Vax-Mania

The Covid vax will soon become de rigueur for Australian babies and infants, aged six months to five years. The FDA has approved Pfizer and Moderna vaccines for this voiceless cohort in the U.S. population and our TGA is busying away going through the motions before giving Moderna a tick here.

Interesting, isn’t it. At the same time that the federal government and state governments continue to push Covid vaccines, and multiple boosters, on healthy people and children, and shortly on babies and infants, to “save” them, antiviral drugs to combat those catching Covid are severely restricted.

And who are they restricted to? Well, according to a report in yesterday’s Australian newspaper, to people over 65 who have two additional risk factors (obesity, immunosuppression, cancer, cardiovascular disease, dementia, cerebral palsy and other debilitating conditions) and to people over 75 with at least one additional risk factor.

In other words, when it comes to treatment, those at risk from the virus, and in fact only those at risk, are identified. But, when it comes to vaccines, that considered policy goes out the window. Why is that? In a hyphenated word, Vax-mania. (Mania; to wit, a type of mental abnormality or obsession; e.g., kleptomania, tulipmania.)

This particular Vax-mania condition has its origins in drug company profits, in attendant lobbying efforts, and in the eagerness of the political class to impose saving solutions, for real or imagined ills, on their needy and grateful populations. And, by the way, populations in need of nanny governments and ready to be grateful predominate these days. No shortage is evident. God has been replaced. Only pockets of populations retain an independent, self-reliant, temperament. Smaller pockets still think God is more powerful and life-giving than governments.

So, there we have it. Roll up your sleeves and be damned grateful. De-pram your baby and offer him or her up to the government medicos to be “saved.” Saved – from nothing at all. From an imaginary threat. Never mind peons, be thankful to your government and full of grate.

Leftism. A misbegotten perverted offspring of Christianity?

Leftism is a great evil. Built on lies to serve an agenda; led by a lust for power over others. The Devil’s spawn perhaps. But if so, has it always lurked within human societies; since the dawn of time? A question to which I have no answer. I’m no historian of antiquity. Three of us were discussing this over coffee this morning. I guess not many people in our immediate vicinity were discussing similar topics. Neutral Bay; they probably voted for or preferenced Kylea Tink.

Rafe Champion, one of our number, suggested that the rot might have set in with the French Revolution. I mentioned Thomas More’s Utopia, written in 1516. Christianity came up. No one mentioned Marx by the way; a Johnny-come-lately.

As a Christian, I find the concession uncomfortable, but the sharing and caring emphasis in the Bible lends itself to a perverted recipe for an ideal civil society. Tellingly, William Temple (1881-1944), later Archbishop of Canterbury, wrote in 1908: “The alternative stands before us – socialism or heresy.” Then and now, it’s not hard to find socialists among Christian clergy; maybe, hard not to in my experience. The current Pope is a prime example, as to a large extent is Justin Welby. Welby’s a fan of so-called “inclusive capitalism”; for this term, without going too far wrong, read Klaus Schwab’s “stakeholder capitalism.”

I had a look at the question of Christianity and socialism a little while ago. You can read it here if you want to spare the time. Sufficient to say, you can’t find support for socialism in the New Testament. Sure, for voluntary sharing; cheerful giving. Not for socialism. But then that’s reading what the Bible actually says; not imputing a spin to suit an agenda.

To segue, the Bible is clear that marriage is between a man and a woman. That sex outside marriage is fornication and sinful. That homosexual acts are sinful. Then you have a majority of bishops at the recent Anglican church’s general synod preventing an affirmation that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Once again you see, an agenda trumps what the Bible actually says. So far as I know, no priest has yet said, “the alternative stands before us, support same sex marriage or be a heretic.” But the way things are going don’t rule it out.

I got a feelin’ that socialism sprang out of Christianity. Being of a religious persuasion I don’t find that surprising. Why wouldn’t the Devil use scripture for his purposes.

Feminism will do us in

If countries extend their reliance on coal in response to the war, then “we are cooked,” Mr Kerry reportedly said to the BBC. Dog bites man, kind of report. Where? At yet another climate-change conference, this time in Bonn to prepare for COP27 in Egypt. Much high-octane flying to get there, no doubt.

I was struck by this in the same report:

Mr Kerry’s call was echoed by a leading Ukrainian scientist who urged delegates to speed up their transition away from fossil fuels. Dr Svitlana Krakovska said oil and gas were the “enablers of war”.

Evidently, Dr Krakovska has not heard of the battles of Tours, Hastings, Trafalgar, Blenheim, not to mention hundreds of others, including Marathon in 490 BC. None, I believe, took advantage of oil or gas. It is so silly on a number of levels. But take it at face value. It means that those countries which dispense with oil and gas are fair game for conquest and enslavement by those who don’t. By the bad guys. As a Ukrainian, she should bring to bear all of her brainpower and think Russia.

Krakovska’s views are archetypally feminine. Not referring to her sex but to her temperament. The same temperament as Kerry’s. The same Kerry who wants to deal again with the Devil; to wit, Iran.

These people, the so-called Western elites, like the Davos crowd, will do us in; as the unrefined Eliza Doolittle might put it. Feminism [edit: s/be Too much femininity] will do us in. The bad guys aren’t feminine. The hairy-arsed Taliban aren’t feminine. Putin and Xi Jinping aren’t feminine and don’t lead feminine regimes. Sorry more so-called toxic masculinity wouldn’t go astray in the West, if we are to survive. Feminism [edit: s/be Femininity] is an essential and beneficial part of civil society, don’t get me wrong; but it can only thrive inside fortifications. As Colonel Jessup put it.

Son, we live in a world that has walls, and those walls have to be guarded by men with guns. Who’s gonna do it? You [elsewhere, “in your faggity white uniform”]?

Re-education: The commies can learn from us

I was with two friends on Friday over coffee. Re-education came up as it applies to communist China and the Uyghurs; to communist regimes generally. I thought, hello, we Australians have been subjected to massive re-education campaigns for some considerable time.

Of course, re-education is to do with replacing truths, or at least the pursuit of them, with lies to serve a political agenda. Think of the lie that Australia was invaded rather than settled. That the indigenous inhabitants formed nations. That there was ever a possibility of such technologically and culturally primitive and sparsely populated nomadic tribes ever being able to hold onto Australia. That there was ever a better outcome, out of all possible outcomes, than settlement by the British.

The lies go on and have gotten into schools. Who doesn’t believe in the lie of the so-called Stolen Generations? Hardly anyone. This is despite Keith Windschuttle’s masterly and scholarly debunking of the fabrication in his book, The Fabrication of Aboriginal History (Vol 3). Oh, Rudd apologised for it; it must be true. You notice how Peter Dutton got out of absenting himself from the Parliament on the fateful day. It was a mistake, he said. He couldn’t be there while Aboriginal children were still being abused dreadfully.

A lie on a lie, I suspect. He knows that there was no systematic removal of part-Aboriginal children from their families. He knows that good people who took neglected children into care have been unfairly maligned. Yet, he has to live the lie to survive. A pretty powerful and successful re-education campaign, I’d say.

Then, to segue, there’s Covid. Has there ever been anything like it? Healthy people prevented from leaving home; working, visiting infirm relatives and the like. But that’s not it. What’s it is that healthy people were persuaded to like being locked up. Voted back in politicians, who locked them up, with increased majorities. And the vaccines. No proof at all that they work. How many obese people with other comorbidities – the only cohort at material risk – did the vaccines save. Who knows? We are not told. I suspect none. Yet parents are apparently getting their healthy 5- to 11-year-olds jabbed to counter a non-existent threat. A bloke at lunch moved away from me last month because he discovered I was not vaccinated. The well-known fact that vaccinated people catch the virus and pass it on does not negate the power of the re-education campaign.

Finally, to climate change. Talk to anyone. Or most anyone. Not only do they believe that we are at existential risk from climate change, despite the evidence that natural disasters are causing much less harm than they ever did, but that we can do something about it. Tell them that China spews out 26 or 27 times more CO2 than Australia and is busily building many new coal-power stations. Talk to the wall. The remaining neurons in their brains shut down. Re-education complete.

The commies can learn a thing or two from us. I suspect those living in China, in the Soviet Union in the past, in North Korea, develop an immunity. A sledgehammer approach, obvious and ludicrous propaganda, might not be as effective as the more subtle techniques employed by our betters. Anyway, the proof is in the puddin. Look around you and despair. Six teals, empty-heads, deluded women, were voted in. My next-door neighbour, an otherwise sensible person, voted for one, she tells me.

One way to put it is that we are living in a society moulded by lies. Lies everywhere. The Father of Lies must be chortling, in his own demonic way.

No likely comeback for Libs in teal seats

Six so-called teals (=Climate 200) candidates defeated sitting Liberals. Here are the first-preference numbers to date with around 80 percent plus or minus of votes counted.

Curtin (WA)

Celia Hammond (Lib) 42.4%

Kate Chaney (teal) 30.0%

Labor / Greens 22.1%

Goldstein (Vic)

Tim Wilson (Lib) 41%

Zoe Daniel (teal) 35.3%

Labor / Greens 17.7%

Kooyong (Vic)

Josh Frydenberg (Lib) 42.9%

Monique Ryan (teal) 41.5%

Labor / Greens 12.2%

Mackellar (NSW)

Jason Falinski (Lib) 41.9%

Sophie Scamps (teal) 38.8%

Labor / Greens 13.4%

N. Sydney (NSW)

Trent Zimmerman (Lib) 38.1%

Kylea Tink (teal) 25.9%

Labor / Greens 29.5%

Wentworth (NSW)

Dave Sharma (Lib) 41.1%

Allegra Spender (teal) 36.3%

Labor / Greens 18.2%

Two things to note. First, in each case the Libs scored more first-preference votes than their teal opponents. That’s good I suppose. But, second, the combined votes of the teals, Labor and the Greens well overwhelmed the Lib vote in each case. All told, there seems little hope that the Libs can come back; certainly, while climate change hysteria holds sway.

A taste of the future: teal-like Zali Steggall in Tony Abbott’s old seat of Warringah improved her position. From 43.5% of first preferences in 2019 to 45.2% this time around. The Lib vote declined from 39% to 34%.

It makes it so much harder for the Coalition to win back government when seven blue-ribbon Liberal seats are gone for the foreseeable future.  Well-heeled people (women in particular by all accounts) in swanky suburbs leading the country down the road to fewer jobs and energy poverty. Not to worry, they’ll be fine.

UAPs. No, not Clive’s lot

With the depressing election, and what not, my mind turned away, to almost anything of light relief. Lo and behold a U.S. House committee was being informed by the Pentagon of UFO sightings by military personnel, all 400 of them apparently in this century. Also, for you UFO spotters out there, they’re now called Unidentified Aerial Phenomena or UAPs. I guess that English is the international language of space talk, as it is in other international spheres, so UAP is probably now a global term.

One downer was a navy official saying that investigators are “reasonably confident” that the floating pyramid-shaped object captured on one leaked, widely seen video, were likely drones. I don’t know why the plural. That’s the way it was reported by American ABC News. In any event, yeah, OK, but what about the other three-hundred and ninety-nine sightings?

Certainly, the Democratic Chairman of the House Intelligence, Counterterrorism, Counterintelligence, and Counterproliferation Subcommittee, André Carson was far from reassured. “UAPs,” he said, “are a potential national security threat and they need to be treated that way.” If that’s the case, why can’t they just shoot one out of the sky? We’d have wreckage to examine, maybe.

Perhaps there are secret video tapes. But when I tune in to Tucker Carlson, who loses his admirable common sense when it comes to this subject, yet again I see pictures of smudges. Are the cameras on US military planes part of a job lot purchased from Dodgy Dan the camera man? Is there one clear picture anywhere? After all, I assume that the Europeans, the British, the Russians and Chinese air forces have all spotted UAPs. Do they take better pictures? How about Japan? They make very good cameras.

Bring of a religious turn of mind, I think some of the sightings might be angels. Admittedly, there is no evidence for this. But they do apparently flit around ephemerally and indistinctly at unimaginable speeds. Angels could do that I think, not bound by or shaped by the material world in which we exist. It’s a theory. Not really falsifiable; and I’m not pinning any hopes on it.

Another theory is the flying saucer theory. This goes along the lines of there being so many sightings that some must originate from another planet. Of course, this betrays a lack of logic. Four hundred false sightings do not make the four hundred and first sighting any more likely to be genuine. In fact, it seems safer to assume in context that if there is a plethora of false sightings, that they are all false. By false I mean that the objects, or whatever, sighted have not been propelled earthwards by intelligent and engineeringly advanced beings from another planet.

It’s a quite a different thing to absolutely rule out flying saucers. I mean there might be intelligent beings out there in the cosmos. Personally, I ‘m not convinced. However many trillions of planets are out there, if the chance of intelligent life emerging is, say, the chance of an ape typing out Hamlet inside a week or two, then there are far too few planets to make it even barely possible.

But I don’t know what the odds are of intelligent life emerging on any given planet – and neither do scientists – so I have to concede the logical possibility of such life existing outside of earth. Assuming, safely I think, that intelligent life does not inhabit planets like Mars or Jupiter in our solar system, then the nearest planetary system is Alpha Centauri, about 4.3 light years away. That’s a very long way away. Over 25 trillion miles.

Beings clever enough to send craft over such distances, and cleverly avoid capture or being clearly photographed when here, might be a threat if they were so minded. And pigs might also fly. My assumption is that that the so-called sightings are either man-made objects or tricks of light or camera malfunctions or angels. Flying saucers, you gotta be kidding.  Tell it to Tucker Carlson.

Moderates versus Airheads. Like versus like?

Ten little nondescripts trawling for some votes. Nine didn’t make the grade then there was one. My federal electorate is North Sydney, where Trent Zimmerman is the sitting member. Yes, I know, I have your sympathies. There are ten candidates for the seat, including Trent.

I have seen Trent twice on the hustings. Once outside Woolworths supermarket, once outside Coles. He cuts a lonely figure, I think. No adoring crowds. He had a young Liberal Party wannabe with him the first time, two the second. I recall Zali Steggall flooding a shopping centre with twenty to thirty tee-shirted supporters in 2019. I haven’t seen Kylea Tink out and about but I imagine she comes replete with many useful tee-shirted idiots.

If I had to take a guess, I’d say Trent is in trouble. Warringah, were Zali did her thing against Tony Abbott, abuts North Sydney. Same kind of people. Same susceptibility to idiotic thinking. It’s hard to take in if you’re still in charge of your senses. But a great body of people in inner-city electorates think that bush fires and flooding would be quelled if only Australia did more to tackle climate change. Should such people get the vote? Obviously not. They are seriously delusional and need psychological treatment. It doesn’t matter, when so many are delusional, they don’t stand out; instead, they vote in delusional airheads.

Suffering under a delusion myself; that is, that my vote matters, I pour over the candidates. My strategy is to vote Lib Dems 1, One Nation 2, UAP 3, IMOP 4 (by the way that’s the anti-vax Informed Medical Options Party), Libs 5 with Labor, the Greens and other climate catastropharians trailing the field. Kylea’s number 10.

I figure my vote will eventually help Trent vis-a-vis Kylea. Though I’m not sure why I should care.

The poor conservative sods outside the polling booths looked from moderate to airhead, and from airhead to moderate, and from moderate to airhead again, but it was impossible to say which was which. Not quite true of course, but there’s no mistaking how far left and green the Libs have gone.

This then is the sad state of affairs. Thirteen female airhead candidates, supported by Climate 200. All contesting seats held by the Libs (9) or the Nats (3). The only exception, which isn’t an exception at all, is the seat of Hughes held by Craig Kelly (formerly a Lib now UAP). And the worst of it? This suggestion that those being challenged by the airheads are moderates. As though there is a whole other large cohort of hairy-chested Liberals standing up for freedom of speech, religious freedom, coal, truth, justice and the Australian way.

What is a moderate Liberal circa 2022? Answer, a Liberal.

Abortion and the Left’s Lies

You may recall Hillary Clinton getting into trouble in the run up to the 2016 election in the United States for referring to an unborn baby as, err, well, an unborn baby. A complete no-no for the Dems who need to consider an unborn baby to be a non-human, a fetus, so that it can be killed by being torn to pieces with good conscience.

Joe Biden has just gone further than Clinton by using the word “child” in context of abortion. I don’t think the Dems will fuss a great deal. He’s clearly beyond rationale thinking and will get a pass. I think he should get a pass. We make allowances for those in their dotage with muddled minds. It’s just that they’re not usually presidents.

Supposing that the leaked Supreme Court majority decision on abortion is genuine, which it seems to be. Then the limits or otherwise on abortion will go back to the individual states to determine. Or, the US Congress could legislate and see whether it survives challenge.

Having abortion rights being determined by legislation, federal or state, is clearly better than the Supreme Court, any court, inventing rights out of thin air; the current state of affairs. But it won’t at all heal the divide in the United States. The debate is not so divisive here because, unlike in America, few people believe in God. Human life is the product of evolution as are cockroaches; therefore, human life is much more dispensable here; provided, that is, we don’t have to actually see the awful deeds.

In America the division is stark.

On one side, human life, made by God, is precious whether it’s at its beginning or at its end.

On the other side, what I prefer to call the dark side, there is no human life until it emerges from a birthing- parent’s womb; a menstruating-person’s womb. The claim, which temporarily and tellingly abandons the language of woke, is that a “woman” has the right to decide what to do with her own body. Here’s Kamala Harris putting the case, stridently. It’s always put stridently to disguise its weakness.

The difficulty is that another body is involved long before he or she emerges from the womb. The unborn baby’s body. It never gets a mention. It doesn’t get a mention because it has to be ignored. “It is a woman’s right to kill the unborn baby inside her at any time she chooses,” isn’t a very sellable proposition. Yet, it is the truth of the pro-abortion position.

As we know, truth and the Left seldom coincide. An empire of lies defines the Left. Denying human life in the womb is just another one of those lies.

Now you don’t have to have an absolute view about abortion. Circumstances can alter cases. But how can you debate the matter with those who refuse to acknowledge that abortion takes away a human life. The truth is, you can’t. And they can’t. Their position is untenable. Ergo, they shout shrilly.

On getting the politicians “they” deserve

I missed the debate. I was out. I have it recorded, waiting to be watched. Do I really, really, have to watch it?

I met a neighbour who said she’d watched it; said it was very civil. And that the audience behaved. Even more reasons not to watch it. She didn’t mention the incident of Morrison saying he was blessed to have healthy children in sympathy with the lady who explained her child was autistic; which since triggered confected outrage among the usual suspects.

I did see a bit of Sky News aftermath. Apparently, Albo was pinned by ScoMo on boat turn-backs, but ScoMo erred by querying why the Labor Party always sided with China against Australia. The audience was polled and gave the debate to Albo by a short head. A more general take was that Albo won because he didn’t mess up. In other words, he won because he didn’t lose.

I don’t really care about the debates or who wins them; unless they’re entertaining, apropos a Donald Trump debate. They don’t alter the facts on the ground. The most important of which is that in recent years, leftist parties have lost their collective minds. Voting for modern Labor is not within cooee of voting for a Bob Hawke or Paul Keating. It’s voting for a resurrected Jim Cairns, made modern. Maybe that’s doing Jim a grave disservice.

George Orwell, in The Road to Wigan Pier, wrote that “one sometimes gets the impression that the mere words socialism and communism draw towards them with magnetic force every fruit-juice drinker, nudist, sandal-wearer, sex-maniac, Quaker, nature-cure quack, pacifist and feminist in England.” Orwell would be impressed to see how far the Left has come since 1936 in embracing faddish fetish causes. To pick one. The Victorian Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act 2021 is a poster child for new Labor.

Those who vote for Labor must either be unbalanced or have a morbid tribal attachment. However, even more disturbed must be those who vote for the Greens or for one of those dreadful refugee-loving, climate-hysterical, fringe parties or candidates. Climate 200 fits the bill perfectly.

One of its lower house candidates, numbering thirteen comely women, is contesting my electorate of North Sydney. She goes by the name of Kylea Tink. When I say I prefer dripping-wet Trent Zimmerman, you’ll understand how bad are her polices, or thought bubbles. She wants a 50 percent reduction in emissions by 2030 and net zero by 2040. No new gas or coal developments. The immediate release of all refugees held in detention in Australia; and so on into la-la land. And she might win.

The problem for the dwindling number of sane voters, of course, is that main-stream centre-right parties have also lost the plot. For example, virtue-signalling has eroded and replaced standing on principle. In microcosm we saw that when Morrison threw our SAS troops to the wolves, as he did with the man accused of raping Brittany Higgins. Presumption of innocence? What’s that when the baying mob must be appeased?

Examples on a policy level. On climate change, the government’s policies are only slightly less idiotic than are Labor’s. On defence, Labor will always tend to spend too little on defence but then the Libs spending is derisory and a shambles. So, we are effectively defenceless in either case, might as well spend extra money on free child care. On Aboriginal policy, instead of making the case for a unified cohesive Australia, the Libs pander to the cause of singling out Aboriginals for special treatment. Even if, for the moment, they are not onboard with constitutionally enshrined segregation.

In sum, while Labor into has moved into bizarre territory; the Libs are chasing after them. This couldn’t and wouldn’t happen without a seismic and generational loss of common sense among a majority of voters. Politics is truly downstream from culture. And “we” (us conservatives apart) are undoubtedly getting the politics and politicians we deserve. An unhappy thought. Meanwhile I’ll put Ms Tink last; try to find a UAP, or One Nation, or Lib Dem candidate to put first and, hold my nose, and put Zimmerman second.

When being far-right is just right

“Emmanuel Macron has won the first round of the French election and far-right rival Marine Le Pen will fight him for the presidency for a second time.” This extract is from the BBC.

“France’s incumbent leader Emmanuel Macron and far-right challenger Marine Le Pen are heading for an April 24 presidential election run-off.” This is an extract from the ABC.

“France voted on Sunday…to produce a runoff rematch between Emmanuel Macron and far-right leader Marine Le Pen.” This is an extract from the Australian newspaper. I could go on and on.

Notice how Marine Le Pen has to be tagged far-right. Irritating for those of us on the conservative right who suspect we too would be tagged far-right if we were important enough.

Luckily this time around,Eric Zemmour, even further right because he opposes the Islamisation of France with even more vigour than Le Pen, gives Le Pen some protection from the globalist scolds occupying the media. Though not much. And now that Zemmour is out, all guns can be turned on “far-right” Le Pen.

Look, two sins to begin with: she wants French law to have primacy over Europe legislation and she opposes wind farms and wants more support for nuclear energy. And, a third, on immigration, she wants France to control its own immigration policies; to decide who can stay and who must leave. Echoes of far-right John Howard there.

It’s clear. If you’re for America first; or, in this case, for France first; in other words, if you are a patriot; like, say, Viktor Orban, you are, by definition, far right. How delicious to picture the Europhiles squirming when seeing Orban re-elected. Hungary for Hungarians. What, not for allowing in hordes of culturally discordant asylum seekers? What perfidy is this?

From now, I intend to describe myself as far right, if I think it will upset any lefties in sight. I’ll just slip it in. “Yes, well, you know, I happen to be far right, just like Viktor Orban.”

Conservatives, and perhaps only conservatives, know that the preservation of freedom depends on the integrity of the nation state. Of course, there are now grave threats from within. That’s no reason to add to them from abroad. It’s no mischance that Europhiles, globalists, collectivists, Marxists, greenies, open-border creeps, despise national borders. They despise individual freedom.