I have recently been involved in something of an online exchange at Quadrant Online (where I am a paid-up subscriber) with a participant who goes by the nom-de-blog of ‘en passant’. (http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/07/trump-vs-accepted-wisdom/#comment-17068). Quadrant Online is a ‘conservative’ site devoting itself to ‘conservative’ causes like opposition to mainstream climatology; opposition to Islam and increase of the Islamic population of this country; opposition to the Turnbull ascendancy in the Liberal Party and for an Abbott revival there. It also seems to favour trickle-down economics. In short, QO supports an assortment of causes; one or two of which I also support. (nb: NOT Tony Abbott.)
I am also a subscriber at New Matilda , a more leftward site which likewise supports a variety of causes, some of which I likewise support. (https://newmatilda.com/2016/07/28/mums-grandmums-and-kids-have-just-invaded-tanya-pliberseks-office-over-alp-refugee-policies/)
However, in the last 24 hours, there has been something of a cybersnafu in the works at Quadrant Online . A crucial response of mine to ‘en passant’ disappeared into cyberspace. Repeat postings got the usual ‘looks like you’ve already said that’ site response. An email exchange with QO management followed, and I was told that other site commenters had had similar experience.
So I have decided to post the missing response here.
The discussion was on Trump vs Clinton for the US presidency. The immediately preceding comment from ‘en passant’ concludes as follows:
I thought you just had thought-bubble, but now I realize you live in one as you failed to answer the only question that really mattered. Trump or Clinton for President? As you failed to work that out when broadly asked I will make it easy for you: they are the only choices. Roll of drums …. and the answer is: ….?
In the absence of any (successfully) posted response from me, the site got:
July 29, 2016 at 11:14 am
Oh well, Ian, I think you have made your line of thought clear.
What I had been unsuccessfully trying to post in response was:
Trump or Clinton?
Gee that’s a tricky one. Let’s see…. (While I’m thinking, you might amuse yourself scratching some more through that dirt file of yours. But for that, you might have to find some sort of light down there under that rock you hide under.)
Trump if he becomes US President will have to make a lot of important decisions. But the only decisions of his that I have so far been able to find record of, all directly involve his own financial interest. I think that also may be the reason Trump has failed to gain any enthusiastic traction so far here Quadrant Online editorial level. Opinion here seems to be that he is the best of a bad pair.
But Hillary is married to former President Bill. And Bill took a magnificent decision in 1999 to withdraw the US support that the murderous Suharto regime had previously enjoyed re East Timor. That threw the balance in favour of East Timorese independence, particularly after the US Chief of the General Staff got on the phone to the Indonesian armed forces chief thug Wiranto and read him the Riot Act.
I can’t see Trump ever doing anything half as principled as that. His first question would most likely be “what’s in it for me?” Nor can I see Bill dropping out of influence anytime soon. Can you, ‘en passant’ or whatever your real name is?
So…… Suspense…………. Drum roll…………Bagpipes in chorus…………. Heavenly Choir…………
AS I SAID, THIS WAS NOT ACCEPTED AT QUADRANT ONLINE http://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2016/07/trump-vs-accepted-wisdom/#comment-17060