Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Australian Politics » Julia , its time to “toughen up princess” because no one is buying your bullshit tears

Julia , its time to “toughen up princess” because no one is buying your bullshit tears

Am I the only one who thinks that Gillard’s tears  are more than a little contrived here? Heaven in a hand basket what a woeful example of an excess of emotion! I can’t help but think that her tears are not for the disabled and their carers but for herself and the rabble that she leads.

Cheers Comrades



  1. damage says:

    You’re not the only one Iain. The HUN in Melbourne has several tweets and letters expressing this concern.
    Former labour lawyer John Faine mentioned it on his show on 774 this morning and was given the right rounds of the kitchen by former Labor staffer Barry Cassidy for even giving it air time because it is only the “partizan social media” that are expressing this view. Baz of course being non – partizan to the bootstraps.

    Personally I feel it is terribly unfair to doubt the PM on this. Anyone who does has had no exposure to the plight of the disabled in this country.

    I would agree that she’s granstanding the emotion, but I think it is genuine.
    Why display it in parliament?
    I am prepared to accept that this level of emotion will simply express its self when the issue is being publically discussed. That’s why I would see it as genuine. The real Julia if you like.
    It may simply be tears of joy that she’s finally got a policy that anyone with a brain and a heart will see as worth something.

  2. Ray Dixon says:

    A bit harsh perhaps, Iain? Although I do think it demonstrates that Gillard’s NDIS is more emotion-based than a really thought-through policy. Sure, it’s important we provide better for the disabled but being disabled (and requiring better assistance than what is presently provided) covers a very wide spectrum of people, from those born mentally impaired to those who become mentally ill, and from those born with physical disabilities to those who become physically disabled. How does she narrow it down to some 450,000 people without explaining exactly what the criteria for this extra help will be? And what the help will be.

    This is the thing with Julia Gillard; she takes an emotional issue like this and sees it as a vote winner because, you know, surely everyone agrees that disabled people need looking after. It’s like her carbon tax – she sees doing something big on climate change as socially progressive and uses it to impose big taxes on us.

    The extra 0.5% medicare levy that will be used to (partially) fund NDIS is a massive imposition on the rest of us, however, I would not begrudge it one little bit if I could be sure it went to those who really need it. Like you, I fear it’ll end up going to create a new beauracracy that oversees a new ‘disabled industry’. I’m not being cynical there and I think you’ll find that the great bulk of the billions of $s going into the scheme will be soaked up on the wages of more public servants not even remotely doing anything for our disabled.

  3. damage says:

    I say you can judge a man by the way he treats people with disabilities (n.b. people with disabilities – not “disabled people” might as well call em retards or spazos). And that rant proves my theory.

  4. Ray Dixon says:

    And I say you can judge a man by the way he demonstrates his ignorance on the Internet. The above miscreant has such huge feelings of personal inadequacy that he revels in going around anonymously and erroneously slagging off at other people under their real names and calling their considered opinions “rants”. Yes, the above comment proves my theory on damage/hj aka …. ….. who, btw, still has a publicly-viewable hate blog dedicated to yours truly & Mr Sear. Now kindly f*ck off, dickhead.

  5. Iain Hall says:

    Maybe I was a bit harsh Ray but it is Julia Gillard we are talking about so I find it very hard to charitable to her at the best of times.

  6. Ray Dixon says:

    Well I have to admit, my first impression of Gillard’s teary performance was much like yours, Iain. On reflection though, I think it was more likely a genuine emotional reaction, seeing she’s got very close to this issue. I still think her tears demonstrate how she’s allowed emotion to lead and cloud her judgement, in fact I think it absolutely confirms it. We should not be introducing massive changes like this one based on emotions, which she seems to have done. Well obviously she has – witness the lack of detail in the policy. Gillard is a kneejerker but only on issues she perceives as being popular, such as climate change. Such as more money for schools. And such as more money for the disabled. Underneath it all, I actually wonder if she gives a stuff about anyone except herself.

  7. damage says:

    Not sure what you’re on there Ray???
    I do know that when “he’s anonymous” gets yelled that you’ve cried uncle.

  8. Ray Dixon says:

    This is what I’m on about you anonymous twerp:


    Okay, there’s not much on it and it looks like you gave up after you let off some steam.

    But it’s still there.

    And it’s yours.

    Take it down, Dunell.

    Or I’ll go further in exposing you.

  9. damage says:

    Nope. Not mine Ray. I have no idea who you are on about. Not surprised you’re not liked, but don’t come looking for me to save your arse.

    Back to the topic.

    Is that a considered opinion?
    That the NDIS is not worth the time or money?

  10. Ray Dixon says:


    It’s yours and I can prove it.

    And I will – right here.

    Unless you take it down.


  11. damage says:

    What else can I say Ray?
    I can’t do it.
    In order to remove something that was mine it would need to be MINE.
    As it isn’t I have no way of doing that.
    So go your hardest. You might be exposing someone, but it won’t be me.
    And it will all be for the sake of appearing to be what? Tough? Smart?

    Or you could just argue the point as mentioned above.
    Do you seriously believe that the NDIS is a waste of money?

  12. Ray Dixon says:

    The blog is yours.

    Now I suggest you remove it.

    If you do remove it I’ll reciprocate by saying nothing more about it.

    Even further, I’ll remove the references to it in this thread.

    It’ll be like it never happened. And like this exchange never happened.

    But if you don’t remove it I’ll put all the evidence up in a new post.

    Now GO ON. It’s not hard to do and it’s not like you’re still using it.

    This is your final warning: Remove it now or face the consequences.

  13. Stuart.W says:

    Playing in the Sandpit now Ray? Iain will roll you with common sense. Wouldn’t you be more at home on some flagging Fairfax site? Any way budget reply on the way, time for some common sense.

  14. Byron Webb says:

    Gillard should have done this long ago. Not just before and election to buy votes. What a discrace this Prime Minister. Roll on September 14.

  15. GD says:

    On the other hand, a magnificent speech by Tony Abbott with his budget reply. Roll on September 14.

  16. Ray Dixon says:

    Stuart & Byron – great to see you both.

    Stuart, I’ve been here all along, where have you been?

    GD, I didn’t watch it mate – better things to see …. like ‘Selling Houses’.

  17. damage says:

    It is clearly an emotional issue. When you have a family member who’s either born with, or acquires a permanent disability then you would have to be a hard prick not to have an emotional reaction. When you become that person’s carer, usually for the rest of their life or of your own then there are a whole other set of emotions attached to that. I believe that anyone who’s so harsh as to begrudge those already suffering as a result of disability as well as those who will acquire a disability in the future, should get a dose of empathy training.
    Of course there has to be a level of beauracracy that surrounds this. Otherwise there will be rorting and people who don’t deserve this assistance will exploit it.
    Here’s a lesson. People are not disabled and they do not become disabled. People are people. Some people have disability, or disabilities. They can be born with them or they acquire them through accident or illness later, but their disability does not define them. People have disabilities. They are NEVER disabled. Not understanding this disqualifies you from further comment in this debate.

  18. GD says:

    I didn’t watch it mate – better things to see …. like ‘Selling Houses’.

    I expected as much 😦

  19. Ray Dixon says:

    No, damage, being an a/hole who sets up anonymous hate blogs disqualifies YOU from further comment on any topic.

    On any blog.


    (except your own lonely hate blog, of course)

  20. Ray Dixon says:

    GD, watching Abbott rabbott on is like watching paint dry. Only less interesting.

  21. GD says:

    So if you can’t read a pdf or listen to 30mins, once a year, of Liberal policy, how can you make a reasoned and qualified appraisal of the political situation in Australia?

    Obviously you can’t. You’ve had your head stuck so far up your arse that you’ve not once criticised Labor’s adoption of the global warming scam, until today that is.

    You’ve pushed the now defunct ‘Rudd For Prime Minister’ campaign since day one, when all other pundits had given up on him.

    Your fall-back position is that Gillard is the cause of Labor’s woes, when in reality, Labor and the unions are the cause of Labor’s woes.

    And still you stick your fingers in your ears whenever contentious issues are raised. Muslim immigration for instance. La-lal-la.

    In short, you’re the epitome of a rusted-on Labor voter mired in the past.

    Roll on September 14.

  22. Ray Dixon says:

    GD, there is no one more one-sided in his political views than you. No one more one-eyed. And no one who uses generalities and rhetoric as much as you do. Don’t tell me I’m not “qualified” to have an opinion. Sheez …..

  23. damage says:

    Whatever Ray.

  24. Ray Dixon says:

    Your shitful, anonymous, stalking, hate-blog’s still up, I see damage.

    If it’s not down today look for a new post here all about you – over the weekend.

  25. Iain Hall says:

    After MUCH thought I have decided to irrevocably ban “damage” for his incessant snarky and abusive comments, I have tired of his nonsense and he is welcome to play elsewhere in future.
    Cheers Comrades

  26. Ray Dixon says:

    That’s a much better option, Iain. Thanks.

    (And he can’t say I didn’t give him a chance!)

  27. Stuart.W says:

    Hi Ray, Regarding your use of the word anonymous as some sort of self defence. Or attack on a foe.
    You are a business man, who profits most from a lack of anonimity. Yes Ray the more people who know you and what you do for a living, would be more inclined to book their accommodation with you. Especially if what you offer is up to standard, ( I believe it is).
    Ergo, Ray most of us bloggers are anonymous to you by design. You the opposite for obvious reasons.

  28. Stuart.W says:

    Oops!….Forgot to mention North are great value tonight.

  29. Ray Dixon says:

    That doesn’t make any sense, Stuart, but what’s changed?

    Anyway, would you mind – and I seriously ask this – if you desisted from mentioning my private/business life here? You see, as you’re anonymous, I can’t mention yours … and I wouldn’t be so personal as to do so anyway. Can you get that?

    As for the footy – there’s a Rd 8 footy thread here, Stuart. Talk about it there please.

  30. Stuart.W says:

    Now I know it makes it makes perfect sense. There is nothing complex or hard to read about your logic Ray, when your beaten on a point just play ignorant, and say something like. “That doesn’t make any sense”.
    You constantly hold yourself up for ridicule, to everyone but yourself.
    If this is indeed Lain’s Blog then let him tell me where to thread, you mind your own business!

  31. Ray Dixon says:

    Just talk about the issues, Stuart. Don’t make it about personalities. You haven’t made any point (or sense) at all.

    As for the threads, if you want to talk footy, there’s a footy thread here. And I don’t need to be the blog owner to suggest you stay on topic.

  32. Stuart.W says:

    Says it all GD. It can be paraphrased as. “I’ll cry to get your vote, then laugh at you once I’ve got it”, Mainstream decent Australia hate this women and the party she leads. The most puzzling aspect of her leadsership is, why were labor to gutless and stupid to dump her long ago.

  33. Were any other than Labour members in the house? It has been suggested that only senior Labourites were present. No other party members knew about it???????

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: