John Howard has attacked Julia Gillard’s famous misogyny speech against Tony Abbott claiming that "playing the misogyny card" is "the worst possible way of promoting a greater involvement by women in public life.”
"We won’t let you women play with us if you keep telling us we’re mean."
He then went on to say "it’s not very nice calling us misogynists. If you call us one it means you’re doing poorly at your job. Men are never at fault, only loud whingy women with emotional problems who can’t weild authority are." Thus proving Gillard’s point. "Also I hate multiculturalism. That’s also a bad thing I need to attack."
Anonymous said: except that photo is photoshopped (quite obviously too). look at any photos from that press conference and you'll see there's no text. i hate abbott too but at least get your facts straight.
…well 1) that is a submission so I didn’t write that and 2) Are you saying that’s the only photo with an incorrect caption on this blog? Because I think you’ll find there are a lot of captions under photos that aren’t correct on this blog… Is that also the only inaccuracy? Like the text is photoshopped but Brandis is still shitting himself?
YESSSSS! Thank you to all the people who bought the All Hail The Lizard King shirt! That’s so rewarding and awesome. People are going to be walking around with my artwork on their body in an attempt to prevent the police for arresting them for indecent exposure! (or on their phones to protect it from indecent cracking) Artwork I spent ages (a seriously long time) working on. That’s the most amazing thing! The true reptilian form of The Lizard King made public. Ah, glorious.
I cannot thank those people enough for their support. You peeps are fantastic
So a while ago I asked people if they wanted shirts and I’d like to announce they’ll be coming soon.
Tony Abbott has recently said he has no problem with the legalisation of medicinal marijuana.
Angry left wing voters yelled “OH YEAH!? Well that’s… right?” and then stood around really confused and scratching their heads.
"Wait… shit… we’re agreeing with Tony Abbott over something? Fuck" said one left-wing activist. "WHO AM I!?"
"Whoa… this is messing with my brain… more so than marijuana would."
"I thought I was going to be really angry today but I’m… not? I’m so confused. I need to go look up the news concerning Ferguson to get my rage levels back up."
There was mutters of confusion and agreement. Meanwhile, in Tony’s office he chuckled to himself.
"Keep ‘em guessing what I’ll do next… classic, Tony" he said to himself.
votre-encre said: What do you think the future holds for our 'great nation'?
Crying, mainly. Hopefully with joy 2 years in the future… until then just sadness… lots of sadness.
Anonymous said: Being from the UK I don't fully understand the Australian political system, although I criticise Abbott for his poor environmental record. Is there no way of breaking apart the government? I understand it's a coalition, haven't people tried to lobby the more moderate party in the coalition?
Yeah that’s not going to happen, sorry. They’re effectively treated as a single party. They’re also not doing too well numbers-wise in the Senate so breaking up will even further get rid of their power so breaking apart is political suicide. They need to stick together. I mean… theoretically it’s possible that the Nationals can break ties with the Liberals but it’s in their best interests to act as one single party because they generally agree and it helps them with form a government. They’ll do what they can to be supportive of Tony Abbott until he loses the next election and then replace him and hopefully his replacement is less of a cunt.
Theoretically he can be doing so incredibly awful in the polls that they know for certain he’ll lose and might get rid of him themselves and replace him with someone the public likes more (like a bar stool with a missing leg for example…) It happened with Gillard/Rudd but didn’t turn out well for them in the end anyway so…
The Liberals (which could be considered Abbott’s party if you split up the Coalition) are, if anything, more moderate than the Nationals. The Nationals are your typical right-wing xenophobes, the Liberals are a mix of a whole bunch of centrist/centre-right/right-wing beliefs. And there’s absolutely no way that the Coalition would break up — it would kill the Nationals. Australia doesn’t exactly have a two-party system (the Greens have decent representation, for one), but it’s not too far from one either.
So even in the incredibly unlikely situation that the Coalition split up, we would still be stuck with Abbott, because he’s the one representing the major party.
What may possibly get rid of him before 2016 is if a double dissolution is called. A double dissolution is something that a politician can call in extreme circumstances that basically forces every single member of the Senate and House of Representatives out of their positions and puts them all up for re-election. If this happens, Abbott’s prime ministership is done. Over. His approval rate is nonexistent. Nobody is going to re-elect him. There have been a lot of threats of double dissolutions for exactly that reason…but the way things are going, we’ll probably have to wait until 2016 to vote him out.
(Not that I’m complaining that much. It’ll be the first election where I can vote, and I want to help kick the cunt out.)
Sorry, I just picked Nationals as an example of one of the elements of the Coalition. I realise how I phrased that poorly and it makes it seem like I meant they were the more moderate element when really I meant in theory it’s possible that they could decide not to be partners anymore. I have absolutely no belief that it’s possible to convince them to break apart though or any of them are moderate enough to even remotely want to. Individual politicians potentially might… parties no.