This week we have gems from George Monbiot, the BBC, Abu Qatada, Charlie Brooker, Hugo Chavez, the UN and of course, the tin foil hat tyrants of Tehran...
The poor old Simpsons pushed those Iranians too far...
The poor old Simpsons pushed those Iranians too far...
Dane Vallejo
By Dane Vallejo

on 10 February 2012 at 11am
1 2 3 4 5

total rating of 3.67


Sponsored Message: Support The Commentator

Welcome to the first of what will be a weekly column, looking back at the last seven days of left-wing madness -- all with a good dose of humour. You won't agree with all of the points -- but that's half the fun! Some will be a few lines long, others, a few paragraphs; all will have the aim of demonstrating what a crazy world we live in. Give it a try and if your point of view clashes, well...you know where the comment box is!

Now, let's start with that Monbiot character...

1. If you’re reading this, you’re probably stupid…according to the Guardian

George (Moonbat) Monbiot: two (three) words guaranteed to get your back up if ever there were any.

He’s excelled himself this week. Not content with being part of the “science is over” crowd – a bats**t mental gang who can’t (won’t) understand that the fact that there has been no net global warming since 1998 shows that the science is all over the place – he’s now come out and said in a full length article in the Guardian that, in the main, people on the right are essentially stupid.

No really. Here’s what he said: “…we have been too polite to mention the Canadian study published last month in the journal Psychological Science, which revealed that people with conservative beliefs are likely to be of low intelligence.”

If you’re going to call people stupid you’d better have some pretty good evidence to back it up. After all, if the “study” you base your arguments upon ends up being trashed as a pile of total cobblers, you’re playing with egg perilously close to your face.

Indeed, the ability to discern the strengths or weaknesses, in anything purporting to be analysis, George, is a key determinant of your own analytical prowess.

So, here’s what Dr. William M. Briggs, Adjunct Professor of Statistical Science at Cornell University said about Monbiot’s “study”. He described it as, “A contender for the worst use of statistics in an original paper ever”.

How embarrassing.

Now I won’t get sucked into an argument on the grounds of ‘my right-wing father is more intelligent than your left-wing mother’ (the feminists will love that one). But if we look at the evidence over the second half of the 20thcentury – and specifically the big political-intellectual standoff of that time – the right hasn’t done too badly in demonstrating its intellect, by essentially being…well, right.

Listen…can you hear that? Shhh; there. That’s the sound of all and sundry on the left propelling their feet as fast as they’ll carry them over the hill with their spears and swords aloft. Because I am, of course, talking about the stand-off between liberal-democratic capitalism and socialist totalitarianism.

True, there has been a major question about values to contend with in all of this. But as our current economic woes will testify – which the left will tell you are the fault of capitalism when really they've been largely caused by bad state regulation, excessive government spending and the related debt crisis – it was also a matter of your analytical and intellectual abilities.

So, when you think about it, it actually shows you to be rather stupid, George. There; I said it.

2. Where did we put that kryptonite?

On hearing that EXTREMIST (more on that later) Abu Qatada was granted bail by Mr Justice Missing (sorry, Mitting), did anybody else sit back and imagine poor old Abu dressed as Lois Lane, clinching on to a red-caped European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) for dear life as he was flown away from the Lex Luthorian axis of British justice and Daily Mail readers?

Of course not. The whole thing’s an utter shambles. Not to mention the fact that Abu Qatada dressed as Lois Lane is a bile-inducing mental image -- apologies on that front.

Peter Oborne, no lefty of course, yesterday defended the Churchill-inspired ECHR, going as far as to say that, “there is no institution…more British than the European Court of Human Rights”. In one sense he’s right. Trial by jury, habeas corpus, free speech, a strict separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive – all principles which Britain ought to be very proud of.

But there’s one critical difference: Churchill championed these principles in an era better balanced by responsibility. Sadly, today, all we hear is the entitlement end of the bargain.

The distortion was painful enough when it was destructively exposed during the summer riots. But it is utterly unbearable when the subject in question is a man like Abu Qatada who, not only has no desire to play his part in bettering our nation, but is effectively waging war against it.

Which leaves us here: trapped in a legal nightmare where progressivism and international law have a stranglehold over common sense and decency; where a majority culture has been ripped to shreds by the new liberal establishment to the point where it is synonymous with oppression.

Qatada has cost the taxpayer an alleged £1 million in benefits, prison costs and legal fees. Enough is enough. The very least we can do is put him on trial immediately. Failing that, you can fly from London to Amman for around £200 – anyone for a whip round?

3. Got a TV? Pay for the licence? Then you’re paying for this…

Meanwhile, old Auntie has been up to her tricks again. ‘Don’t call Qatada an extremist’ BBC managers are alleged to have told reporters; it’s a ‘value judgement’ you see.

Crivens! The Beeb couldn’t possibly show anything other than total impartiality now, could they?

…Except of course on the EU.

…And the NHS.

…OK, and Israel-Palestine.

…Oh, and don’t forget climate change.

…And I suppose you’d have to lump the Labour party in there too.

…We could be here for a while…

4. Dumbogeddon, Charlie? You said it

Also in the Guardian this week – a paper which loses something like £100,000 daily – in an article called ‘When the Daily Mail calls rightwingers stupid, the result is dumbogeddon’, Charlie Brooker allowed the following to fall unceremoniously out of his brain:

“The print edition of [the Daily Mail] is edited by Paul Dacre, who is regularly praised by media types for knowing what his customers want, and then selling it to them. This is an extraordinary skill that puts him on the same rarefied level as, say, anyone who works in a shoe shop. Or a bike shop. Or any kind of shop. Or in any absolutely any kind of business whatsoever.”

Now, if that’s the extent of the complexity the left sees in marketing and selling a product -- or indeed, in business more generally -- is it any wonder they’re not to be trusted with the economy?

5. UNfit for purpose

In what is perhaps this week’s least surprising story, the UN has once again demonstrated its consistency – in consistently failing, that is.

That’s right; in a vintage display of diplomacy, China and Russia were able to park their sizable, twin-veto-charged buses smack bang in the middle of the road to Damascus exposing thousands more to ominous futures.

But it’s OK. A cursory glance back to those evil interventionist hawks, Bush and Blair, ought to remind us that things could be a whole lot worse. Better we do things properly even if it means letting thousands die rather than intervene in some shape or form without the i’s dotted and the t’s crossed. A victory for democracy then; isn’t that right Guardian readers?

And, of course, the Russians, wishing to bring the curtain down on the use of sanctions in the Security Council, will be satisfied at their latest tug on the rope – not to mention the fact that they can continue blissfully selling arms to their Syrian client. Happy days in Moscow too then.

So…winners all round really.

Well, unless you count the Syrians at Assad’s mercy that is.

But, of course, any whining at Russia and China for trimming down the interventionist muscle that the Security Council has built up over the past couple of decades is futile. After all, it’s the way it’s designed; they’re entitled to their veto.

You know what they say – if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. If it is…well, maybe best to scrap it altogether.

NEXT PAGE FOR HUGO CHAVEZ AND HIS CHILD SOLDIERS