James Murdoch, an heir to the Fox News fortune, spent $20 million opposing Donald Trump’s 2020 reelection while funneling another $100 million through a nonprofit to support leftwing political groups, according to a new report.
In all the circumstances, and given the available choices, voting for Trump was not unreasonable. Idealising him, seeing him as a cultural saviour, learning to hate all his enemies, letting something of his abusive, spiteful spirit seep into your being, that was a terrible mistake.
That is a classical statement from a journalist employed by the newspaper to present the news. There is a difference on the editorial page, where there is a range of views presented, from the astonishingly deep and readable Henry Ergas through to a number of others who are barely worth a glance at the headline put above the waste of newsprint they publish.
But as for the paper itself, it has been and remains deeply on the left and as anti-Trump as the New York Times. It was, you will recall, this same paper that supported Kevin Rudd against John Howard in the 2007 Federal election.
This is part of the tragedy of the times in which we live.
Version #1 of the screener advised medical personnel there was “no available data” concerning the safety of getting a COVID-19 vaccine while you’re pregnant, but said “studies and results are expected soon.” In other words, medical personnel were fully aware from the outset that every pregnant woman receiving these vaccines is a full-fledged guinea pig. As is her unborn child.
Version #10 now devotes four paragraphs to pregnancy and breastfeeding. Here’s a portion of one of those paragraphs:
Based on current knowledge, experts believe that COVID-19 vaccines are unlikely to pose a risk to the pregnant person or fetus. …However the potential risks of COVID-19 vaccines for this population are unknown because the vaccines have not been studied in pregnant people. [bold added]
Experts believe. Bad outcomes are unlikely. But we don’t actually know. Why aren’t patients given this information directly? Why isn’t it included, in stark black and white, on the part of the document provided to people before they receive their shot?
Come back in seven years and then we’ll have a clearer idea. This is the latest screening form. Not all that straightforward. You have to wonder why they want to know.
Nor should we omit to mention that every single member of the KKK in history was a Democrat, with no exception.
But if you want vile and disgusting, there is nowhere better to find it than in the son of the President of the United States: No one will care about the Hunter Biden N-word scandal. And that is just the point. You will NEVER find the story in the American media, probably not even in our media here in Oz. I won’t even put on the page what he said since it really is vile (although you can find some of it at the link), but it’s par for the course, both in regard to the party involved and in the media’s absolute refusal to mention it.
Then there is this just today, and I need hardly mention that psychiatrists are notoriously members of the left although there are a handful of exceptions.
As for Critical Race Theory (CRT) itself, here is a primer in the video below.
Being on the left is a mental disease in and of itself. It wasn’t always, but it certainly is now.
AUSTRALIANS who are fully vaccinated against Covid-19 will receive a certificate, paving the way for governments and businesses to enforce tough rules on those who are not inoculated.
The certificate will be available securely through the Medicare app – and eventually added to digital wallets on mobile devices – as the federal government pushes ahead with the plan to help incentivise Australians to get the jab.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison wants fully-vaccinated Australians to be able to bypass state travel restrictions, although the national cabinet is yet to agree, while businesses could seek to use the certificate to withhold services from those who refuse the vaccine.
The Herald Sun understands some federal Liberal MPs are concerned about any government push for Australians to require a vaccine certificate to travel freely.
Opposition government services spokesman Bill Shorten said: “Australians deserve to know when there will be a vaccine certificate system and exactly what they will be used for.”
The certificate will feature a holographic Australian coat of arms, animated green tick and real-time digital clock, along with a unique document number and the personal details of the vaccine recipient, making it impossible to fraudulently reproduce.
Government Services Minister Linda Reynolds said the new record made it “easy” for people to show their Covid-19 vaccination status.
“The Covid-19 digital certificate makes proof of vaccination accessible anytime, anywhere,” she said.
“We’re also giving people control over the level of vaccination history they share, as the certificate only shows your Covid-19 vaccination status.”
Men who have grown up on playgrounds know how to deal with other men, and are always aware that if they go too far they might well end up in a physical fight.
Women, on the other hand, have never been in an environment where a physical fight is a realistic possibility. They therefore do not know how to interact in any situation where men are involved since they will push too far and the men will not know how to deal with such women since they will never resort to punching them out.
This is just the point Peterson makes. He can deal with what he describes as sane women, but really he is talking about dealing with women who will draw back before they enrage their male colleagues. But not all women will and not all women even understand there are these invisible limits they must not pass.
Which is why women are unlikely to rise in organisations to the same extent, since the “glass ceiling” exists because women do not know how to deal with men, and do not know when to fall back.
This is the point Peterson is trying to make although is too polite about how he goes about it. Since the answer is not to allow men to punch a woman in the midst of an argument, I am unsure how these limits can be understood by the women in a workplace environment.
The Scream by Edvard Munch, the absolute wrong response to any emergency, and sadly the very response adopted across the Western World against COVID-19
Three more stories in the past few weeks have proven once again what I and many others saw unequivocally more than a year ago: The panicky response to COVID was unwarranted and not based on the actual facts on the ground but on manipulated and unproven assumptions.
Those assumptions were touted for purely political reasons. Worse, too many Americans meekly accepted those assumptions without any of the kind of mature skepticism that is required of adult citizens in a democratic republic. The result: Our rights were violated and false and corrupt politicians gained power, power they eagerly abused.
And the conclusion.
Above all we must all recognize this very important fact: For more than a full year the constitutional rights of Americans have been badly violated and abused by politicians, mostly Democrats with a fair scattering of Republicans joining in, based on false premises and fake scientific claims. It was obvious before COVID reached our shores, during the epidemic, and now that it has receded that it was really nothing more than a variation of the flu, bad for older people but relatively harmless to everyone else. Panic was the last thing we should have done. We should have gone about our lives like normal, with the one exception of making sure we did not expose old people to the illness.
We did the opposite, and we did so because to many of us believed our so-called “experts,” Instead, those “experts” turned out to be false gods, liars who were not interested in serving the interests of the nation but their own corrupt greed for power.
I’m not sure we, as a society, have learned a thing. As for our enemies, they have learned a very great deal.
A much-maligned statue of Egerton Ryerson was toppled in Toronto on Sunday. The statue, prominently displayed on the campus of Ryerson University, has come under renewed scrutiny after the discovery in Kamloops, B.C., of what are believed to be the remains of 215 Indigenous children at a former residential school. Ryerson is credited as one of the architects of Canada’s residential school system.
In Canada, the Indian residential school system was a network of free boarding schools for Indigenous peoples. The network was funded by the Canadian government’s Department of Indian Affairs and administered by Christian churches. The school system was created for the purpose of removing Indigenous children from the influence of their own culture and assimilating them into the dominant Canadian culture, “to kill the Indian in the child.” Over the course of the system’s more than hundred-year existence, around 150,000 children were placed in residential schools nationally. By the 1930s about 30 percent of Indigenous children were believed to be attending residential schools.
As for this chap Ryerson, after whom Toronto’s version of RMIT was named, this is who he was.
Adolphus Egerton Ryerson (24 March 1803 – 19 February 1882) was a Canadian educator and Methodist minister who was a prominent contributor to the design of the Canadian public school system and the Canadian Indian residential school system. After a stint editing the Methodist denominational newspaper The Christian Guardian, Ryerson was appointed Chief Superintendent of Education for Upper Canada by Governor General Sir Charles Metcalfe in 1844. In that role, he supported reforms such as creating school boards, making textbooks more uniform, and making education free. Because of his contributions to education in Ontario, he is the namesake of Ryerson University, Ryerson Press, and Ryerson, Ontario.
An obvious villain.
FURTHER UPDATE: Also from The Star: Toppling of Egerton Ryerson statue doesn’t end colonial atrocities, but signals an end to celebrating them. Such sanctimonious bilge turns my stomach. These people will never achieve anything personally of any significance that will ever cause anyone to raise a statue in their memory, but are in fact completely empty-ended buffoons. These are people who can only make the world worse than it already is.
Even if we grant an impossible innocence to the people who venerated the man enough to erect a statue in his name, and we assume that they didn’t know better then, it is untenable now: we know better. Why would we continue to memorialize a person whose presence is a reminder of violence inflicted on our fellow humans?
This really is astonishing that she is as publicly ignorant as she is but she will die self-satisfied in her smug certainties as the world around her slips deeper into the mud.
Last summer’s protests for Black lives fundamentally shifted public opinion on how historical figures linked to colonialism and racism are commemorated in public spaces. The immediate months of protests saw the felling of statues of the genocidal Christopher Columbus in dozens of places across the States, of Confederate hero and slavery defender Robert E. Lee in Alabama, of King Leopold — the butcher of Congo — in Belgium, of the slave trader Edward Colston in London, of Canada’s first prime minister, John A. Macdonald, in Montreal.
Not all statue toppling can be judged by the same lens, of course. It was for shame that the Taliban in 2001 destroyed two majestic statues of the Buddha carved into the sandstone cliffs in Afghanistan’s Bamiyan Valley. Theirs was a fundamentalist rage based on intolerance against idolatry in other cultures and religions.
A writer this ignorant is a phenomenon but she knows what she likes and which statues deserve to be overturned and which do not. Even Sir John A. Macdonald! I am truly repulsed by such people.
The answer is to be found in the current manic race-obsession, which has rendered large sections of the population as mad as the Nazis.
Seeing everything in terms of race has turned “liberals” into puritanical bigots. Blinded by their hatred and their prejudice, they call for witch-hunts against those deemed to be racist, which seems to be anyone born with the wrong-coloured skin, in the past or the present. To critical race theorists, race is much more important than rape, and the racist much worse than the rapist. Indeed, if the rapist is seen as the victim of the racist, it is crucial to empower the rapist at the expense of his victim. This, at any rate, is the fate that has befallen poor Prospero and his hapless and innocent daughter.
History is a series of random events that happen at the same time, some of which are significant and some of which are just simultaneous occurrences with no related meaning at all.
Sent from a friend, with this the original version.
DIVORCE AGREEMENT
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, and Obama/Biden supporters, et al:
We have stuck together since the late 1950s for the sake of the kids, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has clearly run its course.
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right for us all, so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
Here is our separation agreement:
Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by land mass, each taking a similar portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets, since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
—We don’t like redistributive taxes, so you can keep them.
–You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.
–Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA, and the military.
–We’ll take the nasty, smelly oil industry and the coal mines, and you can go with wind, solar, and bio-diesel.
–You can keep Oprah, Whoopi, Bill Maher, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell. You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all five of them.
–You can have your beloved lifelong welfare dwellers, food stamps, homeless, homeboys, hippies, druggies, and illegal aliens.
–We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEOs, and rednecks.
–We’ll keep Bill O’Reilly and Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood.
–You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.
–You can have the peaceniks and war protesters.
–When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security.
–We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values.
–You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism, political correctness, and Shirley McLaine. You can also have the UN., but we will no longer be paying the bill.
–We’ll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks, and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Volt and Leaf you can find.
–You can give everyone health care if you can find any practicing doctors.
–We’ll keep “The Battle Hymn of the Republic” and “The National Anthem.”
–I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute “Imagine,” “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing,” “Kum Baya,” or “We Are the World.”
–We’ll practice trickle-down economics and you can continue to give trickle-up poverty your best shot.
–Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name, and our flag.
Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like-minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you might think about which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.
Sincerely,
P.S. Also, please take George Clooney, Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Short, Charlie Sheen, Barbra Streisand, and (Hanoi) Jane Fonda with you.
P.P.S. And you won’t have to press 1 for English when you call our country.
The oldest version on the net I can find is found here at Snopes. It does have this history which is of interest in itself.
In February 2009, a “Minuteman message board” operated by the right-wing website Renew America published what it called a “Letter from a Law Student” proposing a “model dissolution agreement” between — as it said — “American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists, Obama supporters” and the rest of the country.
The “agreement” was also partially reposted at the Patriot Action Network, dated 30 November 1999 (which, of course, predates President Barack Obama’s election by nine years). There is also a version posted on Scribd calling Wall’s proposal a “separation proposal letter.” A month after its 2009 appearance, conservative radio host Neal Boortz featured Wall’s letter on his web site, but the end of the op-ed was changed to: “You can also have Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda.”
The letter has also generated attention from liberal websites: In June 2009, Democratic Underground featured it in a thread, calling it a “piece of shit.” A year later, liberal blogger Rich Merritt posted what he called a “Patriotic Rebuttal” to the piece, which reads in part:
Listen, you are the one who married up, my dear. We are California, the Pacific Northwest, Hawai’i, most of the Midwest, Florida, the Mid-Atlantic and New England. Without us you are Mexico’s ugly step-sister to the north. Most of what we’ve done over the course of our 234-year marriage has been with your best interests in mind even when you literally rebelled. You tried to divorce us once before but we fought you and won. Why? Because despite all your many flaws, we still love you and want you to be better than you are.
In 2011, the letter reappeared, this time with even more added to the “P.S.” section:
P.S.: Also, please take Ted Turner, Sean Penn, Martin Sheen, Barbra Steisand, and Jane Fonda with you.
P.S.S.: And you won’t have to “Press 1 for English” when you call our country.
Forward this every time you get it! Let’s keep this going; maybe some of it will start sinking in!
If you can’t stand behind our Military, Please feel free to stand in front of them!
In the years since, the op-ed has been circulated via message boards, e-mail, and in other nooks and crannies on the Internet (it surfaced on Reddit in June 2013), but no version of the piece has never been definitively tied to a law student named John J. Wall — or any other identifiable person.
Law of Markets 