#whitesupremacy

Greta, the poster child for a dysfunctional education system

Greta.png

You have to hand it to the left. They truly have indoctrination down pat. While there is a sense of awe at the sheer number of kids who attended Friday’s protests around the world at the expense of school (in some cases even exams), 16yo Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, the poster child for ‘climate change’, has exposed how dysfunctional our educational system has become. Forget discipline. Dismiss reasoned discussion. Conform and get rewarded for it.

CM has always felt sorry for Greta’s exploitation. She typifies the style of propaganda used over generations. The way that the UN, EU or World Economic Forum hang off her every word. It is deeply embarrassing. Made worse by the hypocrisy of 1,500 private jets used to fly to hear her speak in Davos.

Many teachers and parents of these kids are no better. Often espousing patronizing and sanctimonious sermons about the intelligence of the youth today. Not to worry, Extinction Rebellion has even published a piece on hypocrisy. Thomas Sinclair wrote,

Someone who doesn’t know the evidence might perhaps be persuaded to review it. But someone who thinks I’m a hypocrite may suppose that I’ve reviewed the evidence and am acting on it — so she can skip the review herself and take my actions as her guide.” Take that!

He goes on,

However, XR can do better than the standard response. The most important point is this. There is no hypocrisyDriving to XR protests, or using vinyl banners, or eating a Pret sandwich at an XR roadblock — these are not hypocritical actions. Hypocrisy is a matter of preaching one thing but practising another. But what XR preaches is a radical change of the system within which we must make our choices, not of the choices we make within the system as it stands.

What infallible logic! How could we be so obtuse? Those kids CM found eating McDonald’s before the climate strike were completely aware of their actions. They were “highlighting” the problem of the fast-food chain’s utter disdain for the planet to serve food in single-use plastics and paper packaging. It was a cry to get McDonald’s to change its wicked ways. Or was it they were just oblivious to the fact that, while gorging on hamburgers, fries and thick shakes, were unable to fathom their own double standards. Lucky for them, Sinclair has a get out of jail free card. Who knew?

It wasn’t so long ago that a CIS study in Australia revealed that 58% of millennials had a favourable view of socialism. Unfortunately, 51% did not know who Chairman Mao was. Another 32% did not know Stalin and 42% hadn’t heard of Lenin. If we combine with “know but not familiar” with “don’t know” we see almost 80%, 66% and 74% respectively. Oh, how wonderful to learn in school about three men whose social policies led to the deaths of 10s of millions. Unbeknownst to them, many of their teachers follow the same Marxist mindset.

What more proof do you need when an RMIT senior lecturer tweeted he’d award full marks for 5% of the course for those that attended provided they sent in a selfie. Presumably, those that didn’t submit a selfie would be secretly docked marks. RMIT made a glib response to the professor’s tweet which went along the lines of defending the indefensible. Pathetic. He should be severely reprimanded or sacked for completely unprofessional conduct.

Corporations often complain about the difficulty in hiring the skills they need to grow. Shouldn’t they now be extra wary that the degrees awarded to those they are looking to hire have been issues on the basis of aligned participation, not academic effort? Qantas CEO Alan Joyce and Virgin Australia CEO Paul Scurrah might make noise about having to be big on social justice to attract the next generation but if they attend schools which openly support activism quite frankly they are all theirs! CM would prefer investing in companies that hire kids who got their education that cost $2.50 in late charges at the public library.

CM has written before on the slipping standards in Aussie education. Is it any wonder when a growing number of teachers are radical activists. Our education system needs a massive overhaul. Our ranks in maths, science and literacy have all been heading south. We aren’t teaching our kids that the real world out there is a touch place. Wrapping them in cotton wool will not serve them at all in later life. That will ironically be the real impact of chasing climate change agendas and the misguided policy that was enacted due to weak-willed authorities.

Although don’t get too excited about a sea change in thinking to fix this awful course. The latest 2019 OECD report has been captured by the warming cult, justifying worsening trends in education on shifts in society, even going so far as to quote (p.16) Decca Records rejecting The Beatles back in 1962 as evidence of how we can get it wrong.

Justifying – although not admitting – the slip (denoted as a “shift”) in education standards on climate change is insane in the extreme. Lucky for us there is a summary version written by the OECD. The full report is here. 479 pages of blather.

There are too many examples of schools around the globe folding to this Marxist nonsense. In the past, student bodies embracing Marxism as a fad were par for the course. Now the university faculties are the drivers. For example:

Posters from the University of San Francisco (uSF) point at white students so they appropriately check their privilege. Karl Marx may have recently turned 200 but his legacy lives and breathes in California. So much for universities being the cradle of free and open thinking.

The Inclusive Communications Task Force at the Colorado State University has introduced an appropriate language guide and it has deemed the words “America” and “Americans” might prove offensive to some and have discouraged their use on campus.

The University of Texas launched, “MasculinUT”, a program which was organized by the school’s counselling staff with a poster series encouraging students to develop a “healthy model of masculinity.” The program is built around “restrictive masculinity” and tries to encourage men to drop traditional gender roles to “act like a man”, be “successful” or “the breadwinner.”

Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University conducted a study to see if there is a correlation between toxic masculinity and climate change. His assumptions ran the line that men see environmentalism as more feminine and get triggered if forced to make ecological choices if they feel threatened.

The University of Melbourne allowed an artistic performance that required “paying” white customers access on the basis of signing an acknowledgement of white privilege. The $600mn+ taxpayer-funded University of Melbourne’s motto is Postera Cescam Laude, which is Latin for “We shall grow in the esteem of future generations.” It is not clear whether the founders of the UoM had Marxist theories at the forefront of their minds in 1853. Growing the esteem of future generations was not to come by cutting down those whose passions as individuals cause them to strive for greatness. Yet the radical leftists believe esteem comes, not from effort, but allocation.

Don’t think that the indoctrination begins in secondary or tertiary education. From tender ages, in the Democratic People’s Republic of Victoria, some educational apparatchiks believe a grandparent kissing their grandchild can violate them and can be considered assault. In what world does a grandparent showing affection to their own flesh and blood have incest on their minds? Most likely never.

It would seem to CM that the most important Royal Commission to be conducted is on our education system. From Safe School programs to universities, Australia’s long term future is being seriously impacted by utterly valueless indoctrination. We will not be the lucky country for much longer because this garbage is already seeping into corporate board rooms.

Note CM in no way thinks Greta Thunberg is associated with Nazis.

Was the CIA too white at the time of 9/11?

Central Intelligence Agency

According to the BBC, it was. The UK taxpayer-funded broadcaster is buying into this hypothesis that the CIA may have been too “white” and not diverse enough to spot the terrorist activity around September 11, 2001. Weren’t the whites that founded the agency in 1947 the same thinkers who had the nous to use “diversity” (Navaho Native Americans) to devastating effect to transmit sensitive information during WWII? That was 54 years prior to the 9/11 attacks.

What a spectacular own goal. How could the BBC be so careless? It should be completely down to the CIA’s white supremacist backgrounds that led to an agency completely driven by irrational fear to facilitate any old excuse to bomb the crap out of shithole nations. Does CM need to do the BBC’s work for them?

Passing the CIA aptitude tests are bound to be pretty tough in the intelligence areas. The day the CIA starts to prioritise skin tones, sexual proclivity and what is between the legs of candidates as opposed to what is between their ears one should expect even more misses to result. It might be too late – find the CIA Diversity webpage here.

Diversity of thought is all that matters. The BBC would do well to seek introspection. If the CIA had been predominantly staffed by blacks and Hispanics, would this article have ever seen the light of day? Of course not. Good to know BBC practices racism. Or is the journalist gunning for a position on the NY Times editorial board alongside the sweet #cancelwhitepeople Sarah Jeong?

What if toxic masculinity is the reason for climate change?

How does this article get past Forbes’ editorial? The opening line in Carolyn Centeno Milton’s piece described that most people would think women would be more likely to use eco friendly canvas shopping bags than men.

Several years back, the UK Environment Agency did a study on the effectiveness of alternative packaging solutions to HDPE (conventional plastic bags) in terms of lowering environmental impact. It said,

The paper, LDPE, non-woven PP and cotton bags should be reused at least 3, 4, 11 and 131 times respectively to ensure that they have lower [impact] than conventional HDPE carrier bags that are not reused.”

So if conventional biodegradable plastic shopping bags are reused to throw out garbage that means 6, 8, 22 and 262 days are required for the alternatives to have a lower environmental footprint. So if one has 10 canvas shopping bags which aren’t used for rubbish disposal they need to be used everyday for 6 years each!

Everyone that CM knows has a stockpile of these enviro alternatives because one forgets, does impulse shopping or requires more bags than initially thought. So is it toxic masculinity or the realities and practicalities of our day to day lives?

Furthermore if consumers can’t use plastic shopping bags to throw away rubbish they’ll need to substitute it with plastic bin liners from aisle 7. Net impact on the environment – zero. In reality it’s probably more as the plastic bags sold at supermarkets are thicker and less biodegradable than what they replace but if it has “eco friendly” written on the side, you’re “woke”!! Job done! Yay!

Dr. Aaron Brough of Utah State University conducted the study to see if there is correlation between toxic masculinity and climate change. His assumptions run the line that men see environmentalism as more feminine and get triggered to make ecological choices if threatened.

The study went as far as to see whether men would select a more feminine looking Walmart gift card with floral print (which was labeled a gender threat card) or a plain one without as a sign of masculine preferences.

The study went so far as China to further its findings. BMW China put forward two ads on the same car; one pushing ecology, the other safety. Had Brough visited China and lost 8 lives in the back of a single Beijing taxi ride he would understand the imperative of those favoring safety. Nothing to do with toxic masculinity. A sign of fragility. A toxic male, by his logic, should favour less safety.

To flip the argument on its head, countless numbers of Tesla drivers have posted YouTube videos showing complete faith in the auto pilot system which has killed numerous owners. Should we take it some Tesla buyers show toxic stupidity to film themselves playing card games, pretending to sleep and massaging the passenger in their quest to be ecological?

If the BMW China study proved anything, the German maker will clearly sell more cars if they focus on safety over the environment. It has nothing to do with toxic masculinity. This trend would be supported by an equal number of women, especially mothers with kids.

Centeno Milton closes on Brough’s comments,

“We need to overcome our unhealthy judgements of gender incongruence. And men need to be confident in their self-identity and decide to live a sustainable lifestyle without caring what other people think.

Funny that, I thought I was just shopping. Little did I know that the inner white supremacist and toxic male in me was driving me to destroy our ecosystems. Note to self – pick floral Walmart gift cards and pester the dealer at BMW to run through the emissions stats on video so CM can upload proof CM fits Brough’s stereotypes to overcome gender incongruence. Unfortunately CM is willing to bet the dealer won’t know the emission number but will know how many airbags the car has.

The only people adding to warming the planet are those producing needless hot air like Brough. So unsettled must climate science be to have such studies funded in the first place. It rates up there with CM’s local paper discussing the stress on pets caused by climate change.

Dr Kerryn Phelps MP misdiagnoses the cancerous white patriarchy

Dr Kerryn Phelps AM MP posted the following graphic on Twitter to howl at the patriarchy on International Women’s Day (IWD). She posted these figures from a (pre-Channel 9) Sydney Morning Herald article from April 2018.  Most of the statistics above are inaccurate or misrepresented but when it comes to bashing middle aged white men, no-one dares questioning the accuracy when it comes to this demographic.

The basics.

1. Whites in Australia make up c.80% of the population. This is census data. No room for much conjecture.

2. Men make up 63% of all full time employment in 2018. In 2000 this was 75%. 13% of those aged 65 and over still participate in the workforce, 65% of those are men. This is down from 79% in 2000. By pure logic, if men were 75% of FT jobs two decades ago, stands to reason they’d have a higher chance of being in positions of seniority today.

3. We stick to the SMH’s definition of ”middle age’ of 40-60 which equates to 2.8mn white men, or 10.7% of the total population.

4. In the Australian Federal Parliament there are 150 lower house & 75 upper house seats. 225 positions up for grabs during election cycles (longer terms for senators). On Phelps’ SMH derived assumptions that means 160 of the seats are occupied by white middle aged males. 160 seats means that federal politics as a profession at present is only 0.0057% of their representative demographic. Phelps might reflect that 30 out of 75 senators are women, or 40% of the total. 60% are males. 17.5% of all Senators are white males over 60yo meaning only 32.5% of senators are middle aged white males.

30% of the House of Reps are women. Yet 17% of the white males in the lower house are aged over 60. So only 53% of our lower house is middle aged white male. Not 70%.

5. There are 2,185 stocks listed on the ASX. If 75% are run by middle aged white men then 1,638 companies fit Phelp’s parroted profile. 0.059% of the all middle aged white men run listed corporates. Although the average age of CEOs in Australia is around 54, or at the upper bound of the 40-60 cohort. Going back to point 2, the higher proportion of men in FT roles seems consistent with this. There should be no surprise.

6. There are 1,054 state and federal judges and magistrates in Australia. Of that, 63% are white men according to SMH. The actual figure is 62%, or 405. Close enough. So 669 members of the judiciary would fit the claim. To hit the top echelons of the judiciary requires long service. Even if we took the SMH at its word, 0.023% of the white middle aged male cohort would take those roles. Note 42% of judges on the High Court of Australia are women.

7. In our tertiary education system , APH notes only 21.6% of university academia in Australia were women in 1985. It rose to 39% in 2002 and is just over 50% today. Today tenured females at universities exceed tenured males. Over 50% of all associate lecturers and lecturers are women. Male senior professors make up 75% of the total. Their average age is well above 50. Senior professors are able to get a higher percentage of research grants because they are mainly in STEM fields.

8. There are 39 Vice Chancellor positions in Australia. 12 are currently held by females. 70% are males. 66% are held by white males. Phelps mistakenly thought that 85% were middle aged white males. In fact the article mentioned that 85% of Vice Chancellors were of Anglo-Celtic background. Still it sounds better if it attacks middle aged white males.

9. Phelps believes the claim that 80% of highest paying jobs are held by white middle aged males. Assuming that 85% of the population was white two decades ago and the Australian Government claims 90% of executive roles are full time roles with men a higher proportion of the workforce back then it should make for little surprise. It is representative.

Labour participation rate among males 15-64 is 82% vs 71.7% for females. Note in 1978 these figures were 85% and 50% respectively. The highest quintile of compensation was 48% of the total in 2017/2018. This quintile also paid 78.7% of total income tax. The top 10% of income earners paid 44.9% according to the ATO. The top 1% paid 16.9%. So the bottom 90% pay less than 56% of total income tax. Middle aged white men pay more tax.

10. Phelps the SMH article that says 80% of film directors and writers are white middle aged males. According to the Australian Directors Guild’s (ADG), ‘Gender Matters – women in the Australian screen industry‘ report, 21% of writers and 16% of feature films are directed by women. There is no “age” breakdown for either gender. 34% of documentaries since 1988 have been directed by women, 41% of producers and 37% writers. The in-house analysis by the ADG shows that teams with at least 50% female creative teams gets 58% of all funded projects. In 2017, the Australian Director’s Guild started a female scholarship mentor program.

In an industry that leans heavily to the ideological left, surely that is a self inflicted wound. In the arts and entertainment industry, the ability to source funds to make films is mostly based on a track record to convert that investment into box office revenue. The ability to write a movie script is based on the creativity of the author, regardless of gender. Page 8 of the report notes, “Anecdotal evidence indicates that women are far more likely than their male counterparts to underestimate and undersell their skills and abilities.” Supposedly this is caused by toxic masculinity?

Will striving for more politically correct measures improve things in the art & film world? America has been trying this path for quite some time now and the results have continued to drift lower and lower. More films but less revenue.

—-

Things have come a long way over the last 50 years. Yet some industries remain very skewed toward men, not because of some evil patriarchal conspiracy.

99.7% of bricklayers are men in Australia. 96.4% of truck drivers are men. 95% of miners are men. 93% of our fire fighters are men. 85% of our defence force is comprised of men. Isn’t this merely individual work choices rather than a deliberate plan to shun women in those industries?

Should there be a Royal Commission to find out why more women don’t want to be brickies, truckies, miners, firies, coppers or soldiers? Should we force quotas? That is what the ADF is now doing with disastrous results. The ADF missed its original gender targets so lowered them but missed by an even wider margin. The Air Force openly practices discrimination to such a degree that if the private sector adopted similar methods, the corporates would face harsh penalties and sanctions. Women in the ADF can achieve their service medal in half the time of men. Then they wonder why morale in the military is drifting lower every year. The irony is that almost 50% of women in the ADF surveyed think these affirmative action measures are meaningless.

On the flip side 98.7% of personal assistants are women98.4% of dental assistants are women94% of receptionists are women. 85.7% of special education teachers are women80% of cafe workers are female.  75.9% of nurses are female. Should we seek to redress the gender imbalance there? Men are 92% of the prison population in Australia? Should we equalize that?

Should we enforce quotas among politicians? Political parties place candidates who they think can win elections whatever their identity – gender, sexual proclivity or otherwise. If parties think women are the magic elixir to secure more terms in government, women will make up a growing proportion of the pre selection process. The patriarchy would be crazy not to run candidates that allow them to sustain their thirst for power.

Hate Crime in America – in charts

Hate Crime in US.png

The FBI posts hate crime data going back to 1996. The trend has picked up since 2014 but remains well below the 1997 peak. The type of hate crime has shifted over the last two decades.

Anti-Black.png

Anti Black Hate Crimes have more than halved since 1996. Since 2014, hate crimes against blacks have risen 24%. As a % of the black population, Anti-Black hate crimes have fallen from 0.0131% to 0.0046% of their racial background.

AA.png

…or 13.15 people per 100,000 African Americans to 4.63 or -65%. Or 1.68 per 100,000 total population to 0.62 crimes per 100,000, or -64%.

Black Hate Crime.png

As a % of all hate crimes, African Americans have fallen from 51% to 28.1%. Anti-White hate crime has also slid from just under 16% to 10.3% between 1996 and 2017.

Black White.png

Anti-white hate crime has fallen in absolute terms from 1,384 in 1996 to 743 in 2017, up from the low of 504 in 2011.

White.png

As a % of the total population, anti-white hate crimes have slid from 0.00052% in 1996 to 0.00023% in 2017, up from 0.00016% in 2011. The media would never run a narrative that hate crimes against whites have jumped since 44% since 2011.

AW.png

Anti-Asian hate crime has fallen from a peak of 527 in 1996 to 131 in 2017. In 2017, Asians were 0.00069% likely to suffer a hate crime relative to the Asian American population.

Asian.png

Anti Hispanic hate crime has fallen from a peak of 636 in 1997 to a trough of 299 in 2015 to 427 at last count.

Hispanic.png

Anti Native American hate crimes trended at a very low level out to 2010. Since then they’ve surged from a low of 44 cases to 154 under Obama and out to 251 under Trump.

NA.png

Anti-Semitic hate crimes remain the highest among all religions in America. They have drifted down to the low of 2014 from the peak in 1996 but in 2017 saw a resurgence to 938.

Jew.png

Anti Islamic hate crimes really grew since the attack on the Twin Towers. From a trough of 22, hate crimes surged to 481 and have remained above 100 since. At last count there were 273 hate crimes against the Muslim community.

Islam

Note Anti Catholic and Anti-Protestant hate crimes have remained below 100 each since 1996, although Catholics have suffered 27% more than Protestants over two decades.

Christ.png

Anti-LGBT crimes rose steadily from 1996 (11% of the total) to a peak of 20.8% in 2012. This has dropped to 15.7% in 2017. In absolute terms this has fallen from a peak of 1,439 cases in 1998 to 1,130 in 2017. Were the policies of gender fluid bathrooms a driver of the rise in hate crime?

LGBT.png

One could make an argument for many crimes going unreported but the FBI data seems consistent from year to year. The trends are statistically robust in the collection. In absolute terms, the idea that America is deeply divided and hate crimes are “surging” doesn’t take into account the long term trends when based against relevant and total populations.

As mentioned in the previous article, Germany has way more Anti-Islamic hate crimes than America. Yet the mainstream media would have us believe that America is a hair’s breadth from going up in flames. Don’t believe your lying eyes or if that means that the FBI is not telling the truth…

Nike & Colin Kaepernick

7EB3D471-D052-4233-BB4D-E2C3C5F66DCC.jpeg

Ultimately consumers will vote with their feet (no pun intended) after Nike’s use of original kneeler Colin Kaepernick as its latest “Just do it.” campaign face. Arguing over who is right or wrong over this has become somewhat irrelevant. The kneeling debate is over 12 months old.

Nike is free to market how it chooses but must bear full responsibility for the firestorm it creates for itself. There is no doubt the social media impact will be huge and the marketing department might wax lyrical at the attention gained all it wants but the question is will the majority of it be positive? Virtue signaling for corporates is a dangerous game. More often than not it backfires.

CM has always held that corporations should stay out of politics because as much as they might profess a united face on certain issues, there is no way they speak on behalf of all those that work for them. The risk is creating an unfair working environment to those who do not wish to participate in the manner the corporate desires, even if they might privately agree. Coercing staff to openly tow the party line is tantamount to making them slaves if forced against their will for fear of repercussions in the workplace.

Don’t think for a second it doesn’t happen. Think of the same sex marriage (SSM) debate. If you had a rainbow flag screen saver you would have been cheered by the internal apparatchiks. Had you a “Vote NO for SSM” screen saver it is likely you would have been hauled in front of your manager and HR to explain your inappropriate workplace behaviour. The matter was a vote of democracy. What place is it for corporates to enforce one type of opinion on changes to the Marriage Act? Let’s not forget the results of the 2011 Census where 0.03% of the population identified with being husband and wife in a same sex relationship. Yes. 1,338 people only. All that fanfare for less than 1,400 people.

We are already seeing people in the US burn Nike products to protest the company’s move.

4F2A07F8-BC36-4AB6-8CDE-DCE3E822DAD3.jpeg

In much the same vein as Democrat Party activists boycotting In-N-Out burgers for donating to the GOP, there is no real sense in die-hard NFL fans pushing to #boycottNike. What is the obsession with boycotts? Surely disgruntled fans can make up their own minds whether they’ll choose to buy Nike products or not. It is just more of the oppression obsession.

Nike will ultimately survive. The NFL has already seen ratings take a proper beating. The question is does this help? Probably not but Nike want to make a statement.

Knee jerk reactions where people burn football jerseys, season tickets, Superbowl pennants or Nike sneakers have become less and less about the subject protested about (Black Lives Matter) but more about people getting sick and tired of political correctness and social justice rammed down their throats on an almost daily basis. Even Buzz Aldrin is sick of the politically correct overtones in ‘First Man’ that went out of its way to delete scenes of an epic moment in America’s history – planting an American flag on the moon. Don’t forget Buzz punched a reporter who disparaged him in public. He said he is a “proud American

Sadly, many Americans feel their patriotism is under fire. That they should feel guilty for displaying Old Glory outside their homes. Maybe those loyal fans want to go and watch a NFL match to leave the financial, relationship, work, marital stresses behind. They pay money to unwind, not have political messaging paraded in front of them. Even if they think Black Lives Matter is a worthy cause, kneeling every match won’t make it sink in any deeper but dilute the message, as has been displayed by making Kaepernick the poster child.

Not all NRA members are cold blooded murderers. Those people that voted Republican in the last election aren’t all white supremacist, bigoted, racist Nazis any more than all those people that voted Democrat aren’t all whining, virtue signaling liberals.

Open debate is what is needed. Kicking people out of restaurants through open harassment, burning runners or boycotting businesses won’t fix a thing. Listening and debating the issues based on logical reason is the only way forward.  The only thing worth boycotting is the boycotters themselves. Sadly the lesson is unlikely to be learnt.

Senate Democrats take up the fight against the nomination of “XX”

0D16B5F7-6B08-4D1C-A333-05154911DE8B.jpeg

What planet are these people on? Without the pick having even been announced, “XX” was deemed to be sufficient enough for Senate Democrats to launch a campaign and fire up the Women’s March group to commit exactly the same mistake. Trump Derangement Syndrome has hit such epic heights that carelessness seems to be a chronic side effect. Not one person proof-read the document prior to the release? One could almost make the case that their hatred and inability to have a sane conversation about any topic such that even if a clone of Obama appointee Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor was nominated they would howl in protest. No wonder the #WalkAway movement is gaining momentum. A party that stands for such flimsy principles will fall for anything.

SC nominees have generally been selected by sitting presidents (no matter how much advice they may have received in making the choice). It is up to the Senate to confirm it. In a democracy if the yea’s beat the nay’s it is pushed ahead. Simple. Could the Democrats truly admit they favour SC justices that prioritize conservative values? Of course not. In principle, SC justices are supposed to be impartial and interpret the constitution. In practice it is not always a safe bet to say personal biases do not come out. We need only look at Sotomayor’s responses to the Masterpiece Cakeshop case to show how she was wilfully criticising the law and interpreting the way she wanted it to be rather rather than defend it for what it is. No doubt one could find evidence to suggest that conservative SCJs have shown personal leanings in the past. In any event, it is not up to the SC to change laws. That is the job of the Hill. It is up to voters to put in those politicians they believe will support their values and change laws to right what they see as wrong.

CM probably has as much read through on SC nominee Brett Kavanaugh as 99.9% of the population i.e. next to none. Yet the expert commentary is everywhere on why every congressman and woman needs to reject this nomination. So unhinged has the left become that the poor kids being stripped from mothers at the border has become seemingly yesterday’s news. If it wasn’t Kavanaugh the identical verbatim would have been spewed at any other nominee set forward. All of them must have been carbon copied. How soon the TDS switches gears from one outrage to the next. This is the type of double standard that infuriates the masses. After the SCJ appointment, what next?

If the Democrats truly have a hope of winning the mid-terms or 2020, they aren’t learning any of the lessons that led to the loss in 2016. The majority of people don’t want to be harassed, screamed at or labeled bigots and racists for holding even uncontroversial personal beliefs. The perpetual outrage is driving normal people to turn off the white noise. Maybe parents want to watch a Disney movie with their kids without having to make their way around an anti-Trump picket march much less be subjected to reviews about Dumbo being safe for kids for not containing racist elements. What on earth would possess Vice Magazine to think that it did?

Democrats alienating GOP voters is a given – after all they are deplorable. Yet for more centrist leaning Democrats, the rattlesnake snapping tail of its left must be causing consternation for a growing number of supporters about whether the party embodies any of the reasons they back it in the first place. The infighting is becoming all too self-evident.

Just think of 28-yo Socialist Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in NY deposing an incumbent Democrat Joe Crowley. She turned on Senator Kirsten Gillibrand on her resounding  nomination win saying, “Unsurprising, but disappointing that @SenGillibrand didn’t even bother to talk to nor consider me before endorsing…You‘d think a progressive leader would at least be interested in how a no-corporate money Bronx Latina triggered the 1st NY-14 primary in 14 years on prog issues.” yet Gillibrand tweeted about Kavanaugh, “President Trump just announced Brett Kavanaugh as his nominee to the Supreme Court. One thing’s already clear from his record: He can’t be trusted to safeguard rights for women, workers or to end the flow of corporate money to campaigns.It is comical.

CM has said repeatedly til blue in the face that the best thing about a Trump win in 2016 is that it has woken people up to how much the vote counts. It doesn’t matter how racist, sexist, nationalist, disgusting or bigoted some may find him or his supporters, the reality is that decades of neglect by both parties has led to his creation. In spite of all the negative media calling into question his intelligence he is still the president and he is likely to get his SCJ picked. Doesn’t sound that incompetent? His opponent had the entire MSM on board, happily hid the fact she had the questions ahead of the debate, hijacked her own party, stole a nomination, buried evidence against her, financed a fake dossier, weaponised the FBI, had her hubby have a chance meeting on a tarmac with the AG ahead of the verdict on her emails and treated the election as a coronation and still lost. Incompetence? If it means enough to a majority of Americans they can exercise their opinions democratically.

If enough people detest his presidency they can cut him off at the knees by restricting his ability to govern at the mid terms and turf him out in 2020. They don’t need to protest on the streets or shout the average punter down. People get the issues. It is on a 24-7 news cycle. They want to vote in peace.

Ironically the Democrats only help him achieve his cause. Some say the mainstream media gave him a $5bn free media campaign in the lead up to the election. One would imagine he gets $10bn in free media every six months now – his tweets are global and when a London Mayor allows a Trump baby balloon to fly around London when POTUS visits only adds to how pathetic the grandstanding has got. A bigger reflection on the juvenile standards of the left than easily winning debates with reason, data and logic.

His defeat is a tragically simple affair – stop giving him hot air and he’ll plummet to earth. Imagine how many XXXX’s Democrats could give to the deplorables then. Sadly Trump is too good for ratings!