Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » AGW and climate change » Shit happens peoples – get over it

Shit happens peoples – get over it

What is all the fuss about? Tony Abbott is a decent man and he would never make light of a soldiers death. Just ask Joe Hockey Andrew Robb or Chrissy Pine or any other Liberal Party politician. They will tell you that Abbott was taken out of context when he said “Nah … shit happens”.

You mightnt know this but he also said these things too:

“I know 35 people were killed in the Queensland floods but, nah, shit happens.”

“I know that Cyclone Nazi (*) destroyed thousands of homes but, nah, shit happens.”

“I know Victoria was flooded too but, nah, shit happens.”

“I know the Aussies lost the Ashes and the Asian Cup but, nah, shit happens.”

“I know the Libs lost the election and I’m not the PM but, nah … shit happens!”

I am getting sick of the media attacking this man. Look at the beat up over his opposition to the flood levy and his call for people to donate money to the Liberal Party instead so they can stop Queensland from being rebuilt. Whats wrong with that? Shit happens Queensland.

Tony Abbott is a real person – a real man, not a blubbering female like Julie ‘no kids’ Gillard – and hes no antsy pantsy fairy. He rides a bike you know? And he swims. He reckons we should all cop it on the chin (just like XXXX should).

Tony Abbott is our PM in exile. He should be running this country and stopping all this waste. Hes right – we shouldnt be spending $30billion on the NBN and if we didnt we would have enough money to build nuclear power stations and end global warming and all these freak weather events.

Why cant anyone else see that? Is it just me? And Tony?

Nah, shit happens.

(* I changed the name from “Yasi” because cyclones should not be named after jews)

Advertisements

71 Comments

  1. PKD says:

    Since when did the libs put out the policy to adopt nuclear power?
    And since when did Abbott come out and say AGW is actually happening? Last I heard he was anti AGW and non-commital at best on nuclear power.

    I guess you didn’t check your facts again, but hey, shit happens right?

  2. SockPuppet says:

    Its his secret plan PK.

  3. PKD says:

    Yes, Abbott keeps his real beliefs and plans secret, sharing them only with an anonymous bogan sock puppet who dwells in a caravan park.

    Who then does a terrible job keeping Abbotts secret plans a secret by blabbing about them on the net.

    Hey I can actually believe that!!!

  4. Luzu says:

    PKD,
    I don’t think I would be the first person to point out that Tony Abbott did not actually say that AGW is crap. He said the science being used as evidence for AGW was crap. But that doesn’t play that well among the Tony-Abbott-haters-for-life club so it is portrayed as his having said something close but with an entirely different meaning.
    Just as his latest comment in which he is commenting on the circumstances surrounding the death of this Australian soldier, rather than the death itself. FGS, the officer standing with Tony agrees with his comment. Can you see a serving officer shrugging off the death of a soldier with such a comment or accepting the same from a politician? I can’t.
    There’s more to this story.

  5. The Other Iain says:

    He reckons we should all cop it on the chin (just like Lygo should).

    So should the man behind the sock. If he had a chin, that is.

    On the issue at hand, personally I think this story is a beat up. Abbott wasnt making light of anything. He was just saying that in war you can’t control everything and sometimes unfortunate things happen and people get killed. Which is perfectly true. Just a cheap bit of sound bite journalism.

  6. Craigy says:

    Yeah… but Tony’s responded by just staring at the journo for 40 or 50 seconds…..weird man….

    We all new Tony would shoot himself in the foot (and he did it in Afghanistan, do we award purple hearts? 🙂 ) .

    Turnbull was licking his lips on TV this morning….It’s good bye Tony. He was never going to be PM. Shit happens Tony!

    And Luzu, you’re spinning out of control mate. AGW is a scientific theory. If the scientific theory is crap in Tony’s view, then so is AGW……The level of stupid is amusing though.

  7. Craigy says:

    Also, it was commented on radio this morning that the Lib’s had blocked access to the footage for 3 months and 7 got at it through FOI. I’m not sure this is true but it wouldn’t surprise me as the conservatives do like to hide their real views about stuff.

    It explains why Howard and his arse lickers like Tony were so keen to send Aussies to their death to try and win the redneck vote. People die and they blow it off with a “shit happens”.

  8. SockPuppet says:

    Another day another hot topic. Thank you for your insides guys. I will respond.

    Firstly to PK: You might have noticed or you might have not (well obviously you did not) that I did not actually say Tone the Man supports nuclear power and believes in AGW. Let me explain English to you mate. Here is my comment about it fully explained (in brackets):

    Hes right – we shouldnt be spending $30billion on the NBN (yes, that is what Tony said PK – fact) and if we didnt we would have enough money to build nuclear power stations and end global warming and all these freak weather events. (but the 2nd part of the sentence is not attributed to him. It is what I think. This is what is called an opinion based on a fact.)

    Why cant anyone else see that? Is it just me? And Tony? (And this means that I am not sure if Tony can see what I see.)

    Sorry PK I do not mean to be condomsending to you and give you a comprehension lesson in clear thinking. But you asked for it.

    Luzu, you are right. The American officer agreed with Tone that “shit happens”. And he knows a lot better than the dead soldiers dad don’t you think? Maybe the dad is just after 15 more minutes of fame? He should listen to the Americans in charge and just STFU.

    BrotherIain (are you really Iain’s brother?): I have seen your ugly bald head and chinless face so you should not be chucking stones at others my boy. Anyway, I agree that Abbott saying “nah shit happens” is appropriate response and I think this should be adopted as our national slogan: “Welcome to Australia, shit happens” should adorn all international airport arrivals. As a warning. Followed by “Don’t complain to us we didn’t ask you to come here”. Okay? As for it being shite journalism I agree that journos should stick to writing stuff about sport (and babyboomers who aren’t babyboomers) and should never use the FOI laws to find out how the Opposition leader handles hisself when visiting our war zones. what a bloody cheek!

    Craigee: He was just about to punch him.

  9. damage says:

    Craigy.

    In my opinion – and it is a humble one – to use the tragic death of a digger for political point scoring is reprehensible.
    Sure we all realise that some people hate Abbott. We furrther realise that some people hate him simply because of the position that he holds and no other reason. The man could cure polio, AIDS and cancer then resurect Princess Dianna and John Lennon and some people would still detest him. We get that.
    However, to use circumstances surrounding his comments on the opperational dangers in a war zone to attack him is piss weak.

    Especially given that some people defended Christine Nixon who went to dinner and let them burn.

  10. Ray Dixon says:

    some people defended Christine Nixon who went to dinner and let them burn.

    I don’t get the comparison with Nixon but I agree she didn’t do her job that day. She also kept a hairdressing appointment and, low & behold, even met with a notorious Internet sta*lker for an hour or so. They had tea & bikkies I believe, and a bit of a ‘chat’. No, it was not XXXX.

    As for the “shit happens” statement, I don’t think it means that Abbott doesn’t care about the soldier’s death. But I think it demonstrates that he’s a loose canon who doesn’t think before he speaks.

  11. damage says:

    It wasn’t a public conversation and in context there was no “thinking” required.

    In fact, it was a perfectly reasonable thing to say because they were talking about who was at fault in this action where mistakes cost a life.
    The concept was something we learned day one when I was in the forces.
    The best battle plan in history won’t withstand just one simple thing. Contact with the enemy.

    The context was that sometimes things occur in battle that simply can’t be accounted for in planning. Or to say in in two words ….”Shit happens.”

    An acquaintance lost his wife a week or so back. She went to the gym and came home with a head ache. 48 hours later she was dead from a cerebral oedema. At 46!

    I bumped into him on the morning of her funeral while getting the paper. He was devistated, but said those same two words to me. “Shit happens!”

    As I said, only those who are dedicated to the hatred of Abbott and the conservative side of politics are pushing this barrow. It is Yasi in a teacup.

  12. damage says:

    Almost forgot.

    Far be it from me to plug him, but if you wander over to PP you can read a surprisingly balanced piece by Jeremy Sear on this. For once, he’s making some sense.
    No chance of it lasting, but never the less worth a read.

  13. The Other Iain says:

    You seem to know a lot about certain people Ray. You claim to know what I look like even though I havent met you. You know who Christine Nixon met with. Where do you come by all this hot info? Are you an internet st**ker?

    Re: Abbott, I’m no fan of him or his politics, but he has been hardy done by here. With regard to the silence, he appeared to be shaking. Maybe he was shocked or upset. Or just struggling to contain his anger. (Ray knows that feeling, I’m tipping)

  14. Craigy says:

    damage,

    I had made the point at this site when Tony was made the leader that I didn’t believe he would make it to the next election, given his mouth and catholic background mixed with his AGW denialism and his membership of the discredited and rejected ‘Howard A team’. It was just too much to think he wouldn’t put his foot in it.

    Tony is the one who politicised this death, by going over there to shoot guns and look tough for the Aussie media. In his ‘I’m tough’ mode, he runs off the mouth by referring to the lack of support from the US Army for the Australian foot soldiers, during the confusion of a fire fight, as ‘shit happens’.

    Now you could just see this as a statement of fact, shit does happen if you send your young men off to another country to fight, but it is revealing that people like Tony, who supported sending them away just to win some political battle, has so little concern for the accusation and blows it off as ‘shit happens’.

    Insensitive, lacking any empathy and clearly a good insight into the mans character.

    I actually don’t mind Turnbull as a lib leader, silver spoon and all.

    As for Nixon and the Victorian ALP – I’m glad they are finished with, but I won’t be holding my breath waiting for Ted to improve the poor leadership in this state. I’m not sure what the answer is right now.

  15. Craigy says:

    I actually think Jeremy got this wrong.

  16. Iain Hall says:

    TOI
    is this a picture of you?

    Craigy
    war is really unpredictable and any soldier will tell you that Tony Abbott is just being very frank about that.

  17. Ray Dixon says:

    I don’t want to be trite, XXXX, but if something is said by SockPuppet wouldn’t it be normal protocol to respond to him rather than to the person you rightly or wrongly believe is behind that pseudonym? We did all this yesterday – why do you want to start it up again?

    Anyway, I think SP’s reference to your “ugly” appearance was what is known as a joke. That’s spelt: J.O.K.E.

    Would you like to me to explain that again?

    As for who Nixon met with and what she did on Black Saturday, um, I think that’s pretty much in the public realm. That means it’s public information, you know, it appears in newspapers like The Age and on TV. Perhaps next time you switch on your TV (if you own one, I realise you’re broke) you should quickly admonish yourself for “stal*king”.

    Now go back to your pathetic hangout and make even more absurd postings. No one is listening. Well I do, but only for the laughs.

  18. Indi Warrior says:

    you really are a blunt tool Iain…

  19. Craigy says:

    “war is really unpredictable and any soldier will tell you that Tony Abbott is just being very frank about that.”

    In front of the national News Iain……..

    As it is the war is lost, so why are we there again? Politics is my guess.
    Why was Tony there? To have a better understanding and support the troops?
    No. It was a photo op, guns blazing, to attract the redneck vote.

    Who do you fancy will replace him Iain?

  20. The Other Iain says:

    (Sorry Iain, forgot the rules, delete that last one. Cheers.)

    I don’t want to be trite, Lygo, but if something is said by SockPuppet wouldn’t it be normal protocol to respond to him

    I was 🙂

    Anyway, I think SP’s reference to your “ugly” appearance was what is known as a joke. That’s spelt: J.O.K.E.

    Yeah I know. It was up (down?) to “his” usual standards.

    As for who Nixon met with and what she did on Black Saturday, um, I think that’s pretty much in the public realm.

    Yeah. But I don’t remember reading that this person was an “internet st**ker”. How do you know this? Were they st**king you too? Is there anyone who isn’t?

  21. Ray Dixon says:

    To my knowledge only you and, er, someone else who comments at your shithole, are actually engaged in illegal sta*lking against yours truly. You keep some fine company there. As for the rest of your comment, stop acting like a child. You’ve done the other stages so maybe it’s time you moved on?

  22. Ray Dixon says:

    Craigy, I agree that Jeremy has got his take on the Abbott reporting by 7 absolutely wrong. But then again, as we know, he just delights in shooting the messenger. Beats me why he thinks the media should not investigate politicians.

  23. Sax says:

    (and he did it in Afghanistan, do we award purple hearts? 🙂 )

    Order of the White Feather would be more appropriate wouldn’t it ?
    Oh well, there is always Dullard.
    Oh dear ?
    😦

  24. The Other Iain says:

    To my knowledge only you and, er, someone else who comments at your shithole, are actually engaged in illegal sta*lking against yours truly.

    Is that so Ray? Well get yourself down to the local constabulary then. Tell them all about it. I’m sure the first thing they will do is visit here to take stock of your own attitude/conduct. It might be ‘men in white coats’ time for a certain little piggy.

  25. Ray Dixon says:

    My own attitude/conduct?? Christ you’re stupid. Thanks for the advice though.

  26. damage says:

    “I had made the point at this site when Tony was made the leader that I didn’t believe he would make it to the next election, given his mouth and catholic background mixed with his AGW denialism and his membership of the discredited and rejected ‘Howard A team’.”

    And you’re still wrong. But despite it taking this long to admit that you finally have. I guess since it took from July till now to admit that the above was wrong that it will be Grand Final time before you admit that you’re off the ball here.

    But again had Abbott stayed at home you’d be accusing him of cowardice and lack of support for the troops. Had he gone and not been seen you’d be accusing him of hiding something. As I said, if he invented nuclear fusion from camel spit you’d accuse him of AWG denial or cruelty to dromidary.

    Oh well!

  27. Craigy says:

    “And you’re still wrong. But despite it taking this long to admit that you finally have. I guess since it took from July till now to admit that the above was wrong that it will be Grand Final time before you admit that you’re off the ball here. “

    Sorry damage but I’m not sure what that all means. I’m wrong about Tony and I’ve taken this long to admit what??? All I said is the knives are out and I’m not alone in that view.

    Your strawman is way off……I don’t give a toss what Tony does or where he goes, he is a reactionary with no real ideas of his own other than those ideological ones he shared with Howard, like the dog whistle stuff that plays to racist rednecks.

    For the record, I’m no fan of the current ALP or their leader either.

  28. damage says:

    http://www.news.com.au/world/pm-kevin-rudd-visits-troops-in-afghanistan-on-way-to-india/story-e6frfkyi-1225796704561

    Mmmmmmm?

    Rememberance day? Coincidence?

    http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/world/kevin-rudd-visits-afghanistan-gordon-brown-hits-iraq/story-e6frev00-1111118352220

    Mmmmm ? Pre Christmas? Coincidence?

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/24/2881961.htm

    “Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says the Government will increase the Australian civilian effort in Afghanistan.

    The numbers of diplomatic, development aid, and police personnel will be boosted to around 50.”

    ………………….but it is revealing that people like Kevin, who supported sending them away just to win some political battle, has so little concern for the accusation …………………

  29. damage says:

    “I had made the point at this site when Tony was made the leader that I didn’t believe he would make it to the next election……………..”

    I don’t give a toss what Tony does or where he goes , he is a reactionary with no real ideas of his own other than those ideological ones he shared with Howard, like the dog whistle stuff that plays to racist rednecks.”

    In other words.
    I don’t give a toss what Tony does or where he goes except for what he does, what he thinks and what believs and if he goes to war zones. Other than that I don’t give a toss what Tony does or where he goes.

    Argument ended.

  30. Craigy says:

    I think I agree with you damage, but I’m not really understand your point……Please explain?

  31. Iain Hall says:

    Damage

    But the way the remarks themselves have been reported is extremely dodgy. Abbott was not saying that he didn’t care if the soldier died – he was saying it wasn’t the fault of other soldiers, that they didn’t fail to provide support, that the death was just one of those incredibly tragic things that happen in war. He was talking to adults who know perfectly well that war is dangerous, and adults who have in fact bravely accepted the real risk of death or serious injury – not children who think war’s a matter of popping overseas, pressing some buttons and then coming home unscathed. He was supporting them, instead of minimising the magnitude of their commitment. The context was obviously completely different from how it’s being portrayed by the hacks – as you can tell from the reaction of the soldiers around Abbott when he speaks.

    This bit by our learned friend is spot on IMHO

  32. Iain Hall says:

    Actually I think that Bolt’s post nails it pretty well Too

    Andrew Bolt

    Wednesday, February 09, 2011 at 01:36pm

    ABC Canberra’s Ross Solly has probably been the best of many presenters this morning to expose the utter hypcrisy of Channel 7’s Mark Riley – and his cowardice in refusing to own up to his sliming of Tony Abbott:

    ROSS SOLLY:

    So, what were you more, what did you find more appropriate? The fact that he’d swore? Is that what you found offensive about it or that you thought was justified making a story out of it?

    MARK RILEY:

    Yeah, oh, look. I didn’t find it offensive and I think a lot of people didn’t find it offensive, Ross, but I just think that that is of interest to viewers, to listeners, to readers, that he responded in the way that he did and I gave him the opportunity to explain the context of his response…..

    ROSS SOLLY:

    Your presenter though, Chris Bath, introduced the story by saying Tony Abbott had been caught out making an insensitive comment. Do you think it was insensitive?

    MARK RILEY:

    Well, Tony Abbott, Ross, you know, I don’t want to be seen to be dodging it but what I think is immaterial is that…

    ROSS SOLLY:

    But your presenter, your network, your presenter introduced it as Tony Abbott making an insensitive, caught out making an insensitive comment.

    MARK RILEY:

    Ok. Yeah, well, I mean that’s for people to judge whether it was insensitive to use that phraseology when he was responding to a reasonable…

    ROSS SOLLY:

    Well, Channel 7 obviously believed it was insensitive. I mean, you introduced it, Chris Bath introduced it as an insensitive comment.

    MARK RILEY:

    Yep, and I think it’s, you know, it’s up to viewers to determine whether they think that it was insensitive or not and people are making their opinions known Ross and that’s completely valid.

    ROSS SOLLY:

    I’m just wondering, am I right in saying that Chris Bath was reflecting what you believe? That it was an insensitive comment? I mean, Chris Bath didn’t say what could be construed as an insensitive comment, what might be construed as an insensitive comment. Chris Bath said Channel 7, sorry, Tony Abbott has been caught out making an insensitive comment and there’s no maybe or might have been.

    MARK RILEY:

    Yep.

    ROSS SOLLY:

    It was an insensitive comment according to Chris Bath and according then to Channel 7.

    MARK RILEY:

    Yeah, well I have to agree with you entirely. I mean, that’s what went to air. I was in the studio doing some live television so I, but… if Channel 7 put that to air then absolutely that’s what…

    ROSS SOLLY:

    Well then, do you, does that rest easy with you, that it was introduced as that and that a judgement was made by Channel 7 on what you have seen, on what you saw, that it was an insensitive comment?

    MARK RILEY:

    Is it insensitive for Tony Abbott to respond in the way he did about the explanation of what happened on, in an operation in which an Australian soldier was killed? I mean, that’s the question.

    ROSS SOLLY:

    And again, you know, I don’t want to harp on this for too long but it seems like a judgement was made.

    MARK RILEY:

    Ok, yeah, yeah, and I don’t want to seem like I’m avoiding it, Ross. I think it’s probably impolitic. He probably could have phrased it differently…

    ROSS SOLLY:

    You’d be aware that the soldier’s widow has said that she has no problems with it. So, once again, in the context of Channel 7 saying it was insensitive, where does that leave you?… Andrew Robb said this morning that you owe Tony Abbott an apology.

    MARK RILEY:

    For what?

    ROSS SOLLY:

    I think for portraying him as being callous and insensitive.

    MARK RILEY:

    I didn’t, I didn’t portray Tony Abbott with any intention other than to show his response What he said and how he responded to it.

    ROSS SOLLY:

    But again, your network did describe him last night as insensitive. You did say he’d made an insensitive comment.

    MARK RILEY:

    Said the remark was insensitive, in the intro, yeah.

    ROSS SOLLY:

    So, do you owe him an apology for that? He said that was taken out of context, you owe him an apology for that.

    MARK RILEY:

    I don’t believe I do, Ross but look, it’s a value judgement I guess on whether it is insensitive to make that sort of remark about the circumstances in which a soldier is killed and people will have different views on that.

    I repeat: if you are caught smearing someone, you either stand by it or apologise for it. Riley is doing neither.

    UPDATE

    Immediately after Abbott in Afghanistan said “shit happens” in discussing the chaos of war that led to an Australian soldier’s death, one of his listeners, Major General John Cantwell, agreed, saying “it certainly does, yeah”. Mark Riley’s report cut out that comment.

    So this bit of Riley’s interview with Solly strikes me as either deceptive (if Riley is trying to suggest his report already included Cantwell’s comment) or an admission that he’d edited his report in a way that took Abbott’s comment out of context and make him look bad:

    MARK RILEY:

    I gave him the opportunity to explain the context of his response. People have said that the Major General Cantwell said, yes it does, after Tony Abbott had made that remark. He does indeed and we’re putting that to air.

    Sydney’s Grill Team on Triple M isn’t impressed:


    PRESENTER:

    Big news story last night was on Channel 7 news and it was about Tony Abbott, well he was accused of making light of a soldiers death, which we don’t think he did here at the Grill Team. He said “shit happens”, well, that was part of what he said but you got different audio and this is what caught our attention. Different audio of the incident on Channel 7 and Channel 9 with a different edit point at the end, which really changed the whole feel of it. This is what you heard on Channel 7 last night.

    [Channel 7 edit]

    PRESENTER:

    So Tony Abbott said there, “sometimes shit happens, doesn’t it?” And then it cut. On Channel 9, you have this.

    [Unedited clip]

    PRESENTER:

    So he said “sometimes shit happens, doesn’t it?” And then the Colonel’s response is “yes, it certainly does”.

    PRESENTER II:

    Exactly, as soon as the Colonel said that response, it changed the context of everything.

    PRESENTER:

    Well, we’ve got the Channel 7 reporter Mark Riley on the phone this morning. Mark, good morning.

    MARK RILEY:

    Good morning.

    PRESENTER II:

    G’day, Mark. We’ve been talking about this a lot this morning, the Tony Abbott situation and your bit on the news with him yesterday. People are coming up with the criticism that it’s taken out of context because you cut out the Colonel saying the response back to Tony Abbott. What do you say about that?

    MARK RILEY:

    Look, I have heard that and you know, sort of, there’s nothing sinister in that General Cantwell, the Australian commander when Tony Abbott makes his remarks, he does, he goes onto say ‘it’s our job to minimise the opportunity for that to happen and do everything we can to ensure that our operations go smoothly’. Look, I can understand how people could believe that I’ve somehow manufactured things. I can tell them honestly I haven’t and that the context was what it was.

    But it wasn’t what was shown.

    Goodnight, Mark.

  33. Ray Dixon says:

    Iain, I think you are making the same mistake as Jeremy has (and often does) by shooting the messenger here. You only agree with Jeremy because, in this case, he sort of backs up your man. Sort of. Anyway, this quote that Riley managed to get out between Solly’s earbashing and aggressive interviewing of him says it all:

    it’s up to viewers to determine whether they think that it was insensitive or not and people are making their opinions known Ross and that’s completely valid

    That is precisely the point. Riley & Ch 7 merely presented the news. Reported on something that actually happened. That’s his job. You can read bias into the intro as much as you like but, in the end, it is the viewers – the general public – who will make the call on whether or not Abbott was a dick.

    Come on, you must realise that taking the Jeremy line of ‘the media done it’ just doesn’t wash.

  34. gigdiary says:

    Two points here, Ray. Ch 7, or Chris Bath, announced it as an ‘insensitive remark’, which was one of Solly’s points. The other is the edited clip that Ch 7 showed, cutting out the other half of the conversation between Abbott and the General. If there’s ever a way to skew opinions it’s to only show part of the story.

    They were clearly looking to muck-rake. Riley’s babbling waffle only confirms that.

  35. Ray Dixon says:

    Gee GigDiary, maybe you should get a gig at PP, seeing as though you are screaming ‘media bias’.

    Fair enough points, I agree, however, don’t you think the public sees through that and that there’s enough there for a balanced opinion to be formed?

    Btw, I hear they don’t pay their writers much (if anything). They’re amateurs after all. Hmm, a job for JM?

  36. Craigy says:

    Ray, you nailed it.

    “You can read bias into the intro as much as you like but, in the end, it is the viewers – the general public – who will make the call on whether or not Abbott was a dick. “

    Abbott is a dick ‘in my view’ and his ‘shit happens’ remark macho, self interested bulldust if you take it in context as he asks us to do. The context was a photo op of him looking tough with his gun play and body armour, to try and win redneck votes, a point that Iain, damage and GD must ignore.

    I would rather just ignore him until he is replaced, as he will be. Even today’s ‘news’ rag has ‘senior Lib’s going after Tony’. Julie (tough nuts) Bishop has her eyes on his job along with Fat Joe and Mal the banker.

    damage, not sure what your confused attempt at a gotcha is about…?? Play the man though if it is your only argument.

  37. Ray Dixon says:

    If the Libs don’t bring back Malcolm they’ll never get elected. Not in this decade. Someone has to change the direction of that party, which is now firmly anchored back in the Howard years, and Turnbull is exactly the sort of forward-thinker to reform its platform.

    The danger for Australia is that somehow Abbott might hang on and accidentally win the next election by default, on account of Gillard not really cutting it as PM. And we know what happens when a party that is not ready to rule suddenly finds itself thrust into power. Look no further than Victoria and Ted ‘ineffective’ Baillieu. He never expected to win and had no plans of what he would do if he did. So he lets the Nats take the reins and, bingo, we’ve got cattle back in the Alpine National Parks and we’re talking about building mega dams!

  38. Craigy says:

    I kind of like Ted, but agree with your take on their performance so far, it all seems backward looking, but I suppose that’s what conservatives do best.

  39. damage says:

    Craigy
    You’re a commied Abbott hater. What argument could anyone mount to cause you to have any other view than the neanderthal “Abbott is a dick ….” comment you make above?
    My point is that you’ve made the comment that you don’t give a hoot about what Abbott does, and then you’ve condemned him for what he’s done. All in the same paragraph. If playing the man is pointing out that your opponent’s slip is showing and that his argument it tainted by a deep hatred of the person at the centre of the issue, then I guess I stand guilty.
    It’s not a criticism of you Craigy so you needn’t be quite as defensive as that, but it is an accurate observation.

  40. Ray Dixon says:

    I agree that Ted is a likeable sort of bloke, Craigy, and a decent person. But that’s where it ends. He has no vision and he’s no leader. It’s not his fault though – he’s just a product of his rich boy upbringing and really has no idea of what life is like for the ordinary folk he now finds himself representing. You know, like “I have to go to somewhere called Kerang because it’s flooded? Is that in our State?” Well, that might be a bit harsh but did you see him trying to do an Anna Bligh after Friday’s deluge? Honestly, he had no idea what parts of the State beyond about Camberwell were inundated. He just gave a blanket warning about “some country areas are flooded”. No information and not enough commitment to give out more precise and timely warnings.

  41. The Other Iain says:

    ‘Red Ted’ was still in Melbourne two days into the Vic flood crisis. And even when he did get out and about, he hardly seemed to get much press. Bligh and Gillard left him for dead on that score.
    As for Abbott, he’s not a bad bloke fundamentally. But he is a political head-kicker and no national leader. That fact is gradually being exposed and it will eventually lead to his downfall.

  42. Craigy says:

    I don’t hate anyone damage, but don’t try and argue against my views about Tonys political performance or his history, just keep going the man……. Its a big fail for you I’m afraid.

    Must agree with you again Ray.

  43. damage says:

    My bet is that Ted knows more about that stuff than you do.

    He worked as an architect and was responsible for projects in many rural areas, has practiced in real estate, again in rural areas and was Shadow for Tertiary Education and Training, Gaming and Planning. All of those would have seen him in rural Victoria extensively.

    Again we see the steriotyping of conservatives by leftists.

  44. damage says:

    There’s no point arguing about your views on Tony.You hate the bloke. What would be the point of arguing against your view. You don’t hold the view because there’s any failure on Abbott’s part, but because you hate him. I can’t argue any point that will change that. It’s not playing the man, it’s allowing the man to have his prejudice and leaving him to it.

  45. Ray Dixon says:

    Abbott’s accusation about Gillard being “wooden” looks a tad ridiculous now, after his ‘frozen minute’ on national TV!

  46. damage says:

    Not at all.
    Her woodenness is not caused by Abbott’s anger at being framed by a journalist.

    Of course she conveniently shattered that by “crying” in parliament.

  47. Ray Dixon says:

    I’m not saying that Gillard does not come across as “wooden”. She does, and nowhere was it more evident than during the Queensland floods when she gave rehearsed speeches and seemed more focused on her grooming than on getting in and doing something. In contrast to Bligh. And Rudd. I’m saying that Abbott is now immortalised by that footage as not just “wooden” but as ‘Petrified Mahogany Man’. Oh, okay, he did shake a bit. And his bottom lip was trembling. I think I saw a bit of drool, actually.

    As for Ted, yes, I am exaggerating about his lack of rural knowledge, but I am not exaggerating about his city-centricity. He’s just like Brumby in that regard. Take it from me, he has f*cked the tourist trade up here this month – no one is coming up because, according to Ted, the whole country areas are no-go zones. He’s an idiot for not clarifying which areas were hit. We had no flooding whatsoever. You should come on up… again. Just identify yourself next time, eh?

  48. Craigy says:

    You don’t hold the view because there’s any failure on Abbott’s part, but because you hate him.

    Yes okay damage ‘I Hate Him!!’ if that’s what you want to think. I’ll keep it nice and simple for you if that’s how you like it.

    BTW. It isn’t just me who thinks he is a failure, his own party members have the knives out. Why do you think that is hmmmm……….???

    I’m not a fan of the ALP as I have said, but your insinuation that the PM “crying” in parliament was a put on, is laughable in the context of your attempt to paint me as an irrational hater……epic fail my friend.

  49. Ray Dixon says:

    Abbott is a failure. Fact. He failed to win the election and the confidence of the 3 conservative independents. Well he did get Katter – says it all!

  50. damage says:

    ????? Not sure what you’re on about there.

    Oh crap – a city centric politician! As premier? Hold the front page.

    Not too sure what the awareness levels are in rural Vic, but this may inform.
    Politicians are, by and large, interested in votes.
    They will, by and large, piss in the pocket of every voter to gain his/her vote.
    To accommodate the amount of piss that the average polie has, he/she needs to piss in as many pockets at once as humanly possible.
    Follow me so far?

    Ok so according to the Victorian dept of Planning and Community Developement for the year ended 30 June 2009, the population of regional Victoria grew strongly to reach 1,447,068 persons.
    That would include the greater Geelong and Ballarat area populations which are well over 200,000 and hardly truely rural.
    The population of Melbourne = 3,995,537.
    Seriously – do I need to go on?

    Also I’ve been interested in how this thread, originally dedicated to Tony Abbott’s framing by a rogue journalist, has become a Ted whack thread. Because he’s conservative.

  51. damage says:

    Craigy

    What evidence is there that “……….his own party members have the knives out”?

    Your own argument about Abbott has no substance to it anyway.
    You’ve made comment above about his religious belief, his politics, his sexuality and that he’s a failure, (despite going within a whisker of outing a first term government for the first time in anyone’s living memory) but nothing on his actual views.

    The “Shit happens” comment has been placed into context and seen as completely appropriate by almost every commentator, including even Jeremy Sear.

    Yet you continue to defend the view that he’s shooting off his mouth and trying to look masculine. Only someone dedicated to the personality of Tony Abbott and not the policy or actual action of the man would take that approach.

    It’s perfectly OK for you to hate him Craigy. My guess is you hated Howard, Costello, Kennett and Reith in their time too, for similar reasons that you hate Abbott. I’m not so inclined to hate politicians I don’t know personally simply because they represent the opposite side of politics, but I accept that there are others who can’t dislike the political views of others without hating them personally too. Especially on the left.

    That said, I feel it a reasonable counter to the kind of attack you have mounted on Abbott. It’s based on a personal contempt and should be viewed as such. That’s not to suggest it’s not a reasonable view for you to hold in a free and open democracy, just to say that we should be honest about where the view comes from and what colours it.

    If you lack the personal resilience to cope with that being said then I’m sorry for the harm you feel, but I’m just calling the spade a spade.

    Cheers

  52. Ray Dixon says:

    I agree with everything you’ve said about politicians. That doesn’t excuse Baillieu (or Brumby) for failing to develop rural centres as an alternative to Melbourne’s insane population growth problems. I’m not sure what your point is other than to big note yourself but you are talking to the converted here. Yes, politicians at State level (Liberal and Labor) are too city-focused and do not have enough foresight to realise that the way of the future is regional growth. And the Nats are no help because, basically, they represent farmers and are anti-population growth and pro-cattle (on the mountains).

    Btw, Ted was brought into it as an example of what might happen if Abbott accidentally wins Government. Threads go like that. You know, “shit happens”.

  53. damage says:

    I’m not big noting myself at all. I never mentioned myself.
    WTF? Sheesh!!!

    And what’s “happened” since Ted won government?
    And how was this an accident BTW? I thought it was a rather resounding result.

  54. Ray Dixon says:

    The “big noting” was in the way you quoted all the stats and said “do you follow me so far?”, etc. It’s no big deal, but it just sounds a bit up yourself I reckon. I don’t want to get into personal slanging matches with you and I’m happy to let bygones be bygones. XXXX could take a leaf out of your book because it seems like the message finally got through to you about, um, that other stuff. I really don’t want to revisit it.

    As for “what’s happened since Ted won Government”, didn’t you read my initial comment? Here it is again: He never expected to win and had no plans of what he would do if he did. So he lets the Nats take the reins and, bingo, we’ve got cattle back in the Alpine National Parks and we’re talking about building mega dams! And today I read that his government has intervened in a planning application on behalf of rich Liberal party members who were objecting to the proposal because it blocked their view from The Domain Towers. We haven’t seen much from Baillieu yet except for ad-hoc actions like those. No plans, no vision. Not that I think Brumby was any better.

    His election was an “accident” in that until the campaign started they gave themselves no hope. His master stroke was to not do a deal with the Greens. That won him respect in outer suburbs.

  55. Craigy says:

    No harm done damage. Just a question, do you hate Julia as much as I hate Tony?

    (I’m just playing along here…)

    Here’s an angle, I’ll try a strawman back at ya….. rrumphhhh (clears throat) here goes..

    In reading your reply it is clear you are in love with Tony Abbott and want to have his babies….Now, now, don’t try and deny it, it is clear to all that read you posts that you have fallen deeply for Tony, with his BIG gun, army hero talk, and his masculine silence that he pulls out when the questions get tough. I understand how you must swoon at the sight of Tony when ever his manly form pops up on the tele.

    Steel yourself though, he may not be the leader for very long as some of his friends are very jealous of all the love his devoted Christian wingnuts pour on him, and are trying to stir up trouble. This of course is hard to do to such a charming, sensitive Catholic like Tony. Why just because he is a member of a church that supports child abusers do some people put his religious beliefs down, it’s just beyond me. Questioning someone’s religion, especially the Catholic faith, is just not cricket.

    Love him damage, love him with all your heart and you WILL go to heaven, I promise you.

  56. SockPuppet says:

    Are you saying Tony Abbott is a gay icon Craygee? Do they have pictures of him in his budgies on the gay club walls? I have to ask you because I have never been inside a gay mens club.

  57. damage says:

    Cranky

    No I don’t hate Julia at all. I think she’s a fine Australian and a genuine good sheila in the finest tradition of everybodies favourite aunty. I don’t like the mess she’s made of the job she has, but I think that she’s restricted by her ideology and has been panicked into doing a lot of dumn stuff for the wrong reasons. I also don’t like the fact that she’s not particularly careful with my money. But her I like – in a purely platonic way mind you.

    The rest of your post I choose to ignore. I’m a male and not able to bare babies and Tony’s an heairy man and not my type.
    However I’m not going to condemn Tony and his offspring in perpetuity because he said “Shit happens” while discribing a situation where shit actually did happen. Call that infatuation if you like, but you’d be guilty of massive exagerations.
    The venom of the above comment simply confirms that fact that no matter the argument you’ll either continue to direct the hate towards Abbott or turn on the person who’s been so rude as to call your bluff.
    Not unusual from a lefty.

    Ray
    You have me at a disadvantage when talking about XXXX etal and the past postings of others. I have no idea WTF you are on about there.
    I’m interested that after basically insulting me you’re willing to let bygones be bygones. Brave of you, but OK then let’s do that.
    If you’re so intimidated by my ability to actually research a point that you find it big noting then it’s a reflection on you – not me.
    As far as I know we don’t have cattle back in any national park and I’m also pretty sure that there is no plan for any new dams. But you’ll research that and let me know I’m wrong if I am – of course.
    What has happened is that these ideas have again been allowed to be discussed since Ted got in. Previously we had your mob in Spring St doing this kind of stuff.

    http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/madden-attended-meeting-over-hotel-windsor-sham-20110210-1anni.html

    And spending 5 billion on a desal plant we don’t need and raping the water from RURAL communities for the city.

    If it was an accident that he got in it was one you could see coming from the moon.

  58. Ray Dixon says:

    “damage”, okay, if you want a clean sheet then you’ve got one as far as I’m concerned. Only I wish you’d chosen a better name this time, why not try ‘Joffa’ or some other Collingwood icon?

    Telling me about the sins of the Bracks/Brumby Labor Government won’t score you any points with me. I agree with you. 100%. They were shit. But please try to stay up to date – the cattle are already back in the Alpine National Parks as an “expirement”, to see if they really do reduce bushfires! Wow! And the government is calling for input on where to build more dams. No, I won’t give you the links. Try, oh, …. the HeraldSun or The Age?

    Both these “initiatives” (if you can call them that) are knee-jerk reactions to the outdated demands of the Nats, who seem to be running the State at the moment. Pity they don’t really care about rural areas either.

  59. Craigy says:

    “The venom of the above comment “

    Nah damage, no venom, I was just having some fun and only reversing your strawman that I am a hateful lefty to see if you have a sense of humour, which it seems you do.

    Anyway, I hate Tony and you want to have his babies, so we can leave it at that.

    Cheers

  60. Craigy says:

    Oh and Socky,
    Yep, Tony’s budgie smugglers have all my gay friends swooning. And as for his tough man style and withering stare, it makes them melt with unfulfilled passion.

    You orta visit a gay club sometime, they can be fun!

  61. damage says:

    Cranky
    You may hate Tony, you admit as much and I’ll take you on your word, but please don’t verbal me.
    I don’t want to have anyone’s babies. When Abbott actually does do something stupid I’ll call it what it is, but this one was no more stupid than you calling Feb 7 victims crispies whan you discuss it with others who suffered that day.
    As I said even committed leftwingers with a history of hatred of all conservative thought and action have said his comments were harmless – but there you are admitting you hate him – so there we have it.
    I like Julia personally, despite her having so little worth admiring politically and I like Abbott too, but I’m no huge fan of Turnbull despite being in the same political spectrum as him.
    I suspect you’d never be able to admit an admiration for a conservative, but I’ll take your admission of a hatred of one as read.
    Please do likewise and don’t make up lustful thought that does not exist.
    I’m a fan of Abbotts because he, like Gillard and Rudd, has some wonderful qualities as a human being.
    You hate the man because of some sectarian and homoerotic/phobic shiver he puts up your spine. I’m a fan of a man who’ll don the budgees and genuflect to his god. I see both as admirable qualities.
    I like Julia not becuse she’s an atheist, but because she’s willing to admit the same in the face of criticism. I just wish she’d cried in private in Queensland and not in public in Parliament.

  62. damage says:

    Ray why would I want to be a collingwood icon?

  63. SockPuppet says:

    Thanks for the invite Craygee but I think I will stick with SouthSide 66 and the Burvale. The Ferntree Gully Hotel is okay too. If you like bogan chicks.

  64. Ray Dixon says:

    You’re not a Collingwood supporter, “damage”? Okay, that’s good.

  65. damage says:

    Ray.
    Did I say that?
    I don’t hink I said that.
    I asked you a question.

    Why would I call myself Joffa?

  66. Ray Dixon says:

    Damage.
    No, you didn’t say that.
    You’re right, you didn’t say that. Although it’s spelt “think” not “hink”.
    I answered your question.

    If you were a Collingwood supporter you might want to.

    Now are you a Pies man? I only ask in case I say something mildly offensive about them that might upset you big time.

  67. gigdiary says:

    It’s ten o’clock and all’s well, now what do I want to complain about?

    Socky’s given up an invitation to go to a gay club in favour of the Surf Side Six, now that was a good club, back in the day. Nothin’ wrong with that. Not much pussy at Ken’s of Kensington.

    Craigy reckons damage wants to have Tony Abbotts’ babies. Frankly, seeing Tony’s offspring thus far, we’d all like a few more of Tony’s girls brightening up the Sandpit.

    As for gay icons, I took a ‘straw poll’ of my gay friends, well actually, in the name of expediency, I only asked my next door neighbour. He reckons Tony doesn’t do it for him; he reckons from the look of those budgie smugglers, Tony’s not smuggling much of a schlong anyway. Answer: Nah, he’d rather have it off with Bill Shorten, not that he puts much faith in a name.

  68. SockPuppet says:

    I think this blog has developed an unhealthy interest in Tony Abbott’s tackle.

  69. gigdiary says:

    As I said, my neighbour reckons it’s not worth tackling….

  70. Craigy says:

    GD and Socky 🙂 🙂 🙂

    damage, any serious conversation we were having ended when you started this kind of stuff –
    “Craigy
    You’re a commied Abbott hater.”
    and “your opponent’s slip is showing and that his argument it tainted by a deep hatred of the person at the centre of the issue, then I guess I stand guilty”

    Lighten up, I was just doing what you do and making an assumption based on the glowing way you write about Tony, that maybe your a bit sweet on him……just a bit……go on admit it, his red Speedos give you a little tingle now don’t they?

  71. damage says:

    Ray
    Say what you like about Collingwood. No skin off mine.

    Cranky
    What have I written that was glowing of Abbott? I think you’re doint an Edison on that one chum.
    No I’m not at all taken by speedos or by the face of a pugilist’s dial that’s not been good at dodging the blows. I’m simply willing to see a comment in the full context in which it was being made.
    Others are not, but there can only be one reason for that.
    I’ll let others be the judge of what that reason might be. I’ve made it clear what I think and you’ve agreed with me.

    Cheers.

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: