Not only defend female sex offenders, they provide a platform for defence

So here's a woman who had sex with an underage boy and complains that he seduced her.

I don't know what's worse, the media portraying her as the victim, or the fact that she's being given a platform on which to defend her actions on television BEFORE SHE'S EVEN GONE TO TRIAL!

Any other country that'd be considered tampering with a potential jury, unless of course there won't be a jury, in which case she (or her lawyers) are trying to garner public sympathy.

Summing up the US Presidential election

It seems like the whole world is involved in the current election, but the whole thing seems to be able to be summed up in what I thought was a brilliant summary of why the media hates Trump (paraphrased because I don't have the exact wording):

"They fear that Trump might be the kind of politician that Hillary has already proven that she is"

So far, from what I've seen, the whole Pro-Hillary argument is (and my comments in italics):

• She's served in government for a very long time - she's worked very little in the private sector;
• She knows lots of people and can work with them - she's brokered deals that got her foundation lots of money, sometimes against the national interests of people both US and foreign;
• She can make the country better through working hard - if she's so great, then why has the last 8 years seen the doubling of the US debt with no clear direct change;
• She's never assaulted any women - although she's allegedly threatened enough of the women who have been allegedly assaulted by her husband; and
• She's better and more reliable than Trump as a government worker - better the devil you know, I guess

The whole Pro-Trump argument is (again, comments in italics):

• He's a successful business man - who has seen companies go bankrupt before;
• Hillary is crooked - no arguments here, but I've bothered to watch Clinton Cash;
• Hillary isn't healthy enough - which apparently is sexist when you question her health, but was ok when McCain was running;
• He says what everyone is thinking - which isn't always a good thing to have, sometimes the person in power needs to have the wisdom and self-control to steer people out of emotional waters;
• If we keep voting for the establishment candidate, we'll get more of the same - this is the big question, is it better the devil you know because not all change is good; and
• Wikileaks failed to find anything worthy of posting about him - again, can't complain

All up, I'd have to say I wouldn't trust Hillary with anything, given that she's far to tainted to be trusted with ANY future office, let alone the top office.  It was a joke how little coverage any of the other democratic candidates got and how the media declared her winner before Bernie Sanders had even finished running.  Bernie had a lot more people on side than the media claimed and his loss really was a case of the Establishment deciding what's best for the voters, which is why there are so many anti-Hillary democrats.

Say what you will about Trump, but he was a lot like Sanders in that both were non-Establishment, both had the media against them at every turn, the difference was that Trump 's opponent didn't fight as dirty as Hillary did to win.

I don't agree with many things that the US does, I don't understand why mandatory voter ID is such a big issue as we have it here in Australia with no big issue (although it's more of a "give us your name and address") with ID only sometimes being requested.  Once you've received your blank ballot papers here, everything you do from then on is anonymous.

I even counted votes here for the last Federal election and the stuff people put on them included:

• John Snow for PM
• Trump for PM
• F**k you all, the last guy I voted for didn't win, the system is rigged

Admittedly this happened all over the place, but I noticed it quite a bit in the safe Labor (Democrat equivalent) seat.

I'm pro-Trump, not because I think that he's a great person, but because their country needs to do something different, because more of the same has nearly doubled their debt (from $10 trillion to almost $20 trillion) in eight years, because he cares about the economy and he's speaking to the people as one of the people and, more importantly, LISTENING to them.

Hillary acts like the Queen who is destined to rule and can do no wrong.  She speaks down to people, she laughs off things like breaking the law, dodgy pay-for-play deals and intimidates people.  The media has steered clear of almost ALL of her failings, yet amplifies any little thing Trump does wrong, which is a clear indication of who THEY want in power.  She comes with too much baggage and owes too many Establishment groups favours to do what's best for the people anymore.

She might surprise everyone and go against the establishment should she win, however I don't think she's going to turn her back on all of the groups that have helped get her elected, have made her rich and have helped get her out of political and legal binds (which you can bet would be put back on the table the moment she steps out of line).

You can bet your dollars that if the media desperately wants one candidate over the other, you probably want the other candidate.

Women are 12% angrier than men, but for good reason, apparently

So a new article has appeared in the left-wing media about how women are actually angrier drivers than men, but the media is quick to justify it.

Interesting to note that when people point out that when men have anger issues and that it's because they evolved to have higher testosterone to help them be more aggressive hunters/fighters people jump on it and say that we as a society should have evolved enough to control it.

Despite having lower testosterone, apparently women are given a pass for being angrier drivers.

Nothing to see here...

Back on board after a long hiatus

Well, it's been a while since my last post, which I've been away for several personal reasons.

But now I'm back on board and the topic of the next couple of weeks is going to be the US Election.

It's interesting how the media is portraying Trump in Australia, almost as though trying to build up global dislike for him on an international level, possibly in the hopes that Australians will tell (or at least apply pressure) their American friends how to vote.

That never really works as well as they think it will.