Tuesday, June 28, 2016

Peter FitzSimons, Nicola Sturgeon exploit Brexit upheaval

Amazing to read about all the shenanigans going on in London after this clear, inspiring statement of British independence. Also amazing to watch Brexit's knock on effects.

Take here for example. Ever the optimist, "Pirate Pete" FitzSimons is trying to exploit the current upheaval to push his tired ol' dream of making Australia a republic ... But his position is incoherent. He says he was against the UK becoming independent from the EU. But because they did, we should now get rid of the Queen as our Head of State. Eh?

I mean, he would've made much more sense if he'd been for Leave all along, and made that known to Aussies. Then he'd be coming across as principled and consistent. But nup. The way he's behaving now just looks very cynical and opportunistic.

Anyhoo, in many ways it's an apples and oranges type situation ... And aside from Pirate Pete himself and a few of his sneering, elitist mates, hardly any Aussies are hot for a republic. I think people will just end up going "meh" at this latest republican push like they have done with all the others.

Over in the UK itself, Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is also taking full advantage of Brexit and being highly obstructive, thereby annoying the crap out of millions of her countrymen. She's been saying that she's either gonna try to block the move out of the EU, or push for Scotland to separate from the UK! Such provocative actions hardly seem wise -- especially given that Scotland made a very clear decision to stay part of the UK not so long ago.

Sturgeon seems to be a very difficult character. And I've gotta say that given their choices in these last two votes, the Scottish people generally seem to be very confused. Talk about wanting to have it both ways!

Finally starting to understand that whole kilt thing, now ...

Monday, June 27, 2016

Socialist reaction to Brexit bombshell reconfirms how right leaving was

Brexit continues to send shock waves throughout the world, with socialists all over the joint losing their shit big time. This massive global tanty just makes it even more obvious that the decision to leave the EU was the right one.

I mean, those voting Leave did so in major part because they were being dominated by a buncha unelected control freaks in another country. So what do these same control freaks and their fellow travellers across the globe do when they get told to sod off in no uncertain terms? They double down, don't take no for an answer ... Can you think of a clearer validation of those voting Leave's main motivation? I can't.

It's like when Milo Yiannopoulos  lobs at some ultra-PC Yank uni and says, "Students today are censorious". Rather than trying to wrongfoot him by letting him speak, they try to shout him down in the most hysterical way imaginable! In a way these idiots are more useful to him than to the creepy totalitarians that have brainwashed 'em.

Gawd. Imagine being that stupid ...

Anyhoo, I'm glad they keep reacting so predictably. As long as the fascist arsehats don't manage to get their way again, they'll just be speeding up the whole process of emancipation that the West has finally started to embark on.

Andrew Bolt's book triggers staff. Bookshops now safe spaces, it seems

Disappointing, but not at all surprising, that some Australian bookshops are making Andrew Bolt's new book hard to find for customers. The purported reason is that it offends some of the poor snowflakes working there. I'm sure that's true in a lot of cases. There are many students and young 'uns employed in these shops, after all. They have grown up being fed PC BS, and accept it as gospel. They see Bolta as the quintessence of eeevil.

But I think it might also be partially a top down directive. Booksellers often have cozy relationships with the big international publishers after all. And Worth Fighting For is published by Wilkinson Publishing. They've been around a while but they seem to be a local outfit. Maybe there's a desire to not be seen as rocking the boat by pushing an independent's product?

The reason I say this is that the traditional offline book business is being eaten alive by Amazon and other online booksellers. So the big publishing houses are feeling very anxious and threatened. Also, Bolt himself cites the case of global warming skeptic Ian Plimer, who had all kinds of retail related trouble with his books. As well as being politically incorrect, they were published by Connor Court, another small, independent outfit.

But in the end I think it's probably the ideological aspect that has most to do with this stealth campaign to sabotage Bolta's sales. And it's certainly not a new phenomenon. Way back in the nineties I remember hearing about a Paul Sheehan book called Among the Barbarians. It caused controversy at the time, and for many of the same reasons Bolt does now. I didn't have any trouble finding it in the St Kilda bookstore I bought it from. But I will always remember the disgusted reaction from the guy behind the counter!

So typical of sneering hipsters. But so silly! I mean, it's a business. They're shooting themselves in the foot by acting like this.

Sunday, June 26, 2016

Remainiacs' baying about Brexit typical of denialist Left

There's obviously sooo much that can be said about the truly earth shattering win for the Brexit campaign. But I think the main takeaway from the solid spanking given to Remainiacs is that the politically correct elites can nudge, threaten, and slime all they want -- but in the end the people will make their own decisions, if given the chance. Democracy works. And it rocks!

And it truly was democracy in action. After all, it wasn't just fusty Tories who voted Leave. People from across the political spectrum said "EU-se can all go get stuffed!". That's what made the outcome extra-delicious.

But this bold expression of national pride left PC lefties in particular with a very sour taste in their mouths ... Hmm. Isn't it interesting how the Left often proclaim that they're all for "people power". But when the people go against 'em, they say: "The people are stupid." WTF? They can't have both ways.

It's not unlike their bob-each-way line on racism in America. For years they whined that Seppos were all a pack o' racist rednecks. Then they elected Obama -- twice. What, so the whole nation suddenly became attitudinally reconstructed? What a joke. If Trump wins later this year they'll revert to their old pre-Obama fave, no doubt ...

It's like that epic line from A Few Good Men. They can't handle the truth! So they engage in all kinds of projection -- calling critics "denialists", for example.

Yeah, well, in this case I think that particular label is no longer libel. It describes them perfectly. Lefty Remainiacs have been crying that the Leavers are all old, dumb, or emotional ... Oh, FFS! Clearly, they won't face reality.

If they stopped clinging so desperately to their precious PC Narrative and saw things afresh they might actually learn something. Then they could compete with actual arguments, instead of relying on their traditional tactics of deceit and intimidation.

But in this case they've been true to form: petulant, hypocritical and incoherent -- most shrilly with their claims that bitter oldsters were mainly to blame for their loss.

Well, if right-on millennials wanna fixate on age as a factor then why not blame their own lazy demographic for not getting off their arses to vote!

In any case, their railing at codgers is so hypocritical. One of the major forms of discrimination SJWs say they wanna ban is ageism, remember. Yet when they don't get their way they are worst offenders. Kids today, eh!

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.

Saturday, June 4, 2016

#IStandWithHateSpeech triggers lefties and reveals their stupidity

Recently the hashtag #IStandWithHateSpeech was created as a response to the creepy EU move to censor online freedom of expression.

A lot of lefties were sneering up a storm about it. Many of them were world class hypocrites, since they'd happily tweeted and retweeted real hate speech themselves, such as #killallmen.

And the less aggro types missed the point.
Sure, some people tweeting the hashtag were dinkum racists. But the vast majority were not. They were making a statement in support of democracy. One man's hate speech is often another man's free speech after all. It all depends on who's defining the term, and what their prejudices are.

Always astonishes me how lefties can't see this. They're forever advocating totalitarian policies that could easily be used against them as well in time.

Take their siding with militant Islam. These socialists are thinking, "Ripper! We can join forces with Islamists to tear down eeevil Western Civilization!", not considering what might happen if they are successful.

Human nature abhors a vacuum, remember. With one system gone, another will inevitably take its place. And it won't be the commie cuddle bunnies who get to call the shots. It'll be the hardcore head hackers determined to create a Caliphate. They'll happily turn on their erstwhile allies and go spacko with the scimitars. It'll be a bloodbath, no doubt about it.

That's why I offered this contribution.
Sure, it was just a tweet. And even a squillion of those don't amount to a hill o' beans in this crazy world. But if the sinister forces of political correctness do ultimately win out then at least I know I did something, however small, to resist them.

Friday, June 3, 2016

Turnbull saying Hanson not welcome not good strategy

The more I learn about Turnbull, the more it seems to me that Brendan Nelson diagnosed him correctly: he's a narcissist. Take that vicious and imperious put-down of Pauline Hanson a coupla days back:

"Pauline Hanson is not a welcome presence on the Australian political scene - remember she was chucked out of the Liberal party," the prime minister told reporters in Sydney today.

I reckon heaps of people who read or heard that comment (maybe even a majority of them) would have thought "Who the hell does this tosser think he is?" or raised an eyebrow at the very least. And that's not just those who sympathize with her, BTW. Even many people who hate her guts would have been alarmed by it.

That's because anyone with a sense of fair play knows that the essence of democracy is that everyone, no matter what their background, should be able to have a crack at a seat. It's up to the people to decide who represents them, not some supercilious silvertail.

Just as nobody should be above the law in a fair society, everyone should be able to participate in elections. But Turnbull was clearly presuming to speak for the political establishment, like some kinda self-appointed Zues of Mt Canberra!

FFS ...

Goes without saying that pissing off the voters is a bad strategy in politics. Which is why I think that utterance will have done Turnbull significant damage. It was a real glimpse into the dark inner workings of his character.

Sure, there have been several of those. The knifing of Abbott was the most spectacular, of course. But that was validated by the complicity of all those spineless Liberal MPs who betrayed their elected leader.

This little unguarded moment, however, was Turnbull's alone. While it wasn't as alarming as Mark Latham's notoriously aggro handshake with JHo it was in the same general ballpark, I reckon.

This revelation along with numerous others -- such as his refusal to attend a solemn and significant military ceremony -- are accumulating in the public's consciousness. The voters are slowly but surely getting a handle on this guy. And they are really starting to dislike him.