate people, to increase their political power, to destroy the political power of those nominally in charge of the area as evidenced by how black males at 6% of the population are behind 42% of police officer killings, isn’t that terrorism, since terrorism is the use of violence for political ends? Gangs kill to get power and stay in power. Terrorists kill for the exact same reason. So, Don, it seems your own skin color should, as you say, have travel bans placed on it. (Look, if Trump is literally Hitler as various media outlets and panels declared simply because he said he’s a nationalist, then black gangs get to be terrorists.)


What “winning” looks like to the Left. Images from AP, RWC, Fox News, and Quora

Yeah, at least 2 more years of the media thinking Lemon, mobs, screaming, and Stalinism is a successful strategy, with the DNC Chairman telling us it’ll only get worse. I’m not going to say Kristallnacht will happen tomorrow, even though Republicans have already been firebombed, shot, ran off the road, dragged behind cars, mobbed, chased out of restaurants, and the suggestion has been floated of denying Republicans the right to vote and the right to live, all of which I’ve discussed previously. But I will say I’ve heard glass shattering in the distance… probably the local RNC HQ. Or maybe, just maybe, that wasn’t glass shattering, but Fort Sumter taking a hit. Will the Left (who traded plantations for welfare, equality-for-only-the-whites for communism/equality-for-only-the-strong, and whips for peer pressure) rise again?

Bonus Stage!


I’ll end on a high note. T-Mek. It’s like Battlezone, and was made by Atari. Except Shao Kahn from Mortal Kombat exclaims things at various points, and you’re fighting for the amusement of an alien warlord or something. It’s easier than Battlezone, and you have more weapons to choose from.


Made by Atari, and even has the crosshairs and radar from Battlezone

It’s a fancy offering for your Sega 32X, one of the less-than-40 games made for it. If you’re collecting-to-collect it’s usually a cheap grab, but if you’re collecting-to-play then you’ll find this is superior to some other games, like BC Racers and that motorbike one. That one was AWFUL. BC Racers just had a bad frame rate and slow controls, not too shabby (except it runs worse than Super Mario Kart which it’s a clear imitation of), but T-Mek came off as faster.

What Do You Think?

Not much to say now. Polling places are closed, voting is done. I’ve said it all above. Try to have a good day (as mentioned before, I’m writing this the night before)?


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

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.


The Hunt For Red October (Various, 1991-1993. Part 3 of the War Games series)

If you’ve never heard of it, pull your head out of your butt, actually look up what Family Guy references ya hipster millennial jackanape, and at least watch the gallderned movie.


Image from uproxx, property of WWE

As the midterms approach and the Democrats continue to run on impeachment (why does the Left’s drive for impeachment against a Republican sound familiar?), so that they can start a new Cold War or something, let’s take another look at some more Cold War games… that came out a little late. Sort of.


It was a flat orange-ish color for the NES on the left, it just came out like that because of the screen used.

Today, we take a look at defectors. Historically from the Cold War, foreshadowing defectors in the Left’s future Cold War, as well as looking at political defectors from the Left.

Since the game is based on a movie based on a book, let’s just get the game out of the way first.

Game Boy


Yes, that was the best picture I could get.

Lousy, but it is one of only two video games I know of (that was made before any hipster with a phone could produce an app) whose title screen features a hammer and sickle and the Soviet Anthem (because those hipster-commie bastards who think (if you can credit what little activity in their brain there is as such) mass murder is trendy (1 in 5 millennials in the U.S. think Stalin was a hero) or take the Pulitzer-winning NYT’s stance that it doesn’t happen, and are so used to their parasite lifestyle of mummy and puhpah giving them everything in the world that they can’t conceive of how an economy based on free stuff would fail, and hate America because this country should not exist according to their ideals and their favorite tenured professors who also live at someone else’s expense, would just loooooove to make an unironic Soviet game with a title screen like that, if they haven’t already). That alone makes it awesome.

No save feature, no password screen, no continues, and you die pretty easily. I was surprised at what happened with my playthrough- I struggled for an hour total over two days to get through the first level, but when I did it was an instant breakout the likes of which we haven’t seen since what Obama gave Russian ally Iran in the nuke deal. I tore ass through the next two levels, and then died at the boss for level 3.

Hunt-For-Red-October-Game-Boy-MapYou face other submarines, destroyers, aircraft carriers that send up depth-charge dropping jets (F-14s are what they look like, which is weird since they are incapable of hunting submarines or even using anti-submarine weapons). But you have some help in this. You can activate Red October’s caterpillar drive, which inverts your sub’s colors and makes people stop shooting at you unless you pass too close. You also have a limited number of missiles that are way stronger than your torpedoes. Just like the Blue Marine, you have infinite torpedoes. Soviet engineering; it’s no wonder they ran out of money and collapsed.

The levels are just long horizontal courses you must navigate your submarine through. Islands that float on the surface but have nothing under them, random large collections of rocks that dwarf your 198m submarine, that are way larger than an aircraft carrier, just floating about 120m under the water’s surface with no geological feature holding them up. Also in each level we have a boss. Level 3’s caught me flat-footed since it has cannons that knock you out in one shot (which you start in the line of fire of) and depth charges that knock you out in I believe 3 shots. I lost all my lives and called it quits, because this is a very frustrating game. Luck is all that propelled me that far. I knew mine had ran out.

Hunt-For-Red-October-AtlantisAs far as I can tell, it’s a very loose adaptation. In the movie, Red October didn’t blow up other submarines (except the one, but Red October didn’t fire a shot), didn’t fire missiles at helicopters and jets, and didn’t face random bosses that I don’t even know what the heck they’re supposed to be. A giant naval mine that shoots torpedoes, an undersea base that sort of reminded me of Atlantis’ central structure, and some kind of underwater death pagoda. I watched a YouTube video of the rest of the game- apparently the 3 bosses I faced are repeated in harder variations, then two different bosses, then you’re done after 8 levels. And I lost it on level 3. We ain’t doin’ this, the “L” in “Flagg” stands for “lazy”!



on the left is the Game Boy’s intro, on the right is the NES’, both had the radar sweep spawning the hammer and sickle, I just took the pictures at different points.

It’s a similar intro to the Game Boy, we even get the radar graphic. But the title screen is different, just the movie logo. And you don’t get a menu or anything, the moment you press start you’re thrown right into the action. You don’t even get the map showing where you are. But that plays into the different cutscene setup, I guess. This game featured dialog from the movie in between levels. It’s the only one that does, at least as far into them as I was able to play.


They a did a good job with the Russian Ambassador on the right. I assume the guy on the left is supposed to be David Stockman.

Hunt-For-Red-October-NESThe control configuration is also slightly different. The levels though look way different. Your submarine looks like a bigger version of the Game Boy sprite, one of the enemy sub types seems to have carried over, and I think one of the surface ship types too, but that’s it. Different levels, more varied enemies, and different hazards, such as the iceberg level involving ice falling on your sub this time. Sure ice is buoyant and shouldn’t be falling on you and shattering on the iceberg under you, only to have the pieces bounce up and fall again, but… explanations and science. I’m playing as Captain Marko Ramius here, not Captain Cold! I’m not some Ice Man that knows all about ice!


I strongly doubt the Soviets called anything the “Arctic Zone”

Just like the Game Boy game, you get some lives, and can add to them if you pick up the right item, and like the Game Boy version once they’re all gone you’re done. No passwords or continues, the game restarts as if you just turned the power on and off, just as the Game Boy version does. So no, I did not beat it. It’s harder than the Game Boy version


It’s also the only version with the Paramount Logo


One more point of interest- if you’ll look on your right, you’ll notice that the HUD is way different on the screenshots for the back of the NES box compared to the screenshot I showed of what really was in the game. The colors look a little faded for the water and icebergs in the ice stage, compared to the screenshot, but that may just be because of poor printing processes on the box or poor picture quality when taking it.


Hunt-For-Red-October-SNESWell, FINALLY someone bothers to explain what the missions are! The Game Boy version just throws you into them, the NES version does too but at least puts dialog from the movie into the game to make the contrast between what was on film and what you’re doing all the more obvious. The SNES game goes in a different direction and shows the missions the sub has, with as much effort to tie it into the movie as the Game Boy version. And they all make so much since. I mean, what Soviet Captain WOULDN’T want to stop arms dealers while on his way to defecting? It’s a no-brainer!


There is exactly nothing in both the book and the movie about illegal arms merchants. What the hell is this?

The inter-mission screen looks like an upgraded version of the Game Boy game’s, and the HUD looks like a 16-bit version of what you’ve seen so far in the NES and Game Boy games. But here we get more weapons, and the torpedoes are no longer unlimited. They also don’t home in on the enemy, an enemy that is now harder to kill because it can endure more hits, even the most basic enemies.



The SNES version introduces a new mode of gameplay, for I guess secret bonus stages or something. You have to pick up an item to trigger it. We get a first-person view of enemy boats in the distance and enemy attack helicopters coming at us. This is designed for use with the Super Scope. Mine is not on-hand and I wouldn’t waste my pack of 20 Toys ‘R’ Us AA batteries on it. Well, 18 of them anyway. The makers of the game obviously wanted you to suffer for not having a Super Scope, because when just using the controller your aiming cursor crawls along the screen like a depressed sloth (ie Eric Holder after he quit).

October, 1943, Two soldiers of the American army loading up a bazooka gun during training exercises in England during World War Two

Pro Tip: Minimize interruption of gameplay when using a Super Scope by having a buddy replace expired batteries.

The SNES version added an innovative feature- if you lose a single life, the game resets itself. I guess you could justify that by making the claim that it’s also easier than the Game Boy and NES versions so you don’t need as many lives, because I made it all the way through the first level on my first try. So I didn’t learn about this until level 2. No passwords or save options here either.

Did I comment on the music yet? I should. Both the Game Boy and NES versions start off with 8-bit versions of the Soviet Anthem while the SNES version has… silence. The Game Boy version has some custom music for its levels. The NES version does too, though it’s a different tune and it’s AWFUL. Hey buddy, you know there’s more than one instrument and more than four notes, right? Anyway, the SNES version gives us generic public domain music. I’m not sure about the menu or Level 1, but Level 2 was Night On Bald Mountain (which at least is Russian) and the Game Over screen is Beethoven’s 9th. Ode To Joy for a submarine captained by a Soviet defector sinking; I always thought Comrade Beethoven was more Marx than musician.


I have a strong suspicion about whose bright idea the Game Over screen music was. Either that or every time you die in this game Conrad McMasters breaks into a vault. Which do YOU think is likeliest? Image from macduff1797

The powerups are different too. Instead of grabbing a wrench icon to repair your ship like in the other games, you grab… a snail. Between this, the weird missions, and the soundtrack I am going to go ahead and make the assumption that the SNES version started out as a different game, and maybe a whale or a Nintendo-Not-Ecco-The-Dolphin was swapped for Krasnye Oktiabr. Even though it was the third one released it just felt and sounded way too different, like someone had a game that played similarly and gave some graphics a Red October paint job.

The Story Of The Story

The Tom Clancy novel came out in 1984. Plenty of Cold War tension still existed, to the point that we even had Russian reversal in full swing (particularly its variant of in Soviet Russia, Democrat asks Russians to interfere in Presidential election- and ignore the Politifact debunking, they cite an article that outright says this was the case to support their claim that this was false). Heck, just one year before, MI6 stopped a rogue Soviet general from executing his scheme to invade Western Europe unopposed. But these video games came out later- the NES and Game Boy ones were released within the 11 months preceding the USSR’s collapse on Boxing Day 1991 (Japan and Europe though didn’t get the Game Boy release until 1992), while the SNES version came out in 1993.

As is obvious from their labels, the games were released as tie-ins to the movie, which came out in early 1990 (about 4 months after the Berlin Wall fell). Still some Cold War tensions in this time sorta maybe, but not having been cognizant of the realities around me at the time I can say at least in hindsight it seemed the Cold War was on its way out. (Maybe that’s why liberals are so eager to start a new one- the first one ended under George H.W. Bush, a Republican, after 12 years of Republican Presidents. Democrats are jealous- they want to start a new Cold War so that they can claim to be the ones that ended it, like how Obama undid a lot of progress in attitudes towards racial equality so that the Left could exploit it for future elections… even if their candidate is a snow-white elderly millionaire).

The Story’s Story

As you may have gleaned from the trailer and what I’ve said in this writing thus far, the plot centers on the efforts of a Soviet submarine commander to reach America, dodging the Soviet Navy, while the U.S. Navy tries to help him (while standing by to blow him out of the water in case they’re wrong about his intent).


Hollywood was ahead of its time. They were Reds before the country turned red in 2016. Hollywood (and the media) spent the election cycle screaming until they were blue in the face. Image from Medium

Frankly, I’m surprised that Hollywood made a movie out of this and that the video game industry made a tie-in. Hollywood was quite enamored with commies, and liberals like our Hollywood elite saw (and still see) the USSR and its ilk as the closest thing to paradise that the world has achieved. Heck, liberal/friend-to-draft-dodgers/hero/peacenik/Sen. George McGovern (D-SD) said that the South Vietnamese would be better off if they stayed under the North’s occupation instead of fleeing to America, that the North was trustworthy in its promises not to hurt them. You can guess how well that went for the South Vietnamese left behind; McGovern should really have put down the Astro Boy manga for a few seconds (As for the refugees, those of you who claim racist Democrats became Republicans after the alleged great civil rights racist switcheroo of the 60s, take a look at how your valued Democrats including such luminaries as Joe Biden and Jerry Brown treated Vietnamese refugees with Brown’s own appointee saying a “large minority” group would be “unwelcome“… and of course your liberal Democrat friends at the time were the ones that voted to cut off aid to Vietnam, leading to the refugee crisis which these Democrats you have on a pedestal refused to handle, refugees which according to liberals at the time should never have existed because America was to blame for everything and the North was really not so bad and there’d be peace once America left and this is so pervasive of an ideology that I spent hours searching Google and found little related to North Vietnamese war crimes much as this 1972 NYT article laments, It’s almost like after the war everyone decided the North were angels or something (or in the case of the American Left, during the war) and the Americans were sadistic butchers (note that the BBC readily used the debunked Turse book)… so I guess in regards to treating communist oppressors as heroes and being their propaganda agents, not much has changed (read how willing Ted Kennedy thought the media was to help the USSR spread a message calling for America to disarm), since Obama ended our program for accepting Cuban refugees who might actually like America while advocating for and passing orders helpful for some openlyantiAmerican peoples looking to become citizens… and I noticed a decidedly leftwing bias in the Google search results for trying to find examples of illegals hating on America ie my searches only showed results talking about discrimination faced by illegals, what a shock, especially after the North Vietnam search trouble I mentioned. Granted, my searches improved slightly when I used the terms “undocumented” andDREAMer“).

Uh… where was I? As for the video game industry, I always just assumed they were lefties because all creative and tech types tend to be that way. Find me an Art major (different from Arts… but really kinda the same) or someone in Silicon Valley that doesn’t have Das Kapital memorized and hasn’t burned an American Flag. Plus, you know, stuff sort of creeps (the folks at that link go way overboard in my opinion, but they raised too many good examples to disregard it- don’t you just hate it when someone you disagree with has a point? It’s like saying they’re right about X legitimizes their wrong views on Y and Z.) into their work.

Re: not knowing the intents of the Soviet sub commander, that was the way it was. We had no idea if someone with nuclear missiles was coming to defect or destroy (good thing card-carrying communist and Obama acolyte John Brennan was not head of the CIA then- he’d take his orders from Soviet Moscow just like the party he voted for in 1976 (and let’s be honest- just like the spirit of the party he currently serves), so Red October would be a dead duck) A little less serious now, the Russian Federation isn’t that much of an adversary, but the Left’s aforementioned nostalgia for the Civil Rights Movement and now I guess the 60s in general- since they want/don’t want a proxy war (in Syria this time) and want a new Cold War- makes it so that a situation like this would be just as terrifying today. I mean, maybe this is just part of that remake-itis that has swept across Hollywood and brought us such gems as that recent Ghostbusters movie- the Left now wants to remake the 1960s, but updated for the 2010s.

Liberal Defectors

It’s worth mentioning how the Left treats people that defect from it (like saying all the people who voted for Obama twice are now and always were racists for voting Trump): just as badly as the Soviets treated their defectors. Liberals are always sure to give their ex-


Go on, try to defect. The guards need a little excitement to keep themselves sharp. Image from wikimedia

comrades the Trotsky treatment. If you’re homosexual, well… you’re not even part of the LGBTQ community anymore according to them. If you’re black you’re an “Uncle Tom”, and this goes for other races and genders with equivalent slurs replacing “Uncle Tom” (sometimes regardless of if they know what your political affiliation is, they might be racist to you because you are part of a government agency they don’t like, just ask ICE). If you’re a Muslim, you’re an extremist (according to Facebook’s, Amazon’s, Twitter’s, and Google’s approved fact-checker SPLC) if you dare challenge the radicals in your own religion (whose radicals employ a very Liberal style) according to Democrats. If you’re a woman, not voting the way the Left tells you that you must vote means that you’re incapable of thinking for yourself, and you’re letting someone else control you- the men in your life, either your father or husband or son or that male friend you have or some male relative or your male boss. If you’re a liberal I guess you don’t really catch the irony here of telling someone they’re willingly enslaved by someone else if they’re not blindly enslaved by you, so I needed this sentence here to make it clear to you.

And then of course there’s how the Left treats Conservative defectors. Parade them around (Communist regimes in general kinda do that with those who defect to them), but give them nothing significant (part-time pundits that rarely say anything worthy of RealClearPolitics or worthy of debunking like on Newsbusters, like David Jolly and George Will, are hardly significant) and maybe let them disappear once they’ve outlived their usefulness (anyone remember Jeff Flake? He was in the news…). Similar to the Soviets’ treatment of Western defectors, really. I mean, given how much the Left hates Trumpers, I find it hard to believe that deeply-entrenched hatreds just disappear the moment someone changes their party label, just as you find it hard to believe that simply electing a black President means America is no longer racist, right?


Here are pictures of liberals being tolerant that one time half the country expressed dissent against their policies. Images from AP, RWC, Fox News, and Quora

As I mentioned in the California piece, all this happens because the Left can’t tolerate dissent, and certainly can’t defend its policies. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez, the future of the party, has become the poster-child for this. Listen to her talk- she hasn’t a clue. So naturally when a conservative host challenges her, she refuses. And tries to equate challenging her on her beliefs to sexism, meaning that asking her to explain why socialism works would be a sexist act. According to her. Huffington Post reliably endorsed this method of not explaining your views.

She outright says that she does not have to explain her views to anyone, and says any males asking will be labelled as sexist. “Don’t challenge me, just do what I tell you, otherwise you face punishment, I’m right and anyone opposed to me has an ulterior motive because I’m so right on everything that no other points of view are acceptable.” This coming from the party that says women who vote Republican aren’t thinking for themselves, from the self-proclaimed party of tolerance and intellectualism. Well, Ocasio-Cortez IS a socialist (who tried to sell medicare-for-all by saying it would cut funeral expenses, because to her I guess the VA scandal never happened or soldiers don’t matter. Given her desire to slash military spending to fund her corruption-ready programs…), and every socialist government has this kind of governing style where they tell you what you are supposed to think and you’re an enemy if you dare object, and intellectuals love communism, so there you go.

And ironically, the same media that carries Ocasio-Cortez on their shoulders as the next big thing are the very same ones worrying that Democracy is at an end. What kind of Democracy is it where you’re only allowed to think and vote in one way? The USSR held mock elections (so fake that voters stopped voting and just wrote on the back of their ballots what the problems were in their area), I guess that’s the kind of Democracy liberals in the media and liberals like Ocasio-Cortez want. Ocasio-Cortez did say she was all for universal employment, I guess that means politicians get to keep their jobs too.

I suppose you’re now calling me a hypocrite.

You’re the party that claimed Trump was bad for attacking a gold star family after the father attacked him, and then you went and attacked the mother of a cancer survivor because she thanked Trump’s son for donating to a childrens’ hospital.

I admit, I rarely hesitate to toss insults at the Left and probably seem about as welcoming to a defector as the 38th Parallel’s DMZ. Well, darn it I get so flustered seeing


It would be a little more welcoming if it were greener (not Army green but green green)… and had fewer landmines. Image from thrifty nomads

the Left spew insults about people like me to the majority of the country and across the world, certainly way more people than anyone on my side could ever hope to reach! Think about it- if you insult me, it can be on social media to millions of followers worldwide because you’re a celebrity, in a movie that millions worldwide will see and will provide millions of dollars to you to fuel your messaging against me, on one of the big three TV news providers or part of your 2-1 cable news advantage (CNN and MSNBC vs Fox News, BloombergTV and CNBC vs Fox Business), in printed media which your side dominates whether it’s books or newspapers or magazines, in any artistic field from poetry to painting (NEA grants are only given to liberals, just like arts organizations, which makes the kerfluffle about Trump defunding NEA hilarious because it means liberals aren’t even willing to privately fund their own art projects despite all the Silicon Valley billionaires, liberal millionaires, and celebrities like Rosie O’Donnell), in most forums, blogs, online publications, and comments sections of websites and YouTube videos and the like, ie everywhere on the internet- which seems dominated by liberals- (that’s more of a qualitative assessment), in our public schools and universities (which follow the Communist Party model of telling you what to think, not allowing for contrary opinions, like in Europe which is no wonder why the Left says they’re the model to follow, which make it ironic when the Left complains that people who vote against them are either brainwashed or not thinking for themselves), and in our living rooms if we watch just about anything on TV that isn’t Fox News, from late-night “comedy” shows to prime time programming, all of which is consumed by people worldwide.

Then of course there’s the wealth gap– your side whines about Republicans and dark money and the like, when your side routinely raises much more money. You complain that the rich are destroying the country when most of them vote Democrat. SO- money and mouthpieces are all on your side, and all insulting me for daring to disagree, despite every fact I base my views on still being available for you to consume, and the biases of your fact-givers disclosed, if you dared to do more than listen to the party line. How do you think I’m going to react, greet your side with tea and cookies? To me, I guess much as it is to you, your defectors are just people who decided that racism, corruption, poverty for all, and mass murder are bits of history not worth repeating. Bravo?

What Do You Think?

Looks like such a fun game, vote Democrat and make it happen! Consider the party you want to support. Vote independent if you don’t like the Republicans, write-in someone’s name. Just don’t assume that the Democrats are any better just because they claim they are. Unless you’ve read all there is and somehow think an inverted Cold War with America as the commie superpower and Russia as the leader of the not-so-free world is the best possible scenario. I bet you’re one of those liberal writers who thinks there are no such things as heroes, so you want to self-destruct the closest country in the world to that state and make the world stage just some game of morally-gray-to-morally-repugnant superpowers clashing with each other. You sick psychopath.


Mario Bros. (Various, 1983-2001)


You know you’ve hit it big when your 1983 arcade game appears on Miami Vice in 1986. (Season 2, Episode 21 “Trust Fund Pirates”)

The Story

As I slog my way through the quagmire known as Donkey Kong Country on the Game Boy Color, I wanted to take a break from the political articles I’ve been marking time with until the DKC review is through (that would be the last 4 to 6 articles, depending on the order these get posted). Seems fitting that I’d focus on DK’s original foe for the piece I write while trying to finish off one of his games.

We Wanted The Game’s Story, Not Yours!

Here it is, set to the theme tune from the always funny “Car 54 Where Are You?”. Sadly the humor (and humors) of the show are not involved in our 8 bit subject of today. And yes, the Atari 2600 was 8 bits. Its processor is a cheap version of what the NES would later use.

Mario Bros. has a simple story- Mario and Luigi are plumbers in New York City. They are trying to clean the pipes out, and must also collect the coins because that is how they get paid. Welcome to De Blasio’s New York.

The objective is to kill all of the monsters that come out of the pipes. You don’t have to kill the fireballs, but they give you points if you do (at least in the Super Mario Advance version, I can’t remember if I ever managed to kill a fireball in the other ones). You achieve fatalities by smashing your head onto the platform beneath the monster you wish to liquidate (literally, your goal is to knock it into the water) and then running directly into the monster whilst it is disabled.

There are 99 different “phases”. Not quite 99 different stages, because several phases take place on a stage. In almost every phase, your goal is to kill the enemies to advance as stated above. However, in phase 4, 8, 16, 24, and presumably the rest of the multiples of 8, you are given the challenge of collecting 10 coins before a timer runs out. If you do, you get an extra life.


Different Versions

Look, there isn’t much to the game. That last paragraph would’ve been the end of this piece if I didn’t pad it out with a comparison between different versions. Besides, I rarely get to see side-by-side screenshots like this detailing different releases.



Atari 5200 gives a big Mario sprite that reminds me of the one in Super Mario Bros. Platforms animate when bumped. There is still only one stage design.


The Atari 2600 version looks pretty simplistic. You only see one stage design. You can’t walk on the POW block in the middle. When you bump your head on the platform above, it does not show an animation indicating where you bumped (this is the only version I played that didn’t). You start with A LOT more fireballs here I think than in other versions.


Atari 7800 gives a very detailed stage… but it’s the only one. At least Mario handled well, his movements were tight relative to the controller commands. And no, I played it on a standard 4:3 TV, not a widescreen 16:9 one. I don’t know why they chose to stretch Mario and the platform graphics.

Nintendo’s Entries


Here is the original arcade version. I did not play it. Image from


Now we get to the NES, which I assume is the closest port of the arcade version out of the ones I played. The stages actually change after a certain number of phases pass. but Mario handles very poorly, skids like he’s on ice even when he isn’t.











On the Game Boy Advance, we have what appears to be a remake sort of (from the Super Mario Advance games). HD upgrade maybe? In keeping with a tradition started in a minigame in Super Mario Bros. 3, the turtles you initially get are replaced by ambulatory spiky shells. All graphics for the player and enemies are on par with the Mario games from the Super Nintendo. Backgrounds and stages have also received a visual upgrade. Mario can now duck, and can throw the POW blocks.


There’s also this variant- a minigame from Super Mario Bros. 3. On the NES version, it only appears if you challenge the other player to a duel. The winner is either the one that isn’t clobbered by an enemy or the first to kill 5 enemies. If my NES were able to read SMB3 properly, I’d have had no need to take this image from strategywiki














The two-player only variant also appears on Super Mario All-Stars on the SNES, via the Super Mario Bros. 3 entry. This time though you need two controllers to ever be able to access it, unlike on the NES where I got everything done with just one controller. On the main menu for SMB3, a “Battle Mode” option is presented so that you can take on your friend immediately instead of waiting for an encounter in the main game.

Believe it or not, there are releases not covered here. Mario Bros. found its way onto the GBA again in the form of a port of the NES title. It also popped up on Nintendo’s Virtual Console, Apple II, Commodore 64, FM-7, NEC PC88, Amstrad CPC, Atari 8-bit home computers, an arcade compilation for the Nintendo Switch, Game Boy Advance e-Reader cards, and on the NES Classic. And maybe even somewhere else I didn’t name. A sort of sequel appeared on the Virtual Boy in the form of “Mario Clash”.

So… How Did You Do?

In case you were wondering, here are the scores from the best run-throughs I had this time around, plus how many lives each game gives you to start with:

  • Atari 2600- 5 lives, Phase 6, 34400 points
  • Atari 5200- 5 lives, Phase 6, 43370 points
  • Atari 7800- 3 lives, Phase 12, 71990 points
  • NES- 3 lives, Phase 9, 69670
  • Game Boy Advance (Super Mario Advance)– 3 lives, Phase 28, 245950 points