On ‘sh..hole countries’

 

On Mark Latham Outsiders Facebook page

Some facts about the world

The Trump controversy about “shithole countries” perfectly demonstrates how he has broken the PC-elitist hold on political debate.

Fact: some countries are shitholes, unfortunately.
Fact: effective immigration programs recruit highly-capable people from advanced, successful countries (just look at Melbourne’s Sudanese gang crime problem for the alternative approach).

Trump is simply being realistic about the situation. He’s also saying that immigration policies should be framed for the benefit of the people living in a country right now, not as some gift to the rest of the world.

Leftist elites are upset with Trump because they believe in a borderless world, where immigration is framed around owing the rest of the world something, instead of hard-headed national interests.

In truth, importing shithole people from shithole countries creates massive crime, welfare dependancy and dislocation problems for the nations that do it. That lesson is crystal clear from around the world.

The Left try to use PC as a way of shielding the public debate from these basic facts. It’s a cruel con-job on the folks without political power and access to decision-making.The Left live in nice leafy, gentrified suburbs where newly-arrived migrants from Third World countries can’t afford to live. Then these migrants are duck-shoved out to poorer suburbs, making them other people’s problems.

While the Left then virtue-signals about how “compassionate” they are. That’s how the loaded immigration debate works and, for too long, Australia has fallen for it.

Impeachment failing – why not scheduling?

Gerard Henderson’s article in today’s Australian is about America’s Left adopting the Soviet tactic of eliminating opponents by declaring them mentally unfit.  These are the interesting paragraphs:

[Michael] Wolff alleges that “one hundred per cent of the people around” Trump regard him as a “moron” and an “idiot”. And he quotes Steve Bannon, a disaffected former Trump adviser who was sacked last August, as saying that the President has “lost it”.

No surprise here. What is surprising is the entry into the debate of Yale University professor of psychiatry Bandy Lee. Last month, before the ­release of Fire and Fury, Lee ­addressed about a dozen members of congress on Capitol Hill. The names of the attendees have not been released.

Lee’s assessment was that Trump is “going to unravel”. In an interview, reported inPolitico, she said “the rush of tweeting is an ­indication of his falling apart under stress”.

Lee added: “Trump is going to get worse and will ­become incontrollable with the pressures of the presidency.” She is editor of The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump (Thomas Dunne Books, 2017), in which 27 psychiatrists and ­psychologists agree that the President is a clear and present danger to the US.

The line is that Trump should be removed from office under the constitution’s 25th amendment. This enables the Vice-President and a majority of cabinet members to advise the Senate and House of Representatives that the President is “unable to discharge the powers and ­duties of his office”. Whereupon the “Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and ­duties of the office as Acting President”.

It is an indication of the state of mind and competence of those 27 psychiatrists and psychologists that they have publicly diagnosed President Trump without examining him. But they are on the record. Let’s wait and see if they are right and, if not, whether there is a price to pay for their professional failure.

The pleasure of Trump’s win persists

One should not take pleasure in the pain of others. There are occasions, however, when one cannot suppress uncharitable feelings. Such is the case of the severe pain and discomfort the left are suffering over Donald Trump’s election to the office of president of the United States of America. That is especially the case when one sees clips of the leftist media laughing uproariously at the mere suggestion that Trump could win – as shown below. One can’t help admiring Ann Coulter’s composure at being laughed to scorn.

Roger Scruton comments on Trump’s victory

Roger Scruton, the world’s preeminent conservative philosopher, gave an analysis on BBC radio of what Donald Trump’s victory in the US elections means – for America and the world. Many conservatives would agree with him on most points of his analysis but would differ on his estimation of Trump’s political understanding and his ability to lead, which is low.

Some of us do not think his character so much worse than many people we meet in our daily lives. Trump’s fault is that he is more open and vulgar about it. To repeat the reply of many men and women to the charge of misogyny based on the ‘locker room talk’, Bill Clinton went one up on Trump by doing far more than verbally abusing women.

On the question of leadership and political understanding, there is no necessary logical connection between bad character and bad policy – something Scruton would readily admit. In fact, Trump has extensive experience in leadership and negotiation, all in the rough and tumble of business. Not a bad grounding.

Trump may not succeed as president of America, but nothing in his experience and character would seem to make him less fit than many who pursue a career in politics. Indeed, he would seem to have an advantage over most, for no other reason than that he understands his constituency and is not afraid to defend them.

 

Catholics’ crucial last minute support for Donald Trump

According to a Washington Times report, most Catholics did not decide their vote for Donald Trump until the last moment when ‘in one of the most profound demographic shifts’ witnessed in US elections many swung their support behind Trump. Exit polls showed that the crucial Catholic demographic went to Trump 52% against Hillary Clinton 45% while until then most surveys had shown Catholics solidly behind Clinton. What happened? Jay Richard, executive editor of the conservative Christian website The Stream, is quoted as saying that the ‘turning point’ came in the third debate when Trump’s pro-life stance contrasted dramatically with Clinton’s pro-choice stance.

There was not a Catholic that watched who could not remember the ghoulishness of Hillary Clinton when it came to partial-birth abortion and Trump’s impassioned commonsense defence of unborn human life. It was huge. Continue reading “Catholics’ crucial last minute support for Donald Trump”

A rare pleasure – the left suffers shock and awe

Somehow I was not surprised when Donald Trump stepped forward as a Republican candidate for the US presidency. Such an absurd and hopeless attempt to enter the political arena at the highest level was consistent with the brash, overconfident character I had seen on ‘The Apprentice,’ the television program that gave him an international profile.

But as the campaign continued and Trump wacked off one opponent after the other, I began to think his attempt may not be all that absurd and hopeless. Then between the bluster and his uncontained and undisguised rage at the leftist political establishment it became obvious (at least to many of us) that he was making a connection with the equivalent in America of what former Prime Minister Robert Menzies called the forgotten people. In this case, it was not just the working middle class but the blue-collar class that had been forgotten and with whom Trump was connecting. Continue reading “A rare pleasure – the left suffers shock and awe”