Category: Politics & economics

current state of the world, economic theory

Cathartic [not]

Reference was made in a previous post to the awful things the media are running to upset and nauseate us but at least they take our minds off other worries for the nonce. They might be said to be cathartic, except …

There are two things I saw last evening which cannot be unseen but first a quote from a reader at N.O. on the gay cake matter.

“Do you think this is the way to make us love buggery?” I had written.

Dfordoom replied:

It’s not intended to do that. They’ve gone way beyond that. The intention is to humiliate us. To force us to do things that are repugnant to us and to force us to pretend to believe in things that we know are wrong and absurd.

What they’re doing is demonstrating their power over us and reminding us that they won the culture wars. They want to make sure we know that there is nothing they cannot force us to do.


There are some words consistently misused – redundant is one and cathartic is another. Google says it means:


Well you know, though it be figuratively applied, it’s probably right to say that this lot below – linked to today’s insanity out there – does purge other worries, but that’s hardly a good thing.

All of us are worried about something, more often than not financial or even if that’s sorted, the syndicated media insists on bringing horrors to us. Certain things in the media are going to be mentioned in the post at 09:00 so maybe hold comment on this aspect till then.

# How the left do it – absurd over-payments to the favoured ones:…

It’s probably nothing …

Vox Day.

It is not “wishful thinking” to distrust the polls. Nor is there a “natural tightening up” of the polls as election day approaches. The entire polling industry is an exercise in attempted manipulation of public opinion. That’s why there is so much media attention focused on it.

The Podesta email doesn’t merely prove that the poll-doubters are right to be dubious about their credibility, but demonstrates, once more, that the conspiracy theory of history is the only one that can properly account for historical events.

Moreover, the media narrative claiming that Hillary’s win is inevitable is nothing more than the First Law of SJW in action:

A confidential memo allegedly obtained from Correct The Record, a Democratic Super PAC, reveals a plan to “barrage” voters with high frequency polls that show Hillary ahead in order to “declare election over,” while avoiding any mention of the Brexit vote (which completely contradicted polls that said Brexit would fail).


There was an analogy used before here and wish I could remember the comedy sketch but in a nutshell, the idea was:

Awkward man is invited to dinner party for maybe a dozen people and for some reason – either a cruel sense of humour or just a mongrel combination of circumstances – he is not taken by the hostess to the table in the large dining room but to a sideroom, as they’d ‘overbooked’ or had got the invitations wrong.

He had the invitation in his hand but it availed little. There were no chairs in the room because they’d taken them all to the main table. So he sat on the floor. Hostess now came through and apologized but would he care to eat while he was waiting? She’d brought him some bread, butter and water.

Hungry by now, he sat on the floor once she’d left and tucked in.…


#  Raedwald:

And these are not my conclusions but the findings of Dave’s Parliamentary colleagues. Last month the Foreign Affairs Committee published a report into Libya that was lost in the news noise.

They concluded that Cameron had personally taken a decisive role, had relied on flawed intelligence, and just didn’t understand what was going on in Libya …

# Gobsmackingly wrong:

A rational person might ask, why is the US government aggressively going after the soldiers themselves, who accepted a bonus to re-enlist and actually served again in a war, putting themselves in harm’s way, in good faith?

If there was active collusion to defraud it should be prosecuted, but if not, why make the soldiers pay the price?

If there is a problem why are they not addressing it with the local government officials who may have offered the bonuses in error to achieve the ends demanded by the powers that be in Washington?