Yeah, but it’s principled when Tony takes the tobacco multinationals’ money; unlike Labor, he’ll do their bidding

Tony Abbott apparently thinks he’s on a winner with the revelation that the tobacco companies managed to slip some cash to Labor after it started refusing them through the front door:

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott yesterday said: ”Certainly she [health minister Nicola Roxon] has been remarkably shrill on this issue.

”It must be a pretty embarrassing thing to have been caught out on this, but that is a matter for her to explain.”

Not half as embarrassing as receiving $3 million from the cancer stick pushers since 1998 like you have (and continue to do), Tony, and then pushing their interests in parliament at the expense of Australians’ health. Not even a fraction as embarrassing – hers was a minor cockup; yours is a continuing sellout for which you’re not even sorry.

PS Isn’t the problem with corrupting donations when the party does what the donor demands? (Like the Liberals do.) Well, if Labor did take the tobacco companies’ money, it’s clearly not been corrupted by it because, obviously, it’s presently fighting them tooth and nail. (Which is why they’ve released this supposedly “embarrassing” information.) In some ways, that’s even better – take their cash, and then use it against them. It’s only a sellout if you give them what they want.

PPS “Shrill”? Get stuffed, you silly old misogynist.

Advertisements

27 responses to “Yeah, but it’s principled when Tony takes the tobacco multinationals’ money; unlike Labor, he’ll do their bidding

  1. The sitting labor MP’s must be a clean mob, if we take in account of the allegations being raised against them. A minister took a couple of hundred dollars donation before 2005 when the party was still taking donations from the tobacco industry.

  2. Splatterbottom

    ““Shrill”? Get stuffed, you silly old misogynist”

    This is beyond stupid. PC nonsense has gone too far. You can’t even call a bitch a bitch any more. Unless, of course, you are calling John Howard “George Bush’s bitch”. Professional offence takers need to be mocked, shamed and shat on. People are demeaned not when they are treated equally, but when their inferiority is implied by their status as a protected species.

  3. I’m sure SB will be leading the vanguard to re-introduce the word “nigger” as an acceptable pejorative to be used against black people.

    After all, anyone who “professionally” takes offence to that word needs to be mocked, shamed and shat on.

  4. Splatterbottom

    Mondo ‘nigger’ wasn’t originally a pejorative. It only became verboten because PC wankers decided to make it so. Then ‘negro’ went and then ‘coloured’ too. And you had better be careful because now ‘black’ is on the way out, you fucking racist.

  5. This is beyond stupid. PC nonsense has gone too far. You can’t even call a bitch a bitch any more. Unless, of course, you are calling John Howard “George Bush’s bitch”.

    Not sure any politicians referred to Howard as “George Bush’s bitch”.

    I guess the next best thing if a male politician can’t call a female politician “bitch” would be to knowingly allow yourself to be photographed in front of a large placard doing it for you.

  6. I presume you’re still going around calling black people “nigger”, SB. Being a man of principle, you’re surely not kow-towing to the PC police. It’s up to people like you to provide some resistance to this.

  7. Splatterbottom

    Did I say anything about politicians, Buns, or is that just you making shit up?

    Speaking of politicians surely you remember the outrage (or was that a few muffled tut-tuts?) from the left when ALP leftist Mark Latham called Albrechtsen a Skanky Ho.

  8. No, it’s not me making shit up. Your complaint appeared to be that while Tony Abbott can’t call Roxon a “bitch”, it was fine to call John Howard “George Bush’s bitch”. And your comparison would be apt if even one politician had ever called Howard “George Bush’s bitch” and gotten away with it.

  9. Splatterbottom

    Buns: “I presume you’re still going around calling black people “nigger”, SB. “

    I’m sure you do, Buns. You always think the best of me, don’t you?

    My complaint is about the hypersensitivity of the PC crowd who debase the currency of genuine disgust with the politically motivated faux-outrage. The pile-on of Sarah Palin after the Gifford’s shooting was classic.

  10. Splatterbottom

    Buns: “Your complaint appeared to be that while Tony Abbott can’t call Roxon a “bitch”, it was fine to call John Howard “George Bush’s bitch”.”

    Now you are adding even more to your steaming pile of shit, Buns. My complaint was against professional offense-takers.

  11. Right. I think where you got off on the wrong foot was implying that male politicians should be able to call female politicians “bitch” and that this should generally be acceptable to people. Because that is an idiotic proposition.

  12. Splatterbottom

    Buns calling politicians things like “Bob Brown’s Bitch” or “George Bush’s Bitch” is not a big deal. I probably wouldn’t do it myself, but screaming the house down about it is childish. I can’t for the life of me see a problem in calling Roxon shrill. Sometimes she is.

  13. “Mondo ‘nigger’ wasn’t originally a pejorative. It only became verboten because PC wankers decided to make it so. Then ‘negro’ went and then ‘coloured’ too.”

    Niggler please!!!!

    How ignorant are you?

    BTW there is a comment of mine in moderation where I swear at sb feel free to delete it.

  14. SB,
    problem with such language is that it sets a tone. Shrill has undertones of a harridan and is meant to be demeaning of women. Leads to

    “Western Australian Liberal MP Don Randall is facing a barrage of controversy following his comments that the mining industry is “pussy-whipped” by Prime Minister Julia Gillard”.

  15. Obviously, Don thinks “pussy-whipped” means the exact opposite of what it actually means.

  16. Words have history. Words can hurt. Other words can heal. The only people who complain about “political correctness” are those who want to continue using the words that hurt to inflict more hurt rather than find new words to heal. SB being Exhibit A on this blog.

    It’s even possible to say the same thing without dragging words with hurtful history into it. Instead of describing John Howard as George W. Bush’s “bitch”, the same point can be made by calling him a “lapdog”. Gender-neutral. Only hurtful assholes think it is defensible to make a point by including a stereotyping dog-whistle like “bitch”.

    Open up a dictionary and learn some new words SB. Edumucate yourself already!

  17. Words have history. Words can hurt. Other words can heal. The only people who complain about “political correctness” are those who want to continue using the words that hurt to inflict more hurt rather than find new words to heal.”

    Hear hear.

  18. Splatterbottom

    Jules: “BTW there is a comment of mine in moderation where I swear at sb feel free to delete it.”

    Please don’t delete the Jules’ comment. I worked hard on my initial comment to go as close the line as I could and would be very disappointed if I wasn’t sworn at.

    SLDR & Unique, my problem is with professional offense-takers who use the language of political correctness to bash opponents. People can make up their own minds about the tone of political conversations without self-righteous victim-mongers jumping in to try to score political points and get off on their own high-falutin’ rectitude.

  19. “professional offense-takers”

    Name one. Strawmen that only exist in your head don’t count.

  20. Splatterbottom

    Unique that would include most people who regularly call others ‘racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘misogynist’ etc and everyone who has called anyone an ‘islamophobe’.

  21. Ah, so only Mr. Straw R. Man then. Thought so. Name please.

  22. It wasn’t as good a line as “niggler please” SB.

    And there is only one reason to call someone a nigger. That reason is to cause them hurt and offense. Why should that right be protected, when the right to respond isn’t?

  23. Unique that would include most people who regularly call others ‘racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘misogynist’ etc and everyone who has called anyone an ‘islamophobe’.

    And presumably also the people who are on the receiving end of these attacks, who then take offense themselves.

  24. SLDR & Unique, my problem is with professional offense-takers who use the language of political correctness to bash opponents. People can make up their own minds about the tone of political conversations without self-righteous victim-mongers jumping in to try to score political points and get off on their own high-falutin’ rectitude.

    Starting to sound a lot like these professional offense-takers you’re complaining about now, SB. You realise that, don’t you? But I suppose that, not being a leftard, you can take all the offense you like without becoming “professional”, right?

    There’s a factual definition of words like “racist”. I find the best defense against being called racist is not engaging in racism. Why would you have sympathy for somebody who gets called a “racist” after he/she has engaged in racism?

  25. ” Why would you have sympathy for somebody who gets called a “racist” after he/she has engaged in racism?”

    Because he likes racists, he revealed himself as one when he started slagging off Palestinians in the recent ‘I’ve got a stupid, primitive, racist brain’ thread.

    If I make a comment which is derogatory to him as a Catholic, say I call him ‘George Pell’s bitch’ he gets upset and accuses me of being abusive (which is true in his case, he dishes it out himself, that is why I give it back) thing is though, this makes SB a racist and a hypocrite.

    As has been said, those who rail against PC are those who want to reserve the right to call black people ‘nigger’.

  26. narcoticmusing

    Professional offence takers need to be mocked, shamed and shat on.

    So, you are suggesting that you are a professional offence taker to professional offence takers? Also, your remedy is a lot more severe than someone simply pulling up someone else for, arguably (as in you’d argue it wasn’t), inappropriate use of language.

    People are demeaned not when they are treated equally, but when their inferiority is implied by their status as a protected species.

    Says you. It isn’t treating a woman equally by calling her a bitch, shrill or describing her impact as ‘pussy whipping’. It is pointing to her gender and is completely unnecessary. I don’t take offence at such things per se, but I would still prefer our politicians attempt to lead by example and not stoop to such gender based insults. I could also see how it is offensive at the least, insensitive – such as using a well coined phrase like ‘no means no’. It has a meaning and to use it against a woman as if it were funny is, at the least, insensitive and unbecoming of a potential leader in our community.

  27. Splatterbottom

    Buns: “Starting to sound a lot like these professional offense-takers you’re complaining about now, SB. You realise that, don’t you?”

    I’m not about taking offense. I don’t have the necessary hubris or moral righteousness. I am not like some PC wanker strutting about, cock in hand, spraying my slimy goodness about, earnestly trying to shame political opponents while standing erect for the oppressed and the little brown people.

    RobJ: “If I make a comment which is derogatory to him as a Catholic, say I call him ‘George Pell’s bitch’ he gets upset and accuses me of being abusive (which is true in his case, he dishes it out himself, that is why I give it back) thing is though, this makes SB a racist and a hypocrite.”

    You’ve got it wrong again, Bobby boy. My point was that your argument was all abuse and no logic. Not that I objected to the abuse.. My advice for you is to try to combine the abuse with relevant argument or two. Actually two is probably stretching it for you but you get the drift.

    Narcotic: “It isn’t treating a woman equally by calling her a bitch, shrill or describing her impact as ‘pussy whipping’.”

    We all know that you are a sweet person and would like politicians to play nice with each other. Good for you. I enjoy a bit of colourful conversation, although ‘skanky ho’ was taking it a bit far, especially for a leader.

    There is nothing wrong with describing the same behaviour with the same epithets. If you think women should get a pass because they are more likely to be shrill or bitchy than men then you are what you criticise, no?

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s