I use the term Obamessiah to mock the way many of his devoted followers feel about him. When he said the seas would stop rising they believed it. When he said he was the smartest person in any room, they believed it. News casters said they got shivers up their leg just watching him. And yet, he was/is a disaster domestically and, especially, in foreign policy terms. As it becomes more and more obvious, I just like tweeking their noses.

"If you marginalise and demonise an entire demographic ....[and so on].."

So you have this particular demographic that you let into the country and a (small?) proportion of them want to kill and maim the citizenry in the name of religion. IF you continue to bring in more members of that demographic, you will certainly import more numbers of these religious zealots. But, according to this way of thinking you enunciate, we have to continue to bring in these zealots because if we don't then some of the demographic that haven't yet turned to zealotry will do so. So either way we end up with more religious warfare on our streets. Brilliant idea!!

"You seem deeply upset by the suggestion that Trump falls into the latter category, "

Not upset in the least. I know its a load of rubbish and will blow over as soon as the next excuse for overturning the election is discovered.

STOP PRESS:
Brandy X Lee, the 'psychiatrist' who started this whole 'Trump is mentally ill" meme has just been outed as having lost her licence to practice psychiatry in 2015.

But fear not AJ. In a year or three, when you'll be able to assert that she never had any influence by doing a Google and finding that she's barely mentioned. I'm sure the algorithms are already at work and the memory-holes are being run day and night.

Last night I watched a couple of U tube videos of the behaviour of the US media as the realisation dawned on them, that Trump had been elected. This was what went to air from the election night studios.

I had not bothered with this before as I was not that interested, but the shock & horror they displayed was very enlightening. No wonder the TV & News papers are going out backwards. Playing to a limited left ratbag audience can't be good for profitability.

I started wondering if the owners, & share holders realise just how much of their audience has had enough lefty propaganda, & is disappearing at a considerable rate of knots, & why?

Quite a few friends, some who would watch TV news programs from 5.00 PM to 7.30PM are now watching none. The net is proving a much better source, & I now only tune if to see the weather map, & programs like the 7.30 report, once required viewing became such trashy propaganda vehicles, they had to die.

Even the documentaries that have been so good on SBS have become nothing more than anti white/western value propaganda since they started local production.

They are killing themselves, with now only the soaps keeping them alive. They will not be missed.

we would be certainly better off and save billions if we were to get rid of the tax funded leftist propoganda machine of abc/sbs. Have they distanced themselves from that white hating racist muslim women yet?

Dear runner,

It is a tossup really isn't it. The ABC and SBS vs the billions in tax breaks we give to those very Christian institutions which did so much sexual damage to our most vulnerable. Ending the tax exempt status of religious organisations gets my vote.

Found a conscience have we steelie. Where on earth did that come from? Oh I see its only activated with your hatred towards your Maker. Fancy you being able to call child abuse wrong. One of your high priest who appear on the abc (Singer) thinks its ok to have sex with animals. Hmm!

Dear mhaze,

You wrote;

“Baby boomers retiring and kids extending their education cause the participation rate to fall all else being equal. But the participation rate isn't falling. So there are offsetting factors. You've got the logic completely arse about.”

Good lord, really?

So you now accept it seems that this are not BS as you previously claimed. Well that is progress of a sort. Of course the logic is sound if you were prepared to do even a modicum of reading. The participation rate had been steadily rising through Obama's term after the GFC but is only half way to the pre-crisis levels. Retiring baby boomers and lower dropout rates have slowed that momentum. Remember though that those seeking work are included in the participation figures. There is a group who aren't included though and they are the so-called “discouraged workers”, those who do not have a job and who are not seeking one. If their numbers were to return to pre-GFC levels both the participation rate and the unemployment rate would rise.
http://www.businessinsider.com.au/unemployment-rate-if-discouraged-workers-came-back-2014-1?r=US&IR=T

I agree that a years worth of figures is not going to give a definitive picture of how this administration is performing, particularly as the momentum of the Obama initiatives will make a proper assessment

In the end the only substantive figure we can rely on at the moment as somewhat indicative is job creation. Trump is not proving to be a standout but that may well change.