The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Good blokes or smug thugs > Comments

Good blokes or smug thugs : Comments

By Sarah Russell, published 15/4/2015

Gillian Triggs remained composed and dignified. She is a role model for all of us at the receiving end of such attacks in both public and domestic places.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 11
  9. 12
  10. 13
  11. All
Notice that Cambo's comment is content-free and consists entirely of scatter-gun smear, just like the article?

About the only thing good about either of them was their short length.
Posted by Craig Minns, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 9:46:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thoughtful article Sarah, and likely explains a master servant mentality in people too rigid to understand just how driven they are to preserve privilege and how much their professional intransigence has cost this nation!

And just what you'd expect when narrow ideology and visionless dogma replaces reason and logic!?

And when winning replaces everything else including genuine progress?

Thus we see endless petty squabbles and the rejection of basic fair mindedness!

So, instead of genuine reform that made the tax avoiding privileged rich pay their fair share; we got instead, a granny killing GST, and most small business operators forced to spend considerable valuable time acting as unpaid proxy tax collectors!

You can see just how well the TATS accept constructive criticism, given the 'Good blokes' and the TATS were seen as two different species, and or, that they hate each other!

What's that? Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the dumbest blowhard of them all? [More tea? Lovely (pa ee) party!]

Or that the article was as ever, just the politics of envy or an attack?

Not so much as a minute pause to consider if there was any merit whatsoever in the article?

And yes, it can be hard to see yourself through the eyes of others, and none too flattering!

Then we wonder why they want to privatize income earning assets, reduce tax/revenue and increase the size of government/jobs for the boys?

Even as record foreign debt continues to balloon; over a 100,000 homeless people sleep rough every night and fewer and fewer can actually afford a home!

Or live in a veritable two storey shack occupying less space than a mobile home!

What's next in a country almost empty; floating trailer parks?

I mean, come on; what else would you expect when protecting privilege and position trumps true progress or the national interest/everything else!

Sarah; the good book advises, do not cast your pearls before swine. And given some of the snorted responses, excellent advice?
Rhrosty.
Posted by Rhrosty, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 12:03:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What possessed the author to rehash the Triggs debate now? This article is a typical example of feminist argument... point the finger at the bad men, call them names (TATS, wow so cleaver) and if anyone responds in disagreement, label them as bullies or thugs.

Gillian Triggs was caught out exercising a partisan agenda. Most of the children are no longer in detention and certainly 90% less than when Labor was in government. If anyone's actions stifled the discussion on children in detention, it was Triggs undoing of her own message by bad timing.

Get over it.
Posted by ConservativeHippie, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 12:21:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Oh gawd, Rhrosty, the piece was a straightforward class-politics smear polemic that ended with a self-serving whine.

The Triggs issue was merely a convenient and easily identified partisan point from which to hang the tatty mess of hypocritical smear.

Presumably Dr Russell is capable of better. Perhaps she might care to prove it.
Posted by Craig Minns, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 12:36:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sarah wants to defend the indefensible; the behaviour of Gillian Triggs. When a lefty has no defence, they attack.
So the author baselessly attacks the good blokes. Any doubt that she is wrong is removed by the support from the hound. He unerringly works out what is wrong, and then supports it.
Posted by Leo Lane, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 3:31:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Craig Minns, "An interesting case of log and splinter in this piece"

You are right.

General comment
While this is an opinion piece and some leeway is allowable, one nonetheless expects some evidence of academic rigor from a PhD. There is already an abundance of tabloid journalism.

"TATs" LOL, childish.
Posted by onthebeach, Wednesday, 15 April 2015 4:26:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 11
  9. 12
  10. 13
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy