I recently read a great piece from Andrew Bolton, in The West Australian, page 10, 9/7/18.
He basically tears strips of the females for putting down men.
He particularly uses the recent ad on TV where six females sarcastically thank men for various acts of chivalry and respect.
His position is that he, like all men, have had enough.
Just as I have been saying, it's well past the due date that we start putting these females back in their boxes, instead of letting them spread their venom by standing on the boxes.
To make his case we have this Sarah Hanson-Young who openly tagged 'all' men as things like, rapists, evil, and words unbecoming a lady.
David Loyenhjelm responded in kind by calling her out and by saying she should stop 'shagging' men.
Now all this was fine because it was in the chamber, but she being she, decided to bring it out into the public arena.
Now it's no secret, I do not approve of females in so many places, but as usual, they come out and make my case for me.
Now she's asking the public to fund her defamation suite against David.
Really?
He won't appologise and I hope he stands his ground.
As Andrew Bolt puts it, enough is enough.
We, the men, have allowed this folly to continue far longer than it should have.
It is beyond annoying that we are supposed to hire someone because of gender and not ability.
Looking back, this is a big part as to why Australia is falling behind in every aspect.

'Beat Up' Bolt is the joke, a public mischief, who for anyone knows, staged managed his own so called "assault", all captured on camera pf course, by unknown left wing assailants. The forums Usual Suspects fell for that one, hook, line and sinker!

The bloke has zero credibility on anything he says.

If she is a joke it's a very bad one. Juvenile. Petulant. Stupid. Think of a derogatory word, and it will fit SHY. I believe she is now looking for crowd funding for her girly lawyer. David Lionbreath is a real pain in the backside, but he has shown SHY up for what she is.

Paul1405 Quote "The bloke has zero credibility on anything he says."

By that do you mean he is wrong?

Quote "'Beat Up' Bolt is the joke, a public mischief, who for anyone knows, staged managed his own so called "assault", all captured on camera pf course, by unknown left wing assailants."

Here you attack the person and way of presenting his message, but you fail to point out how that message is incorrect by fact, so does that mean you agree with him but not his presentation of his messages?

Your comments above could be construed as exactly what you accuse him of A beat up, a joke and in this case a forum mischief.

In no way do I support littlejohn, but SHY is and in my view always has been,contemptible, both want and thrive on issues such as this

Phil,

This is an opinion site, I offer an opinion of 'Beat Up' Bolt, that's all. His admires are numerous on the forum. There are some here who no doubt hang off every word he utters, and believe it as well, good for them.
At least "Shaggy" is an elected representative, and I do believe accord to Derryn Hinch SHY said something which was not all men are rapists.

As for Loyenhjelm, the bloke misrepresents himself as a Liberal Democrat to win votes from the unsuspecting. Another with zero credibility.

Speaking of zero credibility, then there's Mark Latham, a Labor rat who been flogging himself around Canberra like a street pro, trying to get a taker. Well he's found the air head herself, the Lovely Pauline.

Barnyard Joyce, another favorite in the Zero Credibility Stakes.

Paul, say what you like about these guys.
I know very little about the two men in the discussion, but I do know that I hate little miss two dads, with a passion.
She is typical of the 'females' I speak of.
Whenever I have the misfortune of seeing that thing all I see is a mouth espewing some of the most useless comments on the planet.
She dares to believe that she has the smarts to run a country.
It is precisely because of things like her that we are going around in circles.
What a low life taking cheap shots then crying foul when she has been called out and put down and back in her box(place).
Paul, you should be ashamed of yourself for sticking up for this vial thing.
The reason I applaud Bolt and all men, is because we have finally admitted 'openly' that we have allowed this kind of disease to spread unchecked.
I'm not sure what makes your kind of male tick.
Men do not hate women only the females.
Everything those six actors said in the advertisement in question by Bolt, should be taken seriously, not sarcastically.
It has been the subject of many papers and studies, that men are the protectors of women, amongst a myriad of other factors that for some reason females find objectionable.
So Paul, are you a man or a male.
If your a man you still have all the qualities it takes to be a good man.
If your a male, your only focused on the bits that are specified by the females and not the women, who BTW make up the 'real' majority of the population.
So it seems your backing the losers.

Whatever our personal feelings - towards Senator
Sarah Hanson Young and Senator David Leyonhjelm we need
to look at the facts of this particular case. Senator
Leyonhjelm incorrectly claimed that Senator Sarah Hanson
Young had said that "all men are rapists."

Senator Leyonhjelm then called out across the chamber that
Senator Hanson-Young should "stop shagging men," and when
Senator Hanson-Young asked, "What did you say?" Leyonhjelm
told her to "F-off." Thereby in his foul-mouthed phrases
Senator Leyonhjelm turned a debate about the safety of women
into a sleazy political side-show.

And if that was not enough, he proceeded to repeat his comments
in a series of media interviews, including one on Sky News
that prompted an apology from the network and its presenters.
Leyonhjelm is claiming that this abuse is normal Australian
behaviour. It may well be in his circles. But as a Senator he
should have known better. He has refused to apologise despite
being asked by everyone from the Senate president to the
Prime Minister.

Various commentators have pointed out that it is sobering to
reflect on the worst consequences of disrespectful attitudes
towards women.

We had the shocking rape and murder of Eurydice Dixon in Melbourne
last month which gave rise to the debate in which Senator
Leyonhjelm made his disgraceful interjection and it rightly led
to an outpouring of community outrage and grief.

The 2018 Report of the Australian Domestic and Family Violence
Death Review Network which draws on data from all coroner
courts in Australia stated that between July 1st 2010 and June
30 2014 there were 152 intimate partner homicides across
Australia that followed an identifiable history of domestic
violence. Of these 121 or 79.6% were women killed by men.

Senator Hanson Young is giving Senator Leyonhjelm a week to
apologise then she will be taking legal action if he doesn't
apologise and she will be donating the proceeds should she win
to women's charities. It is a shame that all this could have
been avoided with a simple apology from Senator Leyonhjelm.
But perhaps he wants to milk this for all its worth.

You all leave "Sea Patrol" Sarah alone, we need her to provide some much- needed humour in politics

Foxy, your showing your bias again. You deliberately over state things to help you TRY to make your case.
Such as, where this all began.
She DID say MEN, meaning ALL MEN.
DL, rightly disgusted and provoked by this excrement espewing from her mouth, responded in kind.
The level or tone of the comments was initiated by little miss foul mouth.
At the very least I don't expect a woman to come up with such unsubstantiated accusations on such a generalised wording as 'men'.
A more intelligent person would have qualified and directed their comment more acutely and said, 'some' men.
To which no one, not even I would dare challenge her.
But no, then she commits another ignorant fopar and brings it out into the public arena.
Had she left it in the 'house', it would have not gotten any oxygen, because this is part of normal parliamentary debate.
If you disagree with this fact then you really SHOULD get out more.
It is she who is milking this for all it's worth.
Foxy how can you not see that this does not help his cause, but hers. Also Foxy stop using the unfortunate deaths of women to bolster your feeble attempts at point scoring, it's demeaning, and crass.
Your backing this vial thing only puts you at odds with reality.
She is pushing it because she stupidly thinks this is going to get her sympathy and political mileage.
It is in fact going to see her lose her arse at the next election.
Her and her performance have been trash and the voters will see her for what she is, opportunistic.
DL did exactly what any man would do by firstly not suffering fools.
Especially in Parliament.
She on the other hand might represent her female followers, but thank God, she does not represent the majority who are the women.
The women see right through her, so no points there.
Foxy, I might applaud you for being a staunch believer in 'the perfect world', but I'm sorry, (and I mean it).
It is NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN.

ALTRAV,

A chi parla poco, gli basta la meta del cervello.

not bias Foxy said the truth the man needs to gather other bigots to him to get re elected SHY was right in calling him out, however SHY is always making outrageous statements and along with the NSW communist woman hiding in the greens is more harm than good for her party

I see Paul has gone fully unhinged conspiracy theorist, and get the tinfoil hat award. I guess that he also believes the moon landings were staged and that the earth is flat.

Foxy,

Derryn Hinch essentially confirmed that SHY's interjection to which DL reacted essentially claimed that all men were rapists, and while DL's reaction was wildly inappropriate, SHY has a long history of sexist hyperbole that if directed against any minority group would have had her swinging from the gallows of public opinion.

As for the lawsuit, I agree to some extent with the SMH that "David Leyonhjelm is no doubt getting just what he wants, which is more free publicity than a senator elected last on the Senate ballot in New South Wales in 2016 could imagine."

This failed bank teller's only talent is being offended. She doesn't need pepper spray to deter attackers, she simply uses her personality.

Paul1405 - Thanks, now I have a better understanding to why your original comment.

Shadow Minister,

Derryn Hinch has admitted he got it wrong. Senator
Sarah Hanson Young did not say that all men are
rapists and Senator David Leonhjelm reaction was
uncalled for. Whether you like either Senators or
not is irrelevant here - Senator Leonhjelm should
apologise. He's the one in the wrong here. It's that
simple.

Is there any way we can that people like SHY can be prevented from hanging off the taxpayers apron ? There are old age pensioners who struggle after having paid top tax for 50 years & here's that adolescent just out of school & she's already costing us more than what 100 pensioners have to live on. How absurd ! What has she done for her constituents that justifies our taxes being used to pay her et al ?

Dear ALTRAV,

Well looky here, a whole bunch of posts from you and you haven't felt the need to use the word maggot to describe any female who doesn't fit your ideal of contrite, compliant and respectful of men.

So you asked of Paul what kind of man he is when you should have been asking what kind of person he isn't. That of course is pretty obvious, he isn't one who feels threatened by women who speak their minds, of women who point out bad or in the case of DL appalling behaviour, of women who don't put up with unwanted sexual advances.

Because those who do feel threatened by such women are not men but rather boys with mother complexes, something we have been over before.

Mate you continue to tick all the bloody boxes of a person with a malformed personality, immature and with a simmering resentment and hatred of women which needs attention.

Again I advise you get some help.

The insults by the dummy spitters
towards Trump are unparrelled. Real snowflakes who love to spew out hatred and take the high moral ground when they receive a tiny bit back.

Dear runner,

I realise your adulation of a thrice married adulterer is bordering on worship but when you start bringing his name up in completely unrelated threads you know you have a problem.

Like ALTRAV you need specialist help. This might be a start;

http://findabrisbanepsychologist.com/cult-recovery/

Look here is Shadow Minister, the bloke who loves to crow, some time back Shadow claimed that; "An arrest is imminent". Well SM still waiting, still buying fish n' chips so you can catch the "wisdom" of your favorite "journalists" the rancid one himself 'Beat Up' Bolt.

ALTRAV, how long have you had a problem with assertive women? Steele has tagged you correctly, you feel threatened by certain types of females, you need women who are submissive, so you can feel comfortably superior.

"Is there any way we can that people like SHY can be prevented yuda, yuda, yuda." Of course Indy put the people Bolt and you support into power, and they'll soon turn us into a one party state! Then your problem is solved.

Yes Sarah Hanson-Young is a joke, an extremely ugly & bad taste joke on the Oz people, who have to pay to be insulted by the idiot.

Just like all her fellow travellers, she is something that Australia really can't afford, an enemy within.

I tell you what guys and gals, if it will make you all happy and we can get back onto topic, I'll put my hands up and agree with all the name calling and labeling.
You see, I'm one of the good guys, always ready to be compliant, help wherever I can, because I'm a bigger man than all of you put together.(no really, I weigh in at 135kg's)
I will accept all your denigrating descriptions of me.
It's OK, I can take it.
You see, the reason why I am OK with it is that I know exactly who and what I am.
You don't.
Oh and BTW, between us, I'm pretty sure it's not me that needs to see anyone.
Oh, and Foxy, Io adopero le due meta del mio cervello.

- Ok some common sense logic now children -

If David Leyonhjelm DID NOT hear SHY respond with a comment that IMPLIED 'All men are rapists';

- If this did not happen, then in what context would DL respond with "Stop Shagging Men"?

There is no valid reason why he would say that, if he did not hear her firstly say what she said.
End of story.

As for the 'Slut-Shaming', to draw a comparison, it's been argued that you can't be fat-shamed unless you're fat...

AC, I'm with you.
No one is arguing, not even Sarah two dads, that she said MEN. (not some men)
DL took offence, as anyone would, who had just been called a rapist and evil.
He was more than justified to respond in kind.
The nancys out there can try to make him the villain as much as they want.
The cold hard truth that indicts the arrogant one is that she made the first attack.
She started it.
DL was the respondent.
So had she not opened her big know nothing mouth, this whole affair would not be.
He has the blessing and encouragement of ALL the men, unlike her, she will get nothing for trying to point score.
He has NO reason to appologise.
She is the one who should appologise.
Only an arrogant stupid person like her would think otherwise.
She attacks ALL men.
He attacks just her, not all women.
Which do you think is the more unjust?
Next time just let people think your a fool, rather than open your mouth and have it confirmed.
This is a clear example as to why some people, (in this case a female) should not be allowed in high ranking positions.

Regardless of who anyone sides with more on the comments made in the parliament chambers, the lawsuit is over Sarah Hanson being insulted, without an apology.

Maybe it's just me but I don't think a lawsuit is justified over an insult. A lawsuit can be made for sexual abuse, and that can overlap on the kind of insults made. But this does not meet that exception. From what I've read it sounds like Hanson said an insulting remark, (apparently something she doesn't know is insulting) and David Loyenhjelm responded in kind, (with no mistake on the intended tone).

But for the sake of the ongoing conversation of which person was in the wrong. Look at it this way. If the situation was reversed and Loyenhjelm said "women are__________" there would be no mistake that this is a statement generalizing all women. Yet from what I've heard this is exactly what Hanson said. She did start the insults in this case. Continuing on, let's say Loyenhjelm said "women are________," and in reply Hanson called him a misogynistic pig, to f- off, or to stop beating on women. Hypothetically if this was the reply, would those here that stand against David Loyenhjelm's original retort, still stand against Sarah Hanson if she replied in the same manner in the hypothetical situation?

Honestly though regardless how it's viewed, or who's side anyone takes, this is not worth a court case.

SHY's hypocritical opportunism was wrongly timed & it has back-fired, that's all it is & how dare she insists on having more money wasted on a court case than most people will ever accumulaye in their savings account. Just another integrity-devoid creature with unfortunately, some followers.
Will she pay the Court costs if it goes against her ? Or will the axpayer once again be fleeced ?

//Regardless of who anyone sides with more on the comments made in the parliament chambers, the lawsuit is over Sarah Hanson being insulted, without an apology.//

Actually NNS, under Australian law she can't sue him for the comments made in the Parliament as those comments are protected by parliamentary priviledge.

What she can - and should - sue him for are his appalling remarks made on Sky News.

//Maybe it's just me but I don't think a lawsuit is justified over an insult.//

The law disagrees:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation

Paul,

Why are you lying again? I never claimed that the arrest of the Antifa thugs was imminent and you know it. You looked a demented fraud when you made claims like that.

Foxy,

While Derryn Hinch has also called for DL to apologise (as I have) I can't find where he retracted his recollection of what SHY said. I don't know if SHY's exact words were "all men are rapists" but certainly believe that the meaning and intent were along those lines, as she certainly has form in this area.

DL's language was unacceptable but was not wrong to call out her bigoted interjection.

You said it Shadow, if you want to take it back now, given the abject failure of your claim, or have selective memory, that's fine by me. After all you do put yourself up as some sort of legal eagle on the forum, a regular Rumpole of the Bailey when it comes to the law, are you not.
Yep, you even claimed to know the perpetrators, Antifa thugs

SM, DL's language was completely appropriate under the circumstances.
If anyone disagrees, I suggest they get out more often and actually listen to people speaking.
Now if you hang around churches and the like you are not living in the real world.
Try to actually listen to people, school children even.
The thing about living in Australia is that it is a free country and people call a spade a spade, or a slut, a slut, apparently?
SHY shot her mouth off and as far as I and millions of others go, DL didn't come back strong enough.
He rightly thought that someone as insignificant as her did not warrant any more attention than a simple reply of indifference to her lack of deference to him and ALL men.
She is just another irrelevant, arrogant female con artist and ugly to boot.
OK so her looks aren't in topic you might say.
What the heck I feel like giving her some of her own back, just to level the playing field, on behalf of ALL men.

Poor ole "Sea Patrol", one feels for her.

Any way one looks at it, people should not consider her to be dumb, she's far from being dumb, I've heard her speak.

ALTRAV,

A chi dai il dito si prende anche il braccio.

ALTRAV,

L'abito non fa il monaco.

SHY was off the radar for quite some time & weren't things nice but then she returned & instantly, there was controversy. Now, Di Natalie has been realy quiet for some time also, is a dummy spit imminent from him ?
Or will he just stick with his standard idealistic waffle ? All at our expense of course in every which way.

"Poor ole "Sea Patrol", one feels for her". (Is Mise).

If Lionbreath is to be be!eived, it's more than one.

ttbn, quite apropos, good one. Touche'. On behalf of ALL the MEN.

Paul,

Once again you are lying through your teeth. If you want to retract, and grovel, feel free. If you can't show where I said this then I will continue to call you a liar.

What suits you Pauliar, Phony Paul, or just Apaulling?

Steeley, I am touched by your concern, but no need.
I see you are also concerned about my not using the word 'maggot' to describe the modern female, feminist and PC pusher of today.
I hasten to report that the lack of use of the word is in no way an indication of it having lost it's usefulness.
I unfortunately have to inform one and all that I received a communique from the Maggot Breeders Association to refrain from using the word maggot in reference to and in the same context/sentence as Sarah Two Dads.
The actual maggots have complained and cite the fact that they are incensed at being mentioned with reference to any association with SHY.
They charge that where-as they (the real maggots) perform a civic duty and are respectfully beholding to the public, in cleaning open contaminated flesh wounds.
She (SHY) openly contaminates the public with her dis-respectful, foul flesh curdling mouth and arrogance.
So I am called upon to cease and desist using the word maggot in describing low life like Sarah two dads.

//I (Shadow Minister) would pin it on left whinge fascist clowns such as Getup or the greens. As one guy was stupid enough not to wear a mask, it is only a matter of time.//
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 8 June 2017 4:12:47 PM

//it is only a matter of time before they get the other thugs//
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 12 June 2017 8:18:24 PM

//and it is only a matter of time before he is charged.//
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 15 June 2017 2:37:53 PM

ONLY A MATTER OF TIME according to Shadow Minister, and you kept repeating it. It is well over a year now Shadow, so how much time, is according to you a MATTER OF TIME.

In the Beat Up Bolt matter, you believed an arrest was just around the corner, imminent in fact, but unfortunately for you again you got it wrong old chap.

Unless I have misunderstood, SHY represents a collective and the collective obviously agrees with what SHY says otherwise SHY wouldn't be there to make whatever statements that seemingly incite and invite criticism.
I would suggest that SHY is the least of the first world problems facing this community.
Plant a cabbage, you get a cabbage....a carrot is so not going to happen

SD I think what the point is, is that the 'collective' that backed her, or voted for her, as is the norm, did not see the full make-up of this person they voted for.
Once unleashed on the floor of parliament we then see the true colours of these 'con-men' (and females).
We know that 'anyone' seeking office will say what the public want to hear so as to get as many backers as possible.
Once they are 'in', they proceed with their true agenda and attitudes.
The one of many shames about this political system, is that we can't grab these vermin by the throat and physically throw them out of office, thereby treating them with the same kind kind of contempt they have treated others, until the next election.

Paul, I'm not familiar with this Bolt guy, but what is it about him that's got you so worked up?
From what I now hear about the guy he seems to be just another 'shock jock'.
That being said, I can only imagine that if any of what he says is wrong he will get jumped on very quickly by his detractors.
On the other hand, if what he says gets traction by the community then all one can say is that they are personally aggrieved by his comments because they are part of the people he may be commenting on.
If that is the case, one needs to consider if what he is saying about them is true or not.
Obviously those who do not agree will say he is talking rubbish, and he just might be, but, in the interest of truth and correctness it would be natural to call him out with why he is wrong, rather than to just generalise and put him or any 'shock jock' down for no other reason than one dislikes him.
Don't get me wrong, there are many people, in public life, that I dislike.
Having declared my dislike for them, sometimes is enough justification.
If asked why, I would say, 'no particular reason, I just don't like them'.
If you don't like someone or something, it is your decision, because obviously, even if it's not obvious why, but it/they make you feel that way towards it/them.

Corrine Barraclough, writing in The Spectator, rejects the male versus female/bad language smokescreen over the this spat between two of our weirdest and most undeserving senators, and suggests that Leyonhjelm was focused on calling out misandry, something Hanson-Young is notorious for, despite her recreational use of men.

Somebody was going to that eventually and, judging from her reaction and racing for a lawyer, it worked well.

Paul,

I see that you are pleading imbecility in defence of your lying.

In what universe is "a matter of time" anywhere near "imminent"

I will take your admission of gross error as a grovelling apology.

I know that as with SHY you are a stranger to the truth, but next time just check your facts before lying through your teeth.

Dear ALTRAV,

SHY may well have said something generic about men but DL decided to make it personal. When I do that to you you sniffle about being” labeled”, being “called names”. When that doesn't work you whinge that I'm “off topic” and that you shouldn't be “open to criticism by you or anyone else“. Finally you threaten “Keep it up, you'll get the arse anytime soon.”

Aren't you behaving exactly like her? Doesn't that make you less than a 'maggot'? Can't we say ALTRAV is a sissy? A crybaby? A child? A mummy's boy? A sook?

Well one things for sure you are an utter hypocrite.

You really are a bloody mess my friend. Get it sorted.

Steele redux,
You're making a point but it's a pointless one.

Steeley, I think you might have read someone else's comment.
I've gone back over some of my comments and I can't find the line you quote.
I would like to know on which page it so I can go back and read it and see if I erred or need to explain further, because you've got me cringing in the corner biting my fingernails right now wondering which window the molotov cocktail is going to come through.

Shadow, no matter how you want to paint it, you got it wrong. Just for you, you claimed it was only a matter of time before an arrest was made in the Beat Up Bolt fiasco. As one who hangs off every word Bolt utters, you fell for his story that he had been assaulted by as yet unidentified lefties, hook, line and sinker. Over a year later. do you still claim an arrest is only "a matter of time"? Which any reasonable person would take as being imminent.

You go on about Sarah Hanson-Young, do you have anything to say about the NSW Liberal MP, the scum bag Daryl Maguire, who has been exposed at the ICAC. Tapes played reveal Magurie after some of the developers cream for himself and other Liberal grubs.

"1.5 per cent divided by two isn't very good," Mr Maguire says.
"Three per cent is a lot better, if you know what I'm talking about."

A Liberal MP talking about the payola for Liberals to get development approval at Canterbury. No wonder the Liberals are so keen on so much development in Sydney, some of them are getting a kick back!

Paul, you partly right.
How many times have I said.
The scumbags are ALL in it for what THEY can get out of it.
Even if a new naive minister begins his tour of duty, it won't be long before he is confronted with a choice.
If you don't scratch someones back, they won't scratch yours.
It is the ONLY reason the great majority of people go into politics.
The ones who don't 'play the game', will not get any of their bills through.
The, dare I say, honest ones, are the ones you never see or hear from.
They just turn up, sit in the back seats, and wait for retirement.
A poly is not there for our benefit, so let us not delude ourselves that they are.

Foxy. Sara meglio che ritorniamo ala discusione.
Se no cominciano a lagnare.
Chredo che sono inamorato di te.

Pauliar,

Only a moron would equate "a matter of time" with "imminent", but then again you are as far from a reasonable person as possible.

As we have been through this before, at least now you have admitted that you were lying through your teeth. I would have thought you would have learnt from your previous blunders, but I guess that being green and fraudulent is synonymous. I suppose that the Antifa announcement admitting their thugs attacked Bolt was also faked?

Congratulations on finally realising that SHY is a disgusting grub.

Shadow Minister,

Why do you think that Senator Hanson Young is a
"disgusting grub?" What has she done to earn
that remark?

Shadow Minister,

Here's a link for you about what may have motivated David
Leyonhjelm to insult Sarah Hanson Young:
It seems that the man just can't help himself - what does
that make him?

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/is-this-what-motivated-david-leyonhjelm-to-insult-sarah-hanson-young-20180609-p4oo2.html

contd ...

Sorry for my mistake - here it is again:

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/is-this-what-motivated-david-leyonhjelm-to-insult-sarah-hanson-young-20180629-p42oo2.html

cont'd ...

One final attempt:

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/is-this-what-motivated-david-leyonhjelm-to-insult-sarah-hanson-young-20180629-p4zoo2.html

Foxy,

Go for it!

You stick up for "Sea Patrol" Sarah as much as you like, she needs another champion.

Foxy,

For starters, SHY claimed previously that DL's opinion didn't count because he was a "middle-aged white guy".

SHY is a bigot and a hypocrite.

Shadow Minister,

Why are you defending this man. He has a record that
is quite shocking - read the link I gave you.
How on earth did he ever get into our Parliament.
Hopefully he shan't get re-elected.

Why are you defending this man. He has a record that
is quite shocking
Foxy,
SHY has out-done him in that field-by miles.

Is Mise,

I'm so glad that I have your approval.

However, David Leyonhjelm can use your help.
He'll probably need it. You don't know a
woman until you have met her in court.

Foxy,

He'll never be called 'Sea Patrol' David, he just hasn't got it in him.

Foxy,

Firstly, the thread is about SHY, not DL.

Secondly, I don't recall defending DL, in fact quite the opposite. I did, however, point out that SHY's interjection to which he responded was also unacceptable.

Thirdly, the SMH article to which you linked completely missed the point about free speech. The article pointed out that DL defended wicked campers but not Yassmin Abdel-Magied. The reason for this is simple and obvious if one has even an inkling of the issue which is the freedom to express an opinion without fear of reprisal by the state.

1 Yassmin Abdel-Magied faced no state-sanctioned reprisals for her comments, only those of outraged citizens.
2 Wicked Campers had the QSL state government institute laws to ban comments on vehicles and risked having their vehicles confiscated by the state.

If you struggle with this concept, then I will endeavour to elucidate the issue further.

Shadow Minister,

Firstly there wouldn't be a thread on SHY if it wasn't
for DL and his as you say - "inappropriate" behaviour.

Secondly you called SHY a grub - even after DL yelled
that SHY should stop "shagging men" and then told her
to "F-off" when she confronted him with it. The sad thing
was this was done during a parliamentary debate about
women and violence.

DL's defence of Wicked Campers' right to paint their
vans offensive sexist slogans on their vans, such as -
"A wife: an attachment you screw on the bed to get the
housework done," you again are making excuses for this
man? Including his comments to the Chaser's right to
free speech - telling them also to "F-off" and telling
M. T. Reist to "Shut the F-ck up." Nice.

It appears that DL doesn't seem to have any interest in
defending free speech that doesn't serve his own
interests. All he is interested in is denigrating women.

Foxy, I hate to burst your bubble, but this little circus will see DL's voter base increase and SHY, well, not.
The link you gave does nothing to explain what the pre-amble or the reason behind this tantrum.
I think it's fair to say that the women are going to side with side show Sarah and the guys are going to back DL.
As for all the delicate little flowers out there who feel that what DL said was anything but true, well you believe what you want.
I did not give a rats when I first heard about this, but since having listened to all the tripe from the SHY supporters, I cannot sit back and let her get away with PC BS.
She, and those like her, have to be called to account.
The female, anti-male movement, of which she, Gizzard and Wrong belong to, have been left unchecked for too long.
If there is a problem with men raping women, focus on those men.
Leave the rest of us alone.
If we want to tell dirty jokes of which the women are AMONGST some jokes, so be it.
There are millions of people races and cultures, all with jokes told about them.
I too would say to those people, shut up and move on.
It's OK when queers paint offensive slogans on walls or public places, which are clearly offensive to certain people, but that's OK because they are the minority and we are supposed to let them do what they want, because of some mis-giuded and quite frankly, gutless morons out there.
Beware, this PC BS is going to be your undoing.
I leave all you mis-giuded females with one final and telling proverb or idiom, depending what school of thought you are from. "Be careful what you wish for, it may just come true".

ALTRAV,

If you say so!

Foxy, I have to call you out on your suggestion that DL was the cause of this circus.
As I understand SHY was the original antagonist, to which DL replied resplendently.
At that stage everything was tickety-boo.
Then she commits a second attempt at self degradation and mutilation, by opening that ugly foul mouth of hers outside the chamber, hoping to get mileage for herself and her non-existent political career.
I do not like her as a person and certainly do not recognise her as a politician.
She is so full of herself, she is an embarrassment, trying to sound all knowing and authoritarian.
Her true persona is, as the heading states.
Sarah Hanson-Young is a joke!

Foxy,

You seem to be struggling with the concept of free speech.

Free speech is the right to expression without falling foul of the law the acceptable limits are with regards to defamation, incitement to criminal activity, child porn, but shouldn't include causing offence.

Telling someone to F-off or shut up, while impolite and boorish, in no way infringes on anyone's rights.

As for the reaction against Wicked Campers, I am amazed at how society is regressing and becoming more and more prudish and censorious.

Shows such as the Benny Hill show and not the 9 o'clock news would be banned as sexist etc. The following youtube shorts reflect my opinion:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJQHakkViPo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXDHjwaUtPI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCj6YNIpqmA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nyb3YHlI-Q

Secondly, you are shooting the messenger and ignoring the message.

SHY's outburst was vacuous, bigoted and sexist, and as bad as the proposal in the SMH and feminist magazines that there should be a curfew for men.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/a-curfew-for-men-what-a-great-idea-20180709-p4zqev.html

When we talk about two high profile Nevil nobody's like these two, that is what both are, we should not forget their combined base is less than one in six voters, both have form for talking rubbish, both are more than prepared to continue to do so, our senate inflicts them on us,reduce the number in that house, double the first preference[no preferences] votes needed to get a seat in that house of ill repute three years terms in step with the lower house and we would never hear from them again.

Shadow Minister,

We have an etiquette on posting on the internet.
We have an etiquette on how to debate and argue
intelligently there are rules for
how people are expected to behave in a civilised
society. So surely there must
be some sort of standard for the behaviour that
we should be able to accept from our Members of
Parliament.

Therefore making personal comments
and yelling them out across the chamber not
only does it not add anything to what was being
discussed at the time (violence against women)
but it was demeaning to say the least as well as
being irrelevant to the issues being discussed.
Personal attacks on one's opponent are always
irrelevant. Their height, weight, religion, sexual
preferences, political inclinations,
or anything personal is never relevant.

We all know full well that
people who enjoy the rights of free speech have a duty
to respect other people's rights. A person's freedom
of speech is limited by the rights of others. For example
their right to maintain their good reputation and their
right to privacy.

All democratic societies put various
limitations on what people may say. They prohibit certain
types of speech that they believe might harm the government
or people. We have laws covering libel and slander. Laws
against urging violence, public decency, and so on.

DL is being sued for defamation. We shall see where that
goes and if the courts agree with SHY's claim.

Belly,

You hit the nail on the head, but it is closer to one in 12.

The thought of putting them in a cage and letting them sort it out makes me smile.

Foxy,

I agree that both SHY and DL should be admonished for yelling out offensive comments. However, 18c is the only law in place to prosecute people for offensive speech and nothing exists in any western country for breaches of etiquette.

Thinking of SHY's proposed lawsuit, the main defence against slander is showing that what was said was truthful. DL's defence would enable him to subpoena and interrogate SHY in huge detail on her sex life, which could then be reported in the papers. I can hardly wait.

Shadow Minister,

It will be an interesting outcome.

Foxy,

If Sarah wins and gets some money she should not give it all to charity but keep just enough to buy the whole "Sea Patrol" series.

Seeing as she did so well with only one episode, just imagine the heights to which she could soar with the whole story.

I keep reading about Sarah two dads and references to Sea Patrol.
What the heck is that about.
I don't watch useless shows like this one, (I had to look it up) so I'm not up with this connection.
Can someone give me a quick refresher or bring me up to date.

SHY is proof of the idiocy of our political system. the westminster crowd never intended for the likes of SHY to enter politics let alone have supporters.

Is Mise,

You tell 'em luv. You tell 'em!

Folks,

The lovely Sarah is endearingly known as "Sea Patrol Sarah" because she, famously:

"Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young confirms she cannot tell the difference between fact and fiction when fulminating against boat people policies that work and save lives. Hanson-Young's performance in that Senate estimates hearing yesterday was in many ways her most clownish yet. Not only did she seem to think Sea Patrol, starring Lisa McCune, was real, she repeatedly called Lieutenant-General Angus Campbell "Lieutenant".

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/sarah-hansonyoung-all-at-sea/news-story/95444b759ceb805875abc5033f3ef75d

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moJ7j86MyWw

Then there was her little effort at trying to teach Australian History,

"Have a look at the doozy of a media release she issued after Senate Estimates hearings this morning:

Despite an important national debate about changing the date of Australia Day away from Captain Cook’s landing at Botany Bay, the Government has decided to spend taxpayer money it is stripping from the ABC on yet another monument to Captain Cook on the land of the Dharawal people."

http://www.spectator.com.au/2018/05/senator-sea-patrols-specatacular/

Fortunately, she was toilet trained and can tie her own shoelaces.

We can thank our lucky stars we have nothing more pressing trivia to concern ourselves with.....I can see why euthanasia's looking good to some

SD,

It's not really trivia, this piece of political trivia votes in Parliament.

Is Mise,

So do many others.

It's called representative democracy -
where even people with the IQ of a
wooden plank get a say - and they
pick their own kind. Pauline Hanson
comes to mind.

Foxy,

"So do many others."

Yes, but they're mostly ordinary stupid, but "Sea Patrol" Sarah is Greens Stupid.

//Yes, but they're mostly ordinary stupid, but "Sea Patrol" Sarah is Greens Stupid.//

i.e. Somewhat more stupid than Liberal or Labour Stupid, but vastly less stupid than One Nation stupid.

We all heard Malcolm Roberts speak, Is Mise. You can't really now expect us to believe that Greens Stupid is stupider than One Nation Stupid. Sarah could think that 'MacGyver' was real and still not be able to outdo Malcolm Roberts in the drooling halfwit stakes. Compared to the former Senator for the Village of the Damned, microscopic organisms floating about in ponds seem quite clever.

Toni,

"Somewhat more stupid than Liberal or Labour Stupid, but vastly less stupid than One Nation stupid."

That about sums it up.

It's all very well to try to justify these absolutely incredibly stupid people like SHY but, are we not talking about the Federal Government here.
Is this not the place where all the important laws are made that we have to abide by?
I'm sorry but for a country that brags and boasts rubbish words like, 'World's best practices'.
World's best practices?
Only a fool would fall for that kind of spin.
We are lucky if come up to third world practices.
Our politicians are buffoons and charlatans, with an incredible overdose of extreme stupidity and arrogance.
Not one of them is qualified or experienced in their various positions.
They conned their way into the job by lying to another bunch of morons who are so removed from the real world, believed them.
Then to save face they come out fighting for them otherwise they would have to accept they were wrong.
The answer is not to believe what they say, but question them and back them into a corner.
Embarrass them, make them drop their guard.
Then and only then will we begin to sort through the garbage and eventually we will start getting the pollies we seek and with any luck trust.
So far we have had the pollies we deserve because the Aussie public is too lazy and arrogant and lacks the courage to shirt front these pricks.
But that's ok, you all keep believing that everything's fine and it's someone else's problem.
Talk to me when we have our next crash and there are thousands more people out of home and work.

Dear Toni,

Well Andrew Bolt did call Abbott “pathetically stupid” when he decided to knight dear old Prince Phillip.

Steele Redux,
Andrew Bolt wasn't alone there. Just like he's not alone with the git on this thread.