It’s always been problematic defining infinity; the imponderable scale of it makes it virtually impossible. Well, The Volatilian™ has found what it believes is as accurate a definition as it’s possible to make. Infinity is the size of the arrogance of the main stream liberal media to the power of its bias times its hypocrisy. Thus, I = Abh, where the value of A is limitless, b is without limit and h is beyond all limits.
The latest application of this algebra comes from the inappropriately named The Independent, a UK-based newspaper whose readership numbers are in inverse proportion to its Abh quotient. Its dwindling circulation figures – brought about by a gross lack of reader interest and an end-2014 trading loss of US$7.2 million – forced it to scrap its print edition in February and take its chances online. Its sister paper, the “proudly liberal” (its words) Independent on Sunday, folded completely.
The entire history of this paper from whoa to go spans just 30 years. During that time ownership passed from Sir Anthony O’Reilly who in 2014 filed for personal insolvency in a court in the Bahamas – that way he could get protection from his creditors (banks and such) under Bahamian bankruptcy law – to Russian oligarch, Alexander Lebedev, a former official in the KGB.
So there’s the background. But its lack of stature among its peers has resulted in a Napoleon complex of untreatable proportions; and to confirm that diagnosis we draw attention to a 10 September article penned by online deputy managing editor, Sean O’Grady; also apparently the paper’s motoring correspondent. This atrocious piece of blogging reads like it was babbled into a dictaphone by someone in a straight jacket. It is one of the most haughty, prejudiced, ill-researched, inaccurate, sanctimonious rants we have ever had the displeasure of reading. Read it yourself, we’d welcome a second opinion.
The headline to this article refers to “dictators, like Rodrigo Duterte…”. And it’s all downhill from there. O’Grady, who couldn’t possibly have gained his insights by actually stepping foot in the Philippines – but then that’s not exactly a first for lofty London correspondents such as himself – then goes on to lambast the Philippines president for insulting “the most powerful man on God’s earth; President Obama…”. (The Volatilian™ will bite its lip and not respond to that piece of treacly sycophancy).
To continue. He refers to “the damage done by Duterte to his own nation and people … political and geopolitical damage … is the real problem with Duterte the buffoon”. He categorises him with “despots and dictators”, putting him in the company of Musolini, Kim Jong-un, his dad, Kim Jong-Il, Hitler (of course), Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, Castro, Ceausescu, Emperor Bokassa, Mugabe and Stalin. “Nutters, the lot of ‘em,” O’Grady continues, “and Duterte, a modest adornment to the pantheon of monsters, falls easily into the stereotype”. Elsewhere, a picture caption refers to “Mass-murder advocate Duterte”.
All that’s par for the course as far as the liberal-enslaved, main stream foreign media is concerned. They have their consensus view of Duterte and that’s the party line they will continue to toe. And of course, facts don’t matter any more than balance does.
As an illustration, O’Grady tears into Duterte for being homophobic – according to him a “common ideological theme” he and all the other names on his list share.
Really, O’Grady? The man who has repeatedly condemned discrimination against the Philippines LGBT community – a community that turned out in force to have him elected – is in your view, a homophobe? The first President of the Philippines to say he would consider legalising same-sex marriage and who supports allowing LGBT people to serve their country in the military; he’s homophobic by your definition? The father who told the nation from a TV talk show that if his son came out as gay he would have no issue with it. That “everyone deserves to be happy”. Is he the O’Grady homophobe stereotype?
And does any of that actual fact, as opposed to the cant spewed throughout this article, in any way jive with the likes of Hitler and Pol Pot and Mugabe? Only a bigot from the fashionable Left Wing Academy of Partisan Intolerance could make a connection like that. But then that – not journalism – is his real job. The Independent is no more independent than Liberals are liberal-minded. Their definition of freedom of expression actually means freedom to express their views. No other. No surprise then that Obama would be his poster boy.
What this article also does, however, is heap derision on the 15,970,018 Filipinos who trooped out to elect Duterte to office with a landslide 38.9% of the vote. And since his election he’s gained a 91% trust rating from his people – close to double Obama’s approval rating. They, then, are responsible for putting a Hitler clone in Malacañang. The implication from that is that the vast majority of the Philippine electorate must be barbaric.
But, of course, this article was intended for them; this was written for the glee club of latte-lapping lefty Libs in the pampered ghetto of the mainstream media and the politicos and NGOistas whom they fawn after, doe-eyed and dutiful.
Let’s briefly return to mathematics – from algebra to simple arithmetic this time. In June 2015, seven months before it finally closed its print edition, The Independent’s daily circulation was 58,000 copies. – that figure represents 0.36318055496243024% of the Filipinos who made Rodrigo Duterte their president. That’s the measure of O’Grady’s Napoleonic arrogance in this piece.
Unlike Mr O’Grady, the writer of this article will never be writing about cars; he’s not qualified. Unlike Mr O’Grady he’ll stick to writing about the things he does know about.
The good news is that if this e-rag continues to put out pieces as inaccurate and blatantly self-serving as that one, it won’t be too long before it ends up the way of its previous incarnation.