on 08-03-2014 09:39 AM
This disgusting swan song from a Green was lauded on here as a milestone and a rival to Gillards misplaced misogyny rant.
The people who support this type of hate speech are not indicitive of the wider Australian people and to applaud this type of hate is appalling.
I will stand up to this type of thing and so will the majority of Australians. This person is not fit to be in parliament and he should be rejected wholeheartedly by everyone, which he will be come the WA re election, and good riddance to him and his ilk:
SPORTING dark suit and speaking in a calm, measured tone, Scott Ludlam is the acceptable face of the Greens.
He has spoken out previously against the “people’s revolt” against the carbon tax that sparked the “Ditch the Witch” nastiness.
Ludlam’s style is the antithesis of histrionics such as the current appalling rock concert concoctions of a fake prime ministerial beheading.
This week the West Australian senator rose to a near-empty chamber and delivered a prepared speech without raising his voice and with no one around to interject. Later, the 7 1/2-minute speech went viral on YouTube, a hit with the young Green Left crowd, attracting 400,000 hits within a few days.
But forget the style of the speech; it merely disguised a message that was divisive, vindictive and in the end subversive.
“We want our country back,” he said, just six months after a federal election. This is a senator who, with his colleagues, holds the balance of power in the Senate on about 10 per cent of the vote.
Yet he told supporters they were somehow disenfranchised.
Ludlam spoke of “predator capitalism” and a “murderous horror unfolding on Manus Island” as he launched an attack on the Prime Minister and his government. He suggested Abbott treated WA as a “caricatured redneck backwater” and that it was “kind of revolting” that the Prime Minister consulted with “mining billionaires and media oligarchs on the other side of the world”.
Ludlam provided no serious evidence or justification for his slurs. He even talked about Abbott - who I first met 20 years ago through a mutual gay friend and who has been publicly loving and supportive of his gay sister - as “waving (his) homophobia in people’s faces”.
We know the Greens are a party of protest but this invective was simply hateful.
“Prime Minister,” said Ludlam, “you are welcome to take your heartless and racist exploitation of people’s fears and ram it as far from Western Australia as your taxpayer-funded travel entitlements can take you.”
So Ludlam used the Senate to denigrate a freshly elected Prime Minister who is implementing his agenda - to the extent that he isn't blocked by Ludlam’s party - as racist, cynically manipulative, heartless and exploitative.
On what evidence?
This vitriol is subversive because it suggests a democratic government has somehow stolen the country. If Ludlam and his supporters want their “country back” surely the way to do it is through fair-minded criticism and a viable alternative.
No matter how calmly it is presented, unhinged hatred can’t help anyone.
Solved! Go to Solution.
on 10-03-2014 06:34 PM
on 10-03-2014 06:35 PM
on 10-03-2014 06:38 PM
@izabsmiling wrote:
@am*3 wrote:
I though you were worried about voters..not many in France eligible to vote in Aust elections.
We could publish some not nice things about the French president and his mistress... but that wouldn't achieve anything either. The French don't care about their Presidents affairs.
Is there some father/daughter angst here that runs deeper than election campaigns?not relevant at all ...though lets just say that I have had a bit of experience with men and women with NPD
everyone else is just something to be used for their own enjoyment
interesting mention of the French, i do remember a thread on here doing exactly that. People say all the time that they aren't influenced by advertising, yet clearly people are influenced, that's why advertising is such a profitable industry. Abbrott clearly used his family as a prop to help convince female voters that he "understood women" - that can be denied ad infinitum - doesn't mean a thing, the proof was in the election campaign for all to see.
on 10-03-2014 06:41 PM
I have to say, that this has been the most entertaining political thread that I have seen on these boards...
on 10-03-2014 06:44 PM
10-03-2014 06:47 PM - edited 10-03-2014 06:50 PM
on 10-03-2014 06:57 PM
@am*3 wrote:
Quote:If Australians want to discuss this or anything else why does anyone feel that they have the right to try to stop them ?
Exactly, discussing Abbott's daughters on the campaign trail with him. That doesn't mean opposing views that conflict with the person who first mentioned it in this thread cant be put forward...especially ones that don' t involve personal insults about the PM.
I disagree with your thinking that personal insults/ posters opinions about our elected Goverrnment
are less appropriate in a political thread than personal insults to other ebay members/groups of members .
on 10-03-2014 07:38 PM
@am*3 wrote:
Not everyone is influenced by advt. a lot of younger people don't watch free to air TV, don't listen to the radio, don't read newspapers.. Usual places where you get bombarded with ads.
Yes there was a thread here a out the French president and his mistress..nothing to do with influencing Aust voters though.
but how many of those "younger people" go online, plenty of advertising there, magazines etc, or are they Amish. Just because people aren't always aware that they have been influenced, doesn't mean they haven't. I made no mention of the thread re: French politician influencing australian voters, just pointing out that some did comment on that politicians private life.
on 10-03-2014 07:39 PM
10-03-2014 07:43 PM - edited 10-03-2014 07:46 PM
@izabsmiling wrote:Icyfroth wrote:
Fit what?
The PM's daughters helping him win an election? No way, and I think it's disgusting to imply that, frankly.
If you find it disgusting to imply it ..do you not find the fact that that is what was done disgusting ?
Whaaaa...? Why would I find it disgusting that Mr Abbotts daughters helped him in the campaign trail leading up to the election? I certainly don't see it as exploitation, so therefore, no it doesn't disgust me. Wives/husbands and children of presidential or ministerial aspirants lend support in election campaigns all the time.
What disgusts me is your implication that Mr Abbott "pimped" his daughters which further implies they prostituted themselves to get their father into the top job. That is a slur on the character of 3 innocent young women I frankly find despicable. Misogynistic, in fact. Gormless, actually.
It wasn't his daughters that got Mr Abbott the job after all, it was his stop the boats and reverse the carbon tax promises that got him in. That and his gormless predecessors.