Left-wing sting brings down right-wing government in Austria

Left-wing sting brings down right-wing government in Austria, by Phlip Oltermann.

Austria’s chancellor has been ousted in a no-confidence vote just a day after his centre-right party enjoyed a triumphant night in the European elections, after opposition politicians lost faith in his handling of a corruption scandal that has engulfed his former far-right coalition partner.

Austria’s ousted chancellor, Sebastian Kurz

The Ibizia scandal:

The German publications Der Spiegel and Süddeutsche Zeitung published a video on their websites last week that shows Heinz-Christian Strache, the [far-right Freedom party (FPÖ)] leader, and his parliamentary leader, Johann Gudenus, talking to an unidentified woman purporting to be the niece of a Russian oligarch about how she could invest in Austria.

During the six-hour meeting at a luxury resort on Ibiza, the woman expresses an interest in gaining control of the country’s largest-circulation tabloid, the Kronen Zeitung, to which Strache replies that after staff changes at the paper, it could help the FPÖ in its election campaign. A chain-smoking Strache is then filmed saying the woman would be able to gain access to artificially-inflated state contracts.

Strache resigned a day after the video’s publication, describing his behaviour as “stupid, irresponsible and a mistake”. The interior minister, Herbert Kickl, was sacked the following Monday, with Kurz accusing the FPÖ hardliner of failing to show the “required sensibility in dealing with the accusations”.

Who exactly organised the sting on the far-right remains the subject of fevered speculation in both Austria and Germany.

If the right elect stupid politicians who cannot keep their egos and corruption in check, the establishment will uncover them. They need to be smarter and better disciplined.

This sting operation is one of several in the last two years. In Australian we had a sting on One Nation over gun control.

Stings seem to have become a tactic the left is fond of employing, because they have the media power to fully exploit them. When the left get caught out in a sting the media downplay or ignore it, and there are few consequences. But when the right get caught in a sting, it can bring down a government.

Populists Shatter EU Status Quo With Strong Showing In Parliamentary Vote

Populists Shatter EU Status Quo With Strong Showing In Parliamentary Vote, by Tyler Durden.

Winning over 30% of seats, Eurosceptic parties and anti-establishment groups now control their largest bloc of votes since the first EU Parliamentary election in 1979. …

Though pro-European groups together maintain a clear majority, this broad grouping has become increasingly fragmented, which could complicate policy making, while a strong showing from eurosceptics will mount a serious challenge to the status quo. …

In the UK, which only opted to participate in the vote at the last minute as part of a can-kicking agreement with Brussels to extend the deadline for the UK’s departure from the EU, Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party won a plurality of votes (31.7%) – though liberal-leaning media outlets in the UK opted to spin the result as a victory for the “remain” camp, as the LibDems, Greens, SNP, Change UK and miscellaneous other parties won a combined 38%. …

However, analysts are skeptical that the eurosceptic groups will be able to overcome partisan squabbling and work together to form a pan-European coalition – which is the only way to exercise real influence within the European Parliament. They will also lose some of their support when the UK finally leaves the bloc (if that ever happens), and the UK’s 73 parliamentary seats are redistributed.

Marine Le Pen: Emmanuel Macron Should ‘Definitely’ Resign, But He ‘Has Neither the Honesty to Do It, Nor the Panache’

Marine Le Pen: Emmanuel Macron Should ‘Definitely’ Resign, But He ‘Has Neither the Honesty to Do It, Nor the Panache’, by Matthew Poole.

Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Rally party in France, in a Breitbart News exclusive interview on Monday called on French president Emmanuel Macron to resign the presidency, but said he is not honest or bold enough to recognize his worldview has been defeated.

In the United Kingdom, Le Pen noted, David Cameron stepped down as Prime Minister when the British people voted to leave the European Union back in 2016. And in 2019, Le Pen noted, Prime Minister Theresa May announced her plans to resign after the Brexit Party defeated her party and all others in the U.K.’s European Parliament elections. …

Marine Le Pen, 2005

Speaking through a translator via phone for the exclusive interview on Monday, Le Pen explained the victory and why she believes her party won, while Macron’s was defeated.

“There are two main reasons: One is a European reason, and the other is on a national basis. Macron, in the early stages of the campaign, presented himself as the leader of the European Union that the French people do not want anymore,” Le Pen said. “The European Union despises the people. The European Union protects unfair competition specifically with products coming from China. And more than anything, the European Union is fully open to immigration to the European Union that will be submerged.

“The second reason is a national reason. He established some policies, specifically on a fiscal level, that are particularly unjust and unfair to the popular classes, to the common person. For the past two years, he has displayed extreme arrogance and spite for the common people and the French people in general. What I and the list have been doing is explaining to the French people that the former divide between right and left wing does not exist anymore. And for the second time in a row, which means including the presidential election two years ago, the new divide is between the globalists and the nationalists. Twice in a row, this narrative that I have been explaining has become true and has been put in place by the vote of the French people.” …

“Globalism is a post-national spirit,” Le Pen said when asked to explain the differences between globalism and nationalism. “It carries a notion that borders must disappear, including the protection that such borders usually brings to a nation. It carries the concept that overwhelming markets decide about everything. This concept about globalism is pushed by technocrats that are never elected and they are the typical type of person who runs things in Brussels in the European Union. The people that believe in nations—the nationalists—it’s the exact opposite. They believe that nations are the most efficient way to protect national security, prosperity, and identity to make sure that people will prosper in the nations.”

Elite Contempt Is the Common Denominator in Populist Victories

Elite Contempt Is the Common Denominator in Populist Victories, by Caroline Glick.

The Brexit Party’s victory effectively ends the Conservative party’s monopoly on Britain’s political right for the first time in two hundred years. The Conservatives will respond to the trouncing in one of two ways. They can disintegrate completely by doubling down on outgoing Prime Minister Theresa May’s soft Brexit – with or without a second referendum — or they can start listening to their voters. …

Brexit, Trump, Israel, Australia, Europe:

One underlying issue is common in all of the elections. And until the progressive left and the establishment center right reconcile themselves to it, and find a respectful means to contend with it, they will continue to see populist forces grow stronger and win elections.

That issue is contempt. Throughout the Western world, beyond the economic issues and even beyond specific social issues like gay marriage or abortion rights, voters are motivated to vote for the populist, nationalist right in part due to their anger at the left and center-right’s undisguised contempt for them.

In the United States, the left’s snobbery reached its height with Hillary Clinton’s castigation of Trump’s supporters as “deplorables.” But her assertion wasn’t made in isolation. It was made in the midst of a general atmosphere in which Democratic politicians from Barack Obama to Nancy Pelosi and establishment Republicans felt comfortable putting down Americans who aren’t part of their club. Obama infamously referred to Clinton’s “deplorables” as “bitter” people in small towns who “cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”

The media, which serves as an extension of the Democratic Party and embraces NeverTrump Republicans as a means to attack Trump and his voters, continuously broadcasts contempt for both.

Likewise, according to Australian professor and media analyst Stan Grant, one of the decisive factors in Australia’s election was religion. A large swathe of the public developed a sense that Labor leader Shorten held them and their religious convictions in contempt. …

By adopting an attitude of contempt for them, Shorten, like Clinton and Obama and May and French President Emmanuel Macron insulted the voters. …

Globalization cuts both ways:

The rise of the populist/nationalist/ideological right throughout the West demonstrates that globalization cuts both ways. Members of the global progressive and center-right elite embrace the same post-nationalist, post-industrial, and post-Christian values and agendas at elite conferences in Brussels and New York, at the United Nations, on network news and online. But back in their home countries, those they disregard are also online and also talking. The disregarded majorities are also listening to one another.

The most potent message that crosses the world each day and empowers populists and nationalist conservatives is one of exasperation and anger at the transnational elites’ solidarity in their contempt for their people. …

“Democracy” is being redefined by the elite to mean what they want:

For European Unionists and British Remainers, for the Israeli elite and the American establishment, the globalization of their values and agendas has brought them to believe that democracy means fixing the rules of the game. Through judicial activism and bureaucratic regulations, through intellectual terror and public shaming, these elites seek to render election results inconsequential. Ballot boxes, in their view, are no match for the combined forces of the elite media and academia and the bureaucracy. They determine norms. They determine policies – in the name of Democracy.

But throughout the West, the “deplorables” are listening to one another and rediscovering their power and voices at the ballot boxes. They realize that democracy is a means for the people to determine their course in the world. The elite may control the discourse, but the people decide who will run their countries.

Tommy Robinson sulks after humiliating defeat in European elections

Tommy Robinson sulks after humiliating defeat in European elections, by Joe Roberts.

Tommy Robinson has hit out at being banned on Facebook and Twitter as he suffered a humiliating defeat in the European elections.

The former English Defence League leader, who was hit with several milkshakes during the campaign, played down his chances of winning while speaking at the count in Manchester.

He said he had faced a ‘near impossible task’ in attempting to win one of the eight seats available.

Robinson said it was not a fair campaign as he was unable to get across his message on social media platforms. ‘I am not allowed social media,’ he said. ‘I am not able to interact with the public.’

He added: ‘But more than anything every community I have gone to – every working class estate – I have so felt loved, (more) than I have ever felt in my life.’

Erdoğan’s Istanbul Nightmare

Erdoğan’s Istanbul Nightmare by Burak Bekdil (Gatestone Institute)

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan 2019 (cropped).jpg

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan
Photo: Wikipedia.org

Unbelievably, this is the man that Barak Obama said was, “His favorite foreign leader”.  On what basis, heaven only knows.

Much like Hitler fought Stalin – not over political philosophy, but rather “who would be in charge”, Erdogan fought ISIS. Not because he disagreed with ISIS’s leader, Al Baghdadi, but rather because Al Baghdadi had the temerity to “believe” HE was the new Caliphe – not Erdogan. Erdogan helped put him in his place, just like he has everyone else in Turkey – until now.

Erdoğan believed — and made the average Turk believe — that Turkey is a major world power. He claimed that his rule made miracles in the economy. Therefore, since his Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power in 2002, he has not lost a single election. Everything was coming up roses all the time. Not anymore.

Bekdil continues:

Who wins Istanbul wins Turkey,” has been Erdoğan’s dictum since 1994, when he won mayoral elections in Turkey’s biggest city (home to nearly 15% of Turkey’s 57 million voters and accounting for 31% of its GDP). Twenty-five years later, his candidate for mayor of Istanbul, former prime minister Binali Yıldırım, lost in the local election — the first defeat in Istanbul for Islamists since 1994. Game not yet over, Erdoğan ruled.

Erdogan likely manufactured the failed coup attempt to purge his political enemies and secure his grip on the military using cronies instead of competent officers. (Wentworthmaven’s opinion).

Bekdil concludes:

Even if Erdoğan wins Istanbul in the re-run, he will have lost the last few remaining crumbs of his international credibility.

It’s a delicate balance of NATO and the USA playing on one side with Putin constantly trying to woo Erdogan away from the West.  Erdogan has been in the catbird seat for the last two decades; perhaps this will finally come to an end? Especially if the EU grows a backbone and holds him to task.  Unlikely, but then so was Trump, Brexit and European citizens finally waking up to a new reality.

China’s communists fund Jacinda Ardern’s Labour Party: What the United States Congress was told

China’s communists fund Jacinda Ardern’s Labour Party: What the United States Congress was told. By David Fisher.

An influential United States Congress hearing has been told “one of the major fundraisers for Jacinda Ardern’s party” is linked to the Chinese Communist Party and it showed China had penetrated New Zealand’s political networks.

As a result, US lawmakers needed to consider whether New Zealand should be kicked out of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance because of problems at its “political core”. …

The hearing of the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission was aimed at gathering evidence on China’s relationship with traditional US allies. …

China’s actions included getting people linked to the Communist Party or People’s Liberation Army elected and had made it worth the while of political figures “to parrot its line on issues it deems important”. …

The hearing heard testimony from former CIA analyst Peter Mattis who said the Chinese Communist Party had worked “very close to or inside the political core” of Australia and New Zealand and “one of the major fundraisers for Jacinda Ardern’s party has United Front links”. …

However, he said New Zealand “have denied that there’s a problem at all” and failed to follow Australia’s lead in setting up an inquiry into China’s activities.

As Glenn Reynolds notes, isn’t it weird that the NZ Labor Party  supports censorship, disarming citizens, etc.?

The US Cloud People cannot tolerate a rogue intelligence community, but nor can they just open all of this to public view

The US Cloud People cannot tolerate a rogue intelligence community, but nor can they just open all of this to public view. By the Z-Blog.

Supposedly, Trump told Pelosi and Schumer he was done dealing with them until they dropped the investigations. This is probably just a lie fed to the willing media, as part of the war. Most likely, the offer to drop all of it was made by Schumer, but Trump rejected it, as he now has the better hand in this fight.

Proof of this is the decision to hand over to Bill Barr the power to release classified documents related to this scandal and other scandals as yet unknown. That last part is the real issue here. It is pretty much accepted that elements within the FBI, and most likely the CIA, conducted an illegal surveillance operation on the Trump campaign and the Trump transition team. The only decision left on that front is whether or not these people face changes or the whole thing is swept under the rug.

That last part is where things get interesting. If everyone was sure the parties in the FBI scandal were stand-up guys willing to do their time and keep quiet [this would probably be] over and done with by now. The trouble is, they are not stand-up guys. Worse yet, there are too many of them and too well known to be Arkancided. …

That brings us back to the order to authorize Bill Barr to release classified documents into the public. … The real puzzle is the inclusion of the Department of Treasury and the Department of Energy. What could the Energy Department have in its files related to the FBI scandal? What would Treasury have?

One answer lies in the story of Uranium One, which is the turd that official Washington cannot seem to flush. This is the deal that sold off uranium resources and companies to a Russian firm. …

Of course, what this means is the Russian collusion story was just an effort to conceal the FBI spying scandal, which was an effort to cover a lot of other corruption, especially the Uranium One deal. That’s the item at the center of everything. That would explain why Treasury and Energy are on the list. It would also explain why the FBI under James Comey was so vexed by the Clinton e-mail scandal. Clinton was running a pay-for-play operation out of the State Department and a lot of people knew about it.

The question is why would everyone go along with it, but the history of the Clinton family is the story of exploiting the ambition of minor figures. …

Way back in the 1990’s, a truth obvious to many people was that the Democrats, desperate to regain power, sold their souls to the Clintons. They were willing to overlook their obscene corruption, as long as they delivered. It’s turning out that the Clinton family was not just a cancer on the party, but a cancer on American politics. Like the guy who sold his soul to the devil, official Washington is now realizing it was a horrible error to take the Clinton deal. Now they are at a loss as to how to get out of it.

As an aside, the old WASP virtue of keeping low-class people out of public life was not just about snobbery. It was an understanding that people like the Clintons were like an invasive species among the upper classes. High status people did not train their young to hair-split and subvert the rules. They trained them to uphold the rules. As a result, they could never compete with the sort of people who saw rules and customs as an obstacle to their ambitions. Exclusion was a form of self-defense.

Seeds of Labor’s election disaster planted years ago

Seeds of Labor’s election disaster planted years ago, by Nick Cater.

Labor would have won by a landslide if the lard-headed nincom­poops had paid attention.

Instead, they had “sent a message” to the Labor Party, Anthony Albanese told the ABC’s 7.30 host Leigh Sales last week. The message­ was that “we haven’t sold the message well enough”.

That Labor’s new leader should even bother talking about marketing the message, and not the message­ itself, shows that the implications of the party’s rejection have yet to sink in.

Labor will face the next election having spent 51 of the previous 75 years in opposition. The 13 years of Bob Hawke and Paul Keating are looking like an aberration. So long as it remains estranged from the workers it once represented, it is incapable of governing in its own right. …

The corruption of the mass party of the left:

The lure of identity politics is the key to Labor’s downfall. The first signs appear in a 1979 review that called on the party to do more to increase its appeal to women, ethnic communities and young voters. Yet, as the 2002 review acknow­ledges, affirmative action had the perverse effect of alienating Labor’s blue-collar base.

Female candidates were lawyers, teachers and academics. Few if any could boast low socio-econo­mic credentials. …

The Coalition comfortably held the seat of Menzies when the mighty wind of climate anger that was supposed to smite the Liberals in Victoria failed to lay low its strongholds. …

The 7 per cent swing against Labor in Chifley­ was in keeping with most seats in western Sydney, where the Coalition has strengthened its grip at every election since the early 1990s with two exceptions.

It lost ground in 2007, when Kevin Rudd fooled voters into thinking he was on the side of the battlers. And it slipped again in 2016, when the Malcolm Turnbull Experiment, as we now call it, worked in the blue-ribbon heartland but failed miserably in the blue-collar suburbs. …

No idea:

Chris Bowen responded to claims that Labor was not selecting enough working-class candid­ates in 2013 by arguing that Chifley would not be an engine driver if he were alive today. He claimed that thanks to Gough Whitlam’s abolition of university fees, Hawke and Keating’s re-intro­duction of fees, and Rudd and Gillard’s expansion of universities, “young Ben Chifley may well (have) become a lawyer, doctor, engineer or economist”.

[Michael Thompson, in his book Labor’s Forgotten People,] believes otherwise, concluding that Labor’s days as a mass party are gone.

The ultimate threat to Labor would be the rise of a leader in John Howard’s tradition, who talked­ over the head of the mainstream media and appealed directl­y to socially conservative Australians, who included large swaths of traditional Labor voters.

At the time of writing, Thompson could see no Liberal parliamentarian on the horizon with Howard’s instincts. After Scott Morrison’s emphatic victory and near-faultless campaign, he might be tempted to change his mind.

Elites blissfully out of touch with ordinary voters

Elites blissfully out of touch with ordinary voters, by Maurice Newman.

Like Democrats claiming the American college system was rigged against them, the moral legitimacy of the just-elected Morrison government is already being questioned.

ABC presenter Fran Kelly was the first to ask: “Who really won this election — Scott Morrison or Clive Palmer?”

Perhaps she was channelling Labor Party national president Wayne Swan, who complained that a “$60 million spend by a conservativ­e-aligned billionaire in a preference recycling scheme for the Liberal and National Party cannot be allowed to stand”. Is Mr Swan calling for a fresh election? …

Clueless inhabitants of the left’s echo chamber:

Well may the media class wonder­ why it failed to pick the Trump victory in the US, the Brexit vote, the Indian election outcome and a Coalition majority government. Like pre-Revolution Russian aristocrats, the “intellectual” elite remains blissfully out of touch with and contemptuous of the lives of ordinary voters.

Little wonder that those voters trust only the ballot box with their political secrets. In a poll or a vox-pop, who wants to appear as a dumb, bigoted, greedy, mean-spirited­, coal-loving, climate-change denier? No doubt, the media left will console itself that blame for the Coalition victory lies with Palmer’s campaign, the Murdoch­ press, Sky after dark, ­insufficient time to explain comple­x policies, ignorant voters, and a Coalition scare campaign.

There will be no introspection. No thought given to groupthink, bias by omission, lack of integrity or fake news. Certainly not their unconvincing propaganda pushed as consensus opinion.

What are the left going to do about the election? Some are copying the US left:

Now Greenpeace is hitting back. The “climate-change elect­ion” verdict is unacceptable. It ­incites civil disobedience “to take the power back”.

Greens leader Richard Di Natal­e says he wants to regulate the media. Oliver Yates, the failed green “independent” candidate for the seat of Kooyong, tweeted: “I would seek to have the Murdoch­ press’s licence to operate in Australia removed if they continue to threaten our democracy and our safety.”

ABC gave us groupthink on steroids

ABC gave us groupthink on steroids, by Chris Mitchell.

Was the ABC deliberately biased towards the ALP at the federal election, or was its gross fail just a problem of groupthink? …

The ABC is the best-resourced news organisation in the country, paid for by taxpayers who vote across the political spectrum. In Queensland, which swung strongly to the Coalition, the ABC’s many state-based staff apparently failed to see the trends in their own backyard. The ABC has news ­bureaus in Brisbane, the Gold Coast, the Sunshine Coast, Toowoomba, Bundaberg, Rockhampton, Mackay, Cairns, Townsville, Longreach and Mount Isa. …

[Chris Kenny on Sky] said no experienced political journalist could take a 51-49 poll to the ALP with a margin of error close to 3 per cent and say for sure Labor would win. Kenny asked why, if there were a range of views at Sky News, did literally everyone at the much larger ABC fall in behind the Labor narrative? …

Later last Monday night, Paul Barry on the ABC’s Media Watch lamented the bias of News Corp Australia papers, which largely got the election right, and defended the ABC, which he thought ran a fair and balanced campaign. It did not and the nation knows it. Viewers saw the maudlin performance of its election-night hosts — Barrie Cassidy, Laura Tingle, Annabel Crabb, Andrew Probyn, Michael Rowland and Leigh Sales — as they realised Labor was losing.

The nation had heard Tingle on the ABC’s 7.30 throughout the previou­s week proclaiming both sides knew the Coalition was gone. It had heard the anti-Adani campaigning of Radio National’s Fran Kelly and ABC Sydney breakfast radio host Wendy Harmer. …

News, like its Sky News subsid­iary, employs journalists with a ­diversity of views. Think of this paper’s writers from the left: Troy Bramston, Phillip Adams, Graham Richardson, Alan Kohler and, from the left of the Coalition, Peter van Onselen and Niki Savva.

The Courier-Mail has copped a bucketing on social media but its national affairs editor, Dennis Atkin­s, is a former Goss government staffer, as was former business writer and political columnist Paul Syvret. Long-time columnist Terry Sweetman is of the left. The nation’s biggest website, News Corp Australia’s news.com.au, is very left-wing.

This is as it should be because readers of the biggest newspapers in the country have diverse views. As do viewers of the ABC. Yet the ABC does not represent a diversity of views. …

The big issues:

Voters are smarter than journ­alists think. They were right on climate­ and Adani. They know Australia, with 1.3 per cent of global CO2 emissions, can’t change the climate. They support the aspirat­ion that is anathema to the public service culture of the ABC.

And on franking credits they knew Labor was just wrong. Franking credits are a refund for tax paid by a company to remove double taxation. Paying refunds to people who pay no tax is not a subsidy­. And self-funded retirees on low incomes were the big losers. Rich superannuants mostly do pay tax because they have investments in property and shares outside their super. The ABC should have understood this.

In the last week, I’ve met or heard of several people who are normally Labor supporters but effectively voted Liberal because of religious freedom. A progressive nonsense too far.

Australian caught in the middle as the US and China play hardball

Australian caught in the middle as the US and China play hardball, by Alan Kohler.

The American and Australian Huawei bans are very, very different.

Ours was tentative, almost apologetic, not even announced; the US action against Huawei was announced in crushingly specific detail this month and will probably drive Huawei out of business.

But there is much more to the American attack on China that it launched two weeks ago than the ban on Huawei and it is going to give Australia and all US allies that deal with China a very big headache. It’s as if our parents are getting divorced: who gets custody?

Unless all of America’s May 15 actions are withdrawn as part of a trade deal, the US has made a kind of declaration of cold war against China. …

President Trump declared a “national emergency” over technology and communications security, citing “threats … by foreign adversaries …” and issued a wide-ranging executive order that potentially isolates China and throws the global technology supply chain into chaos. …

It almost guarantees Huawei’s demise, since it relies on US components and software …

It takes what had been trade war to a whole new level of conflict and puts not only American companies on notice, but any American ally dealing with China.

What’s more, this is a bipartisan matter in Washington: a day after the executive order was issued, the US House of Representatives Intelligence Committee, dominated by Democrats, announced a “deep dive” focus on China, following a hearing that looked at China’s use of technology for “surveillance, influence and political control” both domestically and internationally. …

The Canberra foreign policy brains trust probably thought the difficulty with our trading partnership with China and alliance with the US would come about because of the South China Sea, or perhaps Taiwan, but those things have been trumped, as it were, by the technology Cold War.

As mentioned several times on the WR, China has been ripping off the West for decades on intellectual property. Finally, someone — Trump — his doing something about it. A real leader.

China, meanwhile, will be hoping that a return to left leadership and its corrupt ways in the US will allow them to continue their cheating ways:

Bojo Has Lost His Mojo. Britain Needs a New Margaret Thatcher

Bojo Has Lost His Mojo. Britain Needs a New Margaret Thatcher, by James Delingpole.

What very few inside the bubble have realised is the degree to which things have changed, and changed utterly, since the Brexit genie was let out of the bottle in June 2016. The Brexit genie changed a lot of things.  …

The current favourite to replace Theresa May is Boris Johnson. But I worry that Bojo has lost his mojo.

I noticed this last October at the Conservative Party conference when he gave his big speech: there were queues round the block; everyone wanted to be there for the moment when Boris staked his claim as the heir to Thatcher — or, as I rather hoped at the time, the British Donald Trump.

But he fluffed it. It was competent, but unmemorable. Neither then nor since has Boris shown any indication that he understands the scale of the task ahead of him. The Conservative Party is in such a bad way it doesn’t need a loveable buffoon to jolly it along and give the chaps and chapesses a bit of a fillip. It needs a cancer surgeon. …

I worry first that Boris lacks the ruthlessness to rid himself of such albatrosses from the old, discredited Cameron/May order.

I worry even more so that he lacks the ideological rigour to do what is necessary to transform the Conservative Party and make it electable again.

Boris has repeatedly invoked the spectre of One Nation Toryism. So, it seems, have pretty much all the other candidates – apart from Dominic Raab (making him my favourite among the favourites).

But One Nation Toryism is just one of those empty, all-things-to-all-men phrases which means nothing more than “Please like me everyone. I promise I won’t do anything too radical that might upset anyone.”

And what Conservatism needs right now is not more of the squishy, apologetic, spineless centrism we’ve seen in every Conservative prime minister since John Major. What it needs is a new Thatcher.

Boris perfectly has it within him to be that character — just so long as his Churchillian sense of destiny kicks in and obliterates his appeasing, moderating, sell-out tendencies, such as this utterly stupid idea he has that what we need right now is more climate change action.

UK: Appeaser Theresa May resigns over Brexit failure, Robert Spencer issues statement

UK: Appeaser Theresa May resigns over Brexit failure, Robert Spencer issues statement (Video 4:15)

Theresa May not only will perhaps go down as the worst British PM since Neville Chamberlain, but also as one of the great purveyors of “Fake News”. From likely colluding with the Obama administration in attempting to undermine President Trump to her blatant hypocrisy, which this short video will enlighten our readers to.

Robert Spencer, a mild mannered erudite Islamic and Christian scholar, who not once has ever suggested the use of violence, has been wrongfully vilified by May. He was literally banned from entering the UK by then Home Secretary, Theresa May.

With the impending and ironic victory of the new UK Brexit Party to help hasten the exit of the UK from the disastrous EU, Boris Johnson will likely find great support from the Brexiteers — led by Nigel Farage and the resurgence of the conservative collective joining the serious Tories and UKIP’ers to finally get the UK out of the EU!

Wentworthmaven has followed Spencer for years and he’s exactly the opposite of what the mainstream media and the ilk of Ms. May would have us believe.

Anthony Albanese is no Bob Hawke, despite the pretence

Anthony Albanese is no Bob Hawke, despite the pretence, by Troy Bramston.

Anthony Albanese’s promise to end class-war politics if he becomes Labor leader lacks any shred of credibility.

Albanese has always embraced the politics of envy and class-war rhetoric — these are the watchwords of Labor’s hard left faction which he leads.

The notion that Albanese would lead Labor to the centre ground of politics with a cooperative relationship with business is hard to fathom. It is just not who he is.

Just ask the inner-city hard left faction party members he represents who proudly wear their “I Fight Tories” T-shirts. This is Albanese’s personal motto. It has been embraced by the hard left faction.

“Tory” is a class-loaded term to describe the British Conservative Party that has no relevance when describing the Liberal or National parties. This is class warfare reduced to T-shirt slogans.

A new Hawke? Not bloody likely…

It is not surprising that Albanese has reached for Bob Hawke’s mantle. He says he wants to lead the party in the Hawke tradition with pro-growth policies based on consensus between business and unions while bringing the country together. Well, who doesn’t?

The problem is that at Labor Party conferences through the 1980s and ‘90s, Albanese and his left faction opposed many of the Hawke government’s economic reforms. As Young Labor president, Albanese often criticised Hawke and Paul Keating. When Labor went into opposition in 1996, many in the hard left faction called for their legacy to be junked.

It is no wonder that Hawke and Keating — and also Gough Whitlam — voted for Bill Shorten rather than Albanese to lead Labor in 2013. Albanese is just not in their mould. …

Albanese’s supporters say his great strength is his authenticity. Well, he just lost it by pretending to be something that he never has been: an acolyte of Hawke and Keating.

Albo left to pick up the pieces

Albo left to pick up the pieces, by Troy Bramston.

Labor has chosen a leader from the hard Left of the party to move it towards the centre. This will be difficult. Albanese will have to abandon much of what he has believed in. His credibility, seen as strength, will be tested. He will also need to accept that voters rejected Labor’s leadership, its policies and many of its modern values.

Few in the party comprehend the scale of Labor’s defeat. It has won a majority of seats at only one federal election, in 2007, in the past 26 years. Labor lost seats and its vote fell. In the suburbs and regions, Labor was defeated in low- and middle-income seats. It suffered swings against it in most of its held seats outside the inner cities. It lost blue-collar voters and aspirational voters. And it needs to get them back to be a viable political party in the future.

Yet, through its control of the bureaucracy, media, and academia, the left has been moving Australian rapidly in its preferred directions. Who really governs the country?

Leaders leap aboard ScoMo express

Leaders leap aboard ScoMo express, by Scott Morrison.

Scott Morrison confronts the world as a massively strengthened national leader. And the world is watching Morrison, looking anew at Australia. Especially every demo­cratically elected government in the West, all of which fear their next election.

They are also looking at Anthon­y Albanese, who represents the first time Labor has chosen a leader from its Left faction to attempt to lead it from opposition to government since the disastrous HV “Doc” Evatt in the 1950s.

‘Albo’ and his UK pal have met three times in the last 14 months

No one has had their heads turned more by the miraculous ScoMo win than the British Conservat­ive Party. Boris Johnson looks back at his old stamping ground of Sydney and, like many other British Conservatives, thinks: here is a conservative government, racked with leadership tensions, apparently very unpop­ular, ridiculed and mocked by the media glitterati, seeking an ­unlikely third term in office.

So, at the last possible minute, they ditch their blandly centrist leader and elect instead a big personality, a larger-than-life mega-campaign­er with boundless energy, the thickest of skins and an almost pathological love of campaigni­ng, a figure uniquely equipped to polarise the political debate around himself.

Johnson likes that narrative very, very much.

Another leader equally entranced is US President Donald Trump, who rushed to congratulate Morrison on the phone on his re-election. American politicos follow British and Australian polit­ics to spot trends that might come up at home. They think Australian and British politics tell them more even than Canada’s, because there is so little national security dimension in Canada.

Trump sees a fellow conservative, written off by a mostly hostile media, not least because of his tough line on illegal immigrants, behind in the polls, who, partly through sheer force of personality, barnstorms his way to re-election. The cost of his opponents’ climate change policies, the future of a coalmine, the sleeper issue of religio­us freedom, a revolt in the regions against the inner-city progress­ive elites — that all seems pretty familiar.

Trump likes that narrative very, very much.