Thursday, June 23, 2016

Sam Newman is right. Squawking slebs are excrement-al as anything!

This squawkfest over Eddit McGuire's Caro joke just gets sillier and sillier. Firstly, he didn't trivialize domestic violence by making an offhand joke. But even if he had it would not have made it any more (or less) likely that men bash their wives.

Some pundits have observed that it was odd that it took so long for the story to gain prominence. That's because no one even noticed it as a "transgression" when it aired. It only ended up on the meeja radar in the first place because a bunch of tiny-minded SJWs who spend their every waking hour looking for stuff to arc up about did so on some stupid podcast. Even many of those now railing most zealously at McGuire would not have been offended at the time. They are trying way too hard to be outraged. And it shows.

This idea that mainstream media personalities have great responsibility as role models is just bollocks. Slebs take themselves way too seriously. Actually, most of the public think they're right tossers. And their pomposity in believing their words can shape society just confirms this view of them.

All that's going on here is that a bunch of vicious hypocrites who think their shit doesn't stink are cynically exploiting the serious issue of domestic violence to lift their own profiles. They should hang their heads in shame. (But given their utter shamelessness, I think that's too big an ask.)

Speaking of shit and shamelessness, Sam Newman is now causing conniptions with his use of the term "excrement" to describe those who have been fulminating so selectively over the issue.

Needless to say, the usual suspects are using this as more evidence of "misogyny". But Aussie fauxminists, so desperate to play the victim, are not aware they have no case. That's because even by their own, er, "logic", made official by AOTY David Morrison, he was only referring to the blokes. "ExcreMENt" is gender specific, innit.

In any case Newman made some good points in his Footy Show spray, such as his observation that Caro made no such ruckus when pretty much the same "drowning" joke was made by her own radio station. So, it's not just ideology that drives the lies of the SJWs. It's also commercial competition.

Forever lusting for power, fame and money these bolshie bimbos and himbos have become batshit crazy as. Blech! What a smelly spectacle.

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Leftist rage at Eddie McGuire fuelled by denial over Sheik Shady?

This whole furore about Eddie McGuire's joke has left me with my jaw on the floor. It has to be one of the most OTT reactions from the usual suspects so far. Given how little it takes to trigger these gruesome crybullies that's saying something.

The most absurd aspect of this explosion of outrage is that it started around the same time Turnbull broke bread with Islamic luminaries including Sheik Shady Alsuleiman. This arsehat's recorded statements about gays and women are waaay more offensive than McGuire's offhand remark by any measure. (And given that they are pretty much par for the course for his religion they're even more disturbing.)

The imbalance in the reaction to these two issues from people who profess to care about social justice has been almost beyond belief ... And maybe the two phenomena are not just coincidental, but causally related?

It's quite likely that our beloved frightbats know damn well that Shady is far more problematic than McGuire. But political correctness demands that they are simply not allowed to criticize him. On the contrary, they must always cast Muslims as victims.

So this acts as a lid on their rage, which must go somewhere. White males -- rich and influential ones in particular -- are fair game. So they rail at them even more hysterically than usual.

With this collective delusion in play I suspect we'll see a spectacularly insane reaction next time a local Muslim says or does something misogynistic, homophobic, or -- God forbid -- genuinely terroristic.

At the same time as normal sane, adult folk are reeling in shock at it, fauxminists, frightbats and assorted pinko finger-waggers will be scouring the meeja for the tiniest transgression by a pale patriarch. Maybe they'll find a videotape of a Government MP saying "guys" or something ... Whatever it is, when they do, the commie crybullies will erupt in such an almighty cacophony of infantile squawking that this last collective shriek'll seem like the cooing of doves, no kidding.

Saturday, June 18, 2016

Lefties exploit Jo Cox murder as they did the Gabrielle Giffords shooting

It's still so soon after this horrific murder of Jo Cox. So I suppose pretty much any commentary on it can be seen as political exploitation. That said, clearly some of it has been way OTT. These articles by Louise Mensch and Brendan O'Neill nail what is so repellant about those who immediately started inferring that the Brexit campaign was to blame.

Brings to mind a similarly horrific event in Tucson, Arizona a few years ago. A nutter called Jared Lee Laughner opened fire on a political meeting. His main target was Democrat Gabrielle Giffords, whom he shot at close range. Miraculously she survived. Tragically, six others did not

In the immediate aftermath of this ghastly massacre it was suggested that Loughner was motivated by a Sarah Palin ad that displayed crosshairs on a map to denote areas targeted by a Tea Party campaign. Not surprisingly no causal link was established. But that didn't stop numerous pundits and politicians across the western world from piling onto Palin. Truly disgraceful stuff.

Friday, June 17, 2016

Will Turnbull's courting of stars at Iftar become his "Ishtar"?

It's becoming increasingly clear that Malcolm Turnbull is a very strange character. His hosting of that Ramadan themed dinner at Kirribilli House was a political faux pas, no doubt about it.

Obviously, it was slated well in advance of the Pulse Nightclub shooting. So it's not like they could have cancelled it ... But even without all these alarming revelations about the presence of this Shady doofus, it would still have been a shockingly bad look.

Photos of the PM holding court with slebs Waleed Aly and Susan Carland have doubtless made delcons coast to coast seethe with rage. Even some hardcore malcoholics would've been very disappointed by them.

You've gotta wonder: Didn't his advisers think about the possible ramifications? Couldn't they have kept the meeja out? Banned photographers? Just downplayed it heaps?

Maybe they just didn't care ... They're probably quite confident that they'll win the election. They figure that they're not gonna win back any delcons anyway, so they might as well just show them even more disdain. And if this is gonna alienate some who were planning to vote LNP, well stuff 'em! There can't be that many of those ...

Well, they might be in for a bit of a surprise. I'm sure I'm not alone in finding the whole celebration quite nauseating. The thing that really irks me is that gruesome grin of Turnbull's. He's flashing it in many of the shots of the event. He's clearly chuffed to be schmoozing with Gold Logie winner Waleed Aly. And there are those exotic lookin' young women (who've all appeared on Q and A, natch) looking resplendent in their traditional garments.

The fundamental belief system that they all adhere to is clearly the furthest thing from Malcolm's mind. He's just loving the colour, movement and right-on glamour of the whole shindig.

Even the name of the post Ramadan meal -- Iftar -- is enticingly evocative, innit? Reminiscent of the mysterious Middle East, it sounds very much like the title of a movie you may have heard of: Ishtar.

The plot of this Warren Beatty, Dustin Hoffman flick is summarized here:

Two terrible lounge singers get booked to play a gig in a Moroccan hotel but somehow become pawns in an international power play between the CIA, the Emir of Ishtar, and the rebels trying to overthrow his regime.

Sounds like crap. Which it certainly was. The public stayed away in droves and the studio behind it suffered hugely.

While Turnbull breaking bread with local Muslim meeja stars prolly won't be as politically disastrous as this epic turkey was artistically and commercially, I think it has done him significant damage. And if there is a lethal Islamist attack on our soil in the coming months -- which is looking more and more likely, let's face it -- it will be judged extremely harshly in retrospect by the public.

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Orlando shooting vigils and flags are useless. LGBTI folk must wake up!

Depressing, but not surprising, that in the wake of this latest mass murder by an Islamist in Orlando, Florida, countless journalists in the mainstream media have been wondering what on Earth could have been his motivation, and framing the horrific event primarily as a gun rights issue ... And I dunno about you, but I'm really starting to get pissed off with these candle-lit vigils, laser light shows, and flags flown at half mast that inevitably follow each gruesome, evil act by or in support of Islamic State.

I know that these events and gestures are cathartic for the participants. That has some value, I suppose. But the fact that emotional expression seems to be their main function is exasperating -- and a bit alarming.

It looks very much like the people who feel most compelled to perform these rituals don't actually get that the horror is real. If they did their first and main aim would be to stop it from happening again, right? But there's little or none of that. You just get a farrago of sanctimony and virtue signalling.

It's as if they're watching an epic movie about the triumph of the human spirit. You know, the kind where you go in, sook up, and walk out filled with goodwill to all men -- er, and women, and the remaining 50 odd gender identities, of course ... You ruminate on the power of love, compassion, forgiveness, and all that other crap. Emotionally revitalized, you resolve to emulate the flick's heroes and live a selfless, spiritual life from now on ... But next day you're back to being the same cranky, petty schmo you always were.



As well as in symbolic actions such as the rainbow flag flown at half-mast at Sydney's Town Hall, shown above, you see this daffy, dippy emotionalism all over social media.

Soon after the Pulse Nightclub massacre story broke, various wishy-washy hashtags started to trend. #WeStandWithOrlando? No they don't. #LoveWins? No it doesn't. #StopTheHate! Well, I wish them good luck with that one ...

There were others like #GaysBreakTheInternet and #LoveIsLove. Needless to say, they didn't mention the, er, caliphant in the room. It's as if Islamic homophobia is not unlike homosexuality in Oscar Wilde's day. It's the hate that dare not speak its name.

There have been many calls for reformation in Islam. I reckon there should be one in the LGBTI community too. They need to realize who their real enemies are. Because right now, they really are like lambs to the slaughter.

(Speaking of which: There's an influential Islamic preacher who says gays should be killed currently in Sydney. Combine this fact with the city's reputation as one of the world's most gay-friendly cities and you have a real recipe for disaster.)

Tuesday, June 7, 2016

#MalcolmWasSoPoor tweet frenzy reveals the Left's hateful hypocrisy

Almost every day the socialists on Twitter go into a frenzy of sneering and jeering over a particular issue, often encapsulated with a hashtag. Their gleeful abuse gives the lie to their claims to be compassionate folk who genuinely seek a fair society.

Take the tsunami of bilious mockery around the hashtag #MalcolmWasSoPoor. This was invented by a leftie tweep who, like so many of them, won't use his real name. Instead he goes by the handle "John Wren", who was a powerful businessman from early last century. He was the basis of a character in commie writer Frank Hardy's Power Without Glory. (Well, at least we know the tweep is well read! Maybe he's a leftist quackademic?)

Anyhoo, he clearly came up with the hashtag in response to Malcolm Turnbull's latest promotional video, in which he talks about his tough childhood and love for his dad, who raised him alone for much of his childhood.
As you can see by the retweet count above it went gangbusters. Hepcats galore had a ball portraying Turnbull as a tragically deluded fat cat born with a silver spoon in his mouth, who is now trying to make out he was actually a sad, beweft wittle urchin.

Now, while I think the video was ill-considered and might even do the PM harm, he was not trying to portray himself as a victim. Yes, he does say that his mum left his dad, who "struggled" and "didn't have much money". But his main message is how much love his father had for him and how supported and fortunate this made him feel. Not only that, he actually says his dad eventually did well for himself financially.

It's hardly a sob story. See for yourself.



That said, it's prolly true that Turnbull over-egged it with the financial hardship angle. He did come from a line of silvertails and his dad was never truly skint. But he was by no means born into a life of power and privilege like, say, Kerry Packer. (Even the union funded New Daily validates the claim that his father "had very little money".)

So, what the lefties have done is fixate very selectively on his passing references to struggle, blown them up into false claims of abject poverty and laid the boot in. They've also completely ignored the emotional devastation wrought by his mum leaving suddenly and without explanation.

An event like this will scar a kid deeply no matter the historical context. But it could be argued that it was more traumatic back in the sixties than it is now since it was so much rarer then.

In any case, the obvious lack of compassion for young Malcolm shown by the gleeful hashtaggers is notable -- especially given their claims to be so full of lerve for humanity.

Basically, they've looked at all the wealth he's amassed as an adult and retrospectively damned him as a child for it. Nasty stuff.

The double standard is revealing too. If Turnbull had gown rich and powerful as a unionist and ultimately become the leader of the ALP, then you can be damn sure his claims of early hardship would be seen as a huuuge plus by those same hashtaggers.

But you can't be too hard on the poor little pinko poppets. Eternally child-like, they are ruled by their emotions. So dogpiling onto Turnbull was not a conscious choice. It was just them shoehorning a hate figure into their precious Narrative.

Resist it in the most minor of ways and it triggers them into a flurry of abusive class war rhetoric. Take this endearingly direct response from another of Twitter's countless leftist intellectuals, for example.

Monday, June 6, 2016

"The Australian Sex Party" is looking like a dopey misnomer

Dunno about you, but a political name like "The Australian Sex Party" conjures up an image of a buncha bacchanalian blokes 'n' babes who just wanna shag up a storm. At first, er, blush it implies strong support for the passionate pursuit of (hedonistic) happiness free from state interference, right?

But when you look into what they're about it doesn't really seem to be the case. Since they've been a minor but nonetheless noticeable political force in this country they have presented a far more doctrinaire image than their name implies. They're pretty PC, actually.

For example, they are big time supporters of same sex marriage. While this is hardly a traditional position there's no denying that the campaign to have it made law has been highly dogmatic and even censorious. Its proponents keep saying how much popular support there is for "marriage equality" yet they don't want the punters to have their say in a plebiscite. These authoritarians want the change to be made by pollies instead -- for the people's own good of course.

You'd think that a truly socially libertarian party would be a bit reluctant to sign up to this suss "top down approach" wouldn't you? (Also, since when did marriage have anything to do with sex? Two things are nearly mutually exclusive! Just kidding.)

Sure, they are for big time recreational drug use legalization, which is pretty rebellious, dude. But their current crusade is primarily focused on the issue of medicinal marijuana. And in this, it looks like they are even trying to out-do the Greens.

Even the Greens are back-pedalling. At the end of March, 2016, the Greens in Victoria voted to not allow medical cannabis to be available to sick and suffering adults. That's right. They voted only to allow medicinal cannabis to be available to children with specific forms of epilepsy. Nothing else.

It's not just this issue that puts them in the same category with those doctrinaire inner city latte slurpers. This particular passage in an article about the ASP joining forces with the Hemp Party sums them up nicely:

The Sex Party occupies a vacuum left by mainstream party inaction on legal reforms with not insignificant popular support, from euthanasia to abortion, marriage equality, legal aid access and prison reform, humane processing of asylum seekers and medical and recreational cannabis.

All of which may sound familiar to Greens supporters (not that kind of green).

Where the Greens and the Sex party essentially differ, according to Patten, is in tax matters, a function of the latter’s roots in essentially being a small business lobby group. It is also displeased with the Greens’ role in teaming with the Liberals to change Senate voting rules in a manner likely to see the drying up of preference swaps that previously propelled micro-party candidates into office. It is likely to withhold its preferences from the Greens in various theatres, which could be a boon to Labor.

Given the highly PC niche they are carving out it seems odd that they would even have the word "sex" in the title, dunnit?

Looks to me like it's there for promotional purposes more than anything else. And not surprisingly it has been effective. Sex sells, after all ... Still, it does strike me as more than a tad ingenuous.