The debate showed Trump is the greatest political genius of our time

Donald Trump is perhaps the greatest political genius of all time. That he became President in 2016 and is still in the running to be re-elected in 2020 given all of the opposition from the media, from every facet of the left and especially the screwball left (is there any other kind at the moment?), from many within his own party, from within the bureaucracy, from state governors who are willing to burn down their cities to defeat him in November, from the Chinese who let loose a deadly pandemic, to the Democrat governors and Democrat politicians generally who used the Chinese virus as a political weapon, from the election cheating that will be a major part of the Democrat election program, given all of these you still cannot count him out.

The debate was a case in point. These are all posts of one sort and another about how PDT neutralised all of this during the Presidential debating with Joe Biden, but also simultaneously debating with the moderator. Do not lose heart is the central message here.

Here Are The 11 Dumbest, Most Slanted Questions Asked By Chris Wallace

See some of the best memes that came out of last night’s presidential debate

CIVIL WAR AT FOX NEWS? Ingraham, Gutfeld, Others Attack Chris Wallace After Debate

JOE CLAMS UP: Biden Claims Russian Payment to His Son Hunter ‘Has Been Discredited’

Trump Corrects Biden: ‘Don’t Ever Use The Word ‘Smart’ With Me’

Your Obligatory Trump-Biden Debate Post

FACT CHECK: Did Hunter Biden Get Kicked Out of the Military for Drugs? (Spoiler: Yes) [Updated]

Trump’s Funniest Moments During the Grudge Match Debate

Trump Goes After Joe Biden Over Son’s Role At Ukrainian Energy Firm, $3.5 Million Wire Payment

Joe Biden’s debate “wire” video goes viral

VP Biden helped son Hunter become fabulously wealthy by shaking down international governments and corporations

NYT readers in rebellion, ‘canceling subs’ en masse after unfavorable Biden fact-check tweet

Contrary To His Debate Claim, Biden’s Own Website Says He Supports The Green New Deal

Trump Goes After Joe Biden Over Son’s Role At Ukrainian Energy Firm, $3.5 Million Wire Payment

Liberals upset Biden does not support Green New Deal

Biden Told So Many Whoppers Last Night, Burger King May Sue Him

Moderator Chris Wallace Interrupted Donald Trump 76 Times, Biden 15 Times

Chris Wallace Just Gave The Most Embarrassing Moderator Performance In History

Trump Tells Biden to His Face ‘I’ve Done More in 47 Months Than You’ve Done in 47 Years’

How the Dems are trying to steal the election


NYT: 18 Revelations From Trove of Trump Tax Records...
LOST MORE MONEY THAN MADE?
FINANCED EXTRAVAGANT LIFESTYLE WITH USE OF BUSINESS EXPENSES...
'Can you believe how f*cking stupid the IRS is?'
FLASHBACK: Ripped Obama 20.5% Rate...
Said poor should have to pay to 'be part of game'...
WIRE: National Security Threat...
Biden ad compares to what workers pay...
Sells 'I paid more' stickers... 

There is not a Democrat policy proposal from one end of the election to the other, other than to make it compulsory to wear masks. The New York Times has released a set of the President’s tax returns and that is what they are turning into the central issue. So far as I can tell, there is no suggestion that there was any cheating on PDT’s taxes, only that he used various existing tax laws to minimise the amounts he paid.

These are amongst the various replies with the first where the video above comes from:

Democrats Are LYING About Trump’s Taxes, Push INSANE Theory That He’s A National Security Threat

New York Times’ Trump Tax Return ‘Bombshell’ Is A Joke

The New York Times Recycles Old Reporting To Drop ‘Bombshell’ Trump Tax Return Story

NYT Debunks Three Media Conspiracy Theories With Trump’s Tax Returns.

And there are the various attacks on Amy Coney Barrett bordering on religious bigotry, but so what? Here’s one post defending her nomination: THE HANDWRINGING TALE.

Meanwhile, the American economy is picking up in spite of every effort to spike it, especially via the Chinese virus: Unemployment is Improving Far Faster Than Projected – Unlike After the Great Recession.

And Trump has been nominated for a third Nobel Peace Prize, this nomination coming from Australia! Australian Law Profs Nominate Trump For Third Nobel Prize For ‘Trump Doctrine’.

And do not forget the old political equaliser that goes beyond the lying and the media bias, well beyond: Trump Calls On Justice Department to Investigate Ilhan Omar Over Illegal Ballot Scam. There is a new story on Democrat electoral cheating coming out every day.

The Melbourne Syndrome in pictures

It would be much funnier if it weren’t actually true.

AND THIS FROM TODAY’S FINANCIAL REVIEW: Mask crackdown mad, health experts warn. Their headline, with this text:

Asked why he would require Victorians to wear masks when there is no health purpose, Mr Andrews dismissed the question. “That’s an esoteric debate, isn’t it? Maybe there will be a time when we have the luxury of having those sorts of debates.”

Maybe there will be a time! “Mad” is just the word.

And indeed, Andrew Bolt now specifically asks

Has Daniel Andrews gone mad?

I cannot tell if this is just hyperbolic exaggeration or is meant literally. To me, it could be either, but what if it’s literally true? I keep coming back to The Caine Mutiny and Captain Queeg. The Caine is a US battleship during the war in the Pacific. Captain Queeg is its captain who has gone insane. The leader of the mutiny is Maryk.

Maryk keeps a secret log of Queeg’s eccentric behavior…. Soon afterward, the Caine is caught in a typhoon, an ordeal that sinks three destroyers. At the height of the storm, Queeg’s paralysis of action convinces Maryk that he must relieve the captain of command to prevent the loss of the ship. Willie, as Officer of the Deck, supports the decision. Maryk turns Caine into the wind and rides out the storm.

The Murdoch Press and the left

From Five myths about Rupert Murdoch published in The Washington Post. Myth Number 1:

1. Murdoch is on the far right.

Fairness and balance aside, Fox News serves up some of the most conservative voices active in American politics. The Wall Street Journal publishes consistently anti-tax and anti-regulatory editorials and opinion pieces. Murdoch’s London tabloids beat the drums for the invasion of Iraq, while his Australian tabloids routinely mock the idea of global warming.

And yet, this is a guy who kept a bust of Lenin in his student chambers at Oxford University. Murdoch founded his native Australia’s sole national newspaper (the Australian) in 1964 and encouraged its reporting on conditions confronting aboriginal peoples. Even though he is hostile to government initiatives on climate change, groups that examine corporate carbon emissions have given News Corp. high marks for monitoring and disclosing its footprint; the company beat a five-year deadline that he set back in 2007 to become carbon-neutral. A naturalized American citizen, Murdoch supports more liberal immigration laws.

Over the years, he has moved to the right. But his cultural conservatism and skepticism of regulation are tempered by more progressive stands, influenced in part by his three adult children with his second wife. And his political instincts prove flexible. Although he went after New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a leading Republican, last year for cozying up to President Obama in the wake of Hurricane Sandy so close to Election Day, Murdoch has made common cause with center-left Democrats such as the late New York City mayor Ed Koch and Hillary Rodham Clinton when she was a senator from New York. Similarly, he backed Labor’s Tony Blair for prime minister three times in Britain. He is simply not as conservative as Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes or the Journal editorial page.

And then there is this from Wikipedia:

 At the end of the Thatcher/Major era, Murdoch switched his support to the Labour Party and its leader, Tony Blair. The closeness of his relationship with Blair and their secret meetings to discuss national policies was to become a political issue in Britain.Former [Labour] Prime Minister Gordon Brown’s official spokesman said in November 2009 that Brown and Murdoch “were in regular communication” and that “there is nothing unusual in the prime minister talking to Rupert Murdoch”.

And in Australia.

Rudd certainly has a lot to say about the coverage of the 2007 federal election by this august organ’s parent company in his new book, Not for the Faint-hearted, released today:

True to the Murdoch newspaper and Howard government form guide … The Murdoch press continued with its breathless reporting …

We gave him a hard time in 2007? We gave him our endorsement. The Australian’s editorial, November 23, 2007:

Mr Rudd has spoken of recapturing some of the reform zeal of the Hawke and Keating years … We recognise that no change is free of risk, but we recommend a vote for Mr Rudd.

Rudd hated News’s coverage of his time at a strip joint in New York. Rudd’s memoir, yesterday:

Sure enough … I was hit with the full barrage of Murdoch front-page headlines, screaming RUDD’S STRIP CLUB SHAME and DRUNK RUDD CAN’T RECALL STRIP CLUB …

And our investigations into his multi-millionaire wife’s business dealings. Not for the Faint-hearted, continued:

The Murdoch press stalking her as if she was a criminal … This was a type of McCarthyism; where once a charge is made, then published and sensationalised, it becomes legitimate to publish any subsequent charge …

Didn’t stop our sister paper The Daily Telegraph from endorsing him. November 23, 2007:

The Daily Telegraph believes Kevin Rudd should be the next prime minister … we now believe Mr Howard has reached his use-by date …

As did Brisbane’s The Courier-Mail, November 23, 2007:

Kevin Rudd is a man for his time … he has the support of The Courier-Mail, only the second endorsement we have given federal Labor since the newspaper was established 74 years ago.

The question was not who was responsible but why did anyone think it was the right way to go?

I watched the examination of Daniel Andrews the other day until I could bear it no longer. The major issue seemed to be who had decided to employ these private contractors rather than bring in the ADF. But that was not the right issue. The right issue is why was that decision made? And let us not kid ourselves. The decision was made by Daniel Andrews irrespective of who is being asked to take the rap. As if he didn’t know what was going on. Is everyone an absolute idiot?

But that aside, the question of who is irrelevant. What demands explanation is why it was decided almost immediately to enforce the quarantine within Victoria using unqualified personnel who had to be trained from scratch.

It cannot be because they were a cheaper source of labour, since they cost an additional $18m whereas the ADF were being sponsored and funded by the Commonwealth.

It cannot be because these people had an expertise that would allow them to undertake these tasks with greater focus and with less potential for mistakes. We know that cannot be the case since we have heard from many of them about their lack of relevant skills and qualifications and their absence of training.

We also know it cannot be the case that they had a superior skill set since the virus – uniquely in Victoria – escaped from confinement and went onto to kill hundreds more while being contained everywhere else.

It cannot be because Daniel Andrews wanted to provide more money to his union colleagues by providing them with sinecures that would earn them a tonne of money for providing an essentially simple service, because the task wasn’t all that simple as it turned out. But the money they most surely did receive, lucky them, for taking on a job that was well beyond their capabilities.

So why were these completely unskilled union colleagues of the premier chosen to receive the millions for undertaking these tasks even though they were not even a favoured tenderer for the state and had no requisite skills?

It is obviously a very difficult question because not a single person seems to be able to come up with a plausible answer.

Private security

Don’t know why it has taken so long for the penny to drop, but just how ludicrous is this:

A senior Department of Jobs official has been shifted from their role as evidence mounts that the decision to use private security guards at Melbourne’s quarantine hotels was partly driven by a well-meaning attempt to provide jobs under “social inclusion” policies.

The phrase looked so innocuous. Private, I was thinking, as in from the private sector. The notion that that socialist nitwit would prefer to use security guards hired from the private sector is ZERO if not less. What a lying swindler he is, finding yet another way to help bankrupt the state. Meanwhile, how much do you believe this?

Mr Andrews told the official inquiry into the ill-fated hotels program on Friday he had no knowledge of how private security had been put in charge of guarding people.

Those words again.

Andrews fronts the Inquiry today

News and Opinion | Herald Sun

Daniel will front the Inquiry today. The last opportunity to find someone, anyone, who knew what was going on. From Tim Smith from the Victorian Opposition (it does exist):

I don’t recall. No, those meeting notes with my name do not jog my memory. The decision to use security guards was already made, I don’t know by who. That was not my responsibility. I heard something about the ADF, but I don’t recall what.

Each senior figure speaking before the hotel quarantine inquiry should be made to read the transcript of their evidence and donate a considerable sum from their handsome taxpayer-funded salaries to the victims of this disaster for every time they used a version of those words.

Hundreds of Victorians have died. Thousands of businesses have collapsed. Hundreds of thousands of Victorians have lost their jobs.

The people entrusted to navigate Victoria through this pandemic steered it onto the rocks of the second wave — and are now they obfuscate, buck pass, dissemble and perhaps even lie under oath. It is a conga line of incompetence, insincerity and insensitivity. And it is a gross insult to the families who have lost loved ones because of them.

As for the virus, this is really where we are at.

Can we eliminate the virus? No.

Can we be sure that the death rate will never come back to its previous level? No.

Can we stay in lockdown forever? No.

Can we put an end to domestic travel forever? No

Can we put an end to international travel forever? No

Can we keep the productive parts of the economy subdued forever? No

So what are we going to do? At some stage, in spite of all of the uncertainties, even Daniel Andrews will have to open not just the economy but the whole of society up again, however much his totalitarian instincts may stand in the way.

Going to the comments section of the article by Chris Uhlmann on Daniel Andrews (see Call off the Covid Dogs) an article which was published online but not in the papers, these were some of the arguments of those who support the hard lockdowns and the approach taken by Andrews in Victoria. This is the link to the comments section of the article. You can also find the article at the link as well.

So easy to be wise after the event. If Victoria had just let it rip and many thousands died you would have been criticising the government for not doing enough.

When an existential threat appears, I want a leader who takes the cautious approach.

He seems to suggest that it is possible to ring fence aged care facilities. Chris Uhlmann makes it a choice between saving the lives of the elderly and saving the economy.

The only reason the death rate is as low as it is in this country is because we have taken extreme measures.

Until a vaccine is developed (if ever) quarantine and reduction of face to face contacts is the only effective method at the disposal of Governments to protect society.

The Victorian restrictions have been extreme and damaging. However it was the only acceptable response to suppress infection rates to a manageable level.

Chris is entitled to his opinion but he is no health expert, virologist, or scientist. Nor does he even quote or refer to any that might backup his view.

200,000 US deaths in 7 months indicates that this virus is a highly contagious killer. Aust could have had similar (per capita) stats if we didnt act as swiftly and as seriously as we did.

This is not an ordinary pandemic disease like influenza. When it gets any foothold at all, it does not advance incrementally, but exponentially.

The chief medical officers, most scientists and the WHO advises what we should do. The vast majority of leaders and intellectuals of the world advises what we should do. The politicians are listening and acting on said advises.

The ugly truth is we know that you and some other people either measure success in monetary terms or political terms, whilst you say that the elderly are affected you ignore that there is a growing after affect of Covid in younger people, chronic lung disease, heart damage and neurological damage, what does that do to the economy, how would massive chronic disease where people aren’t dead, but unable to conduct a full days work ever again, or wait and manage as we are.

What bizarre logic: using the success of lockdown in keeping cases/deaths low to argue that there should be no lockdown.

Let’s not just consider the death rates when asking was lockdown worth it. Let’s ask if we really want a large percentage of our community suffering from long term disabilities.

Our society has not been destroyed at all Mr Uhlmann, in fact it has been made stronger bar a few in the tin foil brigade.

Andrews has his constituency shrinking though it may be. There will be quite a post mortem on the psychology of the lockdowns and dealing with irrational fears which will come in company with the visiting of the phenomenal costs on the whole of Victorian society. Eventually, Andrews will be remembered as a reckless villain who brought so much destruction of virtually zero compensating gain. Here’s another cartoon that captures other aspects of the Victorian disaster.

Johannes Leak Letters Cartoon published on Wednesday September 9.

The Andrews virus

News and Opinion | Herald Sun

What I found most remarkable about the cartoon was the implication that it is women in particular who find Daniel Andrews’ approach to dealing with the virus most appealing. As for the virus, this is really where we are at.

Can we eliminate the virus? No.

Can we be sure that the death rate will never come back to its previous level? No.

Can we stay in lockdown forever? No.

Can we put an end to domestic travel forever? No

Can we put an end to international travel forever? No

Can we keep the productive parts of the economy subdued forever? No

So what are we going to do? At some stage, in spite of all of the uncertainties, even Daniel Andrews will have to open not just the economy but the whole of society up again, however much his totalitarian instincts may stand in the way.

Going to the comments section of the article by Chris Uhlmann on Daniel Andrews, which was published online but not in the paper itself, these seem to be the arguments of those who support the hard lockdowns and the approach taken by Andrews in Victoria. This is the link to the comments section of the article. You can also find the article at the link as well.

So easy to be wise after the event. If Victoria had just let it rip and many thousands died you would have been criticising the government for not doing enough.

When an existential threat appears, I want a leader who takes the cautious approach.

He seems to suggest that it is possible to ring fence aged care facilities. Chris Uhlmann makes it a choice between saving the lives of the elderly and saving the economy.

The only reason the death rate is as low as it is in this country is because we have taken extreme measures.

Until a vaccine is developed (if ever) quarantine and reduction of face to face contacts is the only effective method at the disposal of Governments to protect society.

The Victorian restrictions have been extreme and damaging. However it was the only acceptable response to suppress infection rates to a manageable level.

Chris is entitled to his opinion but he is no health expert, virologist, or scientist. Nor does he even quote or refer to any that might backup his view.

200,000 US deaths in 7 months indicates that this virus is a highly contagious killer. Aust could have had similar (per capita) stats if we didnt act as swiftly and as seriously as we did.

This is not an ordinary pandemic disease like influenza. When it gets any foothold at all, it does not advance incrementally, but exponentially.

The chief medical officers, most scientists and the WHO advises what we should do. The vast majority of leaders and intellectuals of the world advises what we should do. The politicians are listening and acting on said advises.

The ugly truth is we know that you and some other people either measure success in monetary terms or political terms, whilst you say that the elderly are affected you ignore that there is a growing after affect of Covid in younger people, chronic lung disease, heart damage and neurological damage, what does that do to the economy, how would massive chronic disease where people aren’t dead, but unable to conduct a full days work ever again, or wait and manage as we are.

What bizarre logic: using the success of lockdown in keeping cases/deaths low to argue that there should be no lockdown.

Let’s not just consider the death rates when asking was lockdown worth it. Let’s ask if we really want a large percentage of our community suffering from long term disabilities.

Our society has not been destroyed at all Mr Uhlmann, in fact it has been made stronger bar a few in the tin foil brigade.

Andrews has his constituency shrinking though it may be. There will be quite a post mortem on the psychology of the lockdowns which will come in company with the visiting of the phenomenal costs on the whole of Victorian society. Eventually, Andrews will be remembered as a reckless villain who brought so much destruction of virtually zero compensating gain. Here’s another cartoon that captures other aspects of the Victorian disaster.

Johannes Leak Letters Cartoon published on Wednesday September 9.