And so it was that last Saturday, a middle age, middle class 'journalist' by way of Christina Patterson, sat comfortably 'reviewing' the newspapers.
For the frontline of the p.c. liberal brigade which is normally staffed by short haired, man hating feminists, she is unusually attractive, although so obviously an ardent liberal; she duly followed classic lines dictated by the p.c. doctrine so loved by the liberal elite.
She, quite absurdly, pronounced that the travel ban on certain war torn countries riddled with terrorists by President Trump was, apparently, the worst breach of human rights in the last 60 years.
Let's just stop and think about that for all of, err... 2 minutes then shall we.
Here are just a few other 'human rights' violations we came up with in that time.
See if you think any of these are worse than a travel ban.
The imprisonment, without due process and trial, of political objectors and other 'enemies of the state', by China and the subsequent denigration and abuse of their 'human rights'.
The brutal treatment of people in the forced labour camps of North Korea and 'human rights' violations, let alone torture and murder.
The suppression of free speech and control of the population through fear, incessant propaganda, brainwashing and manipulation in those countries.
The treatment of Tibetans by China.
Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.
The fact Saddam Hussein gassed women and children.
President Assad bombing and gassing civilian men, women and children.
Israel's illegal occupation of Palestinian land.
Talk about losing all sense of proportion and reality.
Her assertion that the right of any independent, democratic nation to restrict travel from any other country in the world is somehow 'wrong' or 'racist', is at best misguided and at worst, naïve, ill-informed ignorance or sheer stupidity.
But of course, that is what these liberals do though; exaggerate and distort the facts to suit their agenda where of course, everything is viewed through their prism of 'equality' and 'diversity', no matter how illogical.
President Trump has not banned Muslims from entering the U.S.
He has ordered a temporary ban on travel from 7 war torn countries previously identified by the Obama administration, as being a risk to the national security of the U.S.
And that's because we all know they are full of radical Islamic terrorists.
And he's also refused entry to the U.S. by 'refugees' form Syria.
Given the threat from Muslim terrorists, as demonstrated by recent murders, violent and sexual attacks in Germany by 'refugees' or illegal immigrants, some would think that eminently sensible.
After all, the rationale for preventing anyone entering your country who is believed to pose a threat, is that if they can't get in to your country, then they simply cannot commit any crime there.
It's not a difficult concept to grasp.
It's the same with the intention of the Trump administration to deport illegal immigrants from the U.S. most notably, starting with those with a criminal record or background.
Most rational people, free from the dogma of 'equality' and blinded by 'human rights', would wonder quite what exactly was wrong with deporting illegal aliens.
As, by definition, those people have no legal right to be in the U.S. then no doubt, again they would also think it an eminently reasonable position to hold and rational policy to implement.
However, obviously the p.c. liberal Gestapo insist it is 'racist'.
It's the same story with a proposed wall on the border with Mexico.
As opposed to a sensible barrier to help try and prevent illegal entry in to the U.S. which was supported by enough U.S. citizens in order to get the candidate who proposed it elected, it is of course 'racist' and indeed apparently, an insult to Mexican 'dignity'.
Meanwhile, here in Europe we have an idealistic, wealthy, liberal elite, insulated from the real world, who are obsessed with their liberal fantasy agenda.
These idiots deem it sensible, indeed in the name of 'equality' and 'human rights', to let anyone, from anywhere, in without any checks whatsoever.
This is going to come back and bite us in a big way.
As if it hasn't so obviously already enabled several murderous atrocities across Europe.
Miss Patterson, bless her, also claimed that, for some strange reason known only unto herself, she didn't accept the 'democratic argument', as she put it, for what was the free election of the Trump administration in the U.S.
This is another trait of the liberal elite which we have written about before.
They simply don't accept the will of the people, through democratic elections.
They don't believe anyone can have an opposing view, or act contrary to their fabled beliefs and what they alone deem to be 'right' and 'acceptable'.
They hate the fact that, what they see as the uninformed, 'populist' little people they look down on from their ivory towers, have the ability to throw a spanner in their doo-gooder works, let alone the audacity to disagree.
That is evident in the way they refuse to accept every policy, decision, referendum and election result they do not agree with or does not suit their misguided, wishy-washy, do-gooder, p.c. cause.
Well, deal with it.
Donald Trump not only won the Republican nomination for the Presidential election while freely airing his views, but enough people voted for him to win and subsequently try and implement what he said he would do.
It's called democracy.
And majority rule.