<< EMISSIONS STANDARDS MET ~ MAIN ~ RUDD VS RUDD >>
PEOPLE WISHED DEAD
The Age’s Catherine Deveny is hopeful:
Hopeful that this avalanche of corruption and deception will stop people voting for Howard again. Then I realise that if they were stupid enough to be sucked in by him the first and the second time, there’s not much hope. I just hope a few of them have died from xenophobia and affluenza.
At least people who voted for Howard the third and fourth time are spared Catherine’s doom prayer.
I’ve never once caught affluenza, I must have been inoculated at birth.......
Posted by Old Tanker on 2007 10 16 at 01:57 PM • permalinkCatherine has a hard-on for the worm. Sweet.
What you call “swingers” we call “undecideds”. The Undecideds are constantly being trotted out and plopped in debate focus groups where they impress us with their seemingly effortless abilities to jump on and off candidate bandwagons. They are ridiculous people, although slightly less ridiculous than those who would have us pay them any mind.
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2007 10 16 at 02:03 PM • permalinkY’know, I’m an Age reader myself, but Deveny shits me. Hutchinson even more. In fact any columnist who has a cry about the Unprincipled Electorate (’sif any electorate has ever, on balance, voted on principles) just gets torn out, provided there’s nothing decent on the next page.
Posted by Hideandreason on 2007 10 16 at 02:04 PM • permalinkI guess Catherine can’t get enough satisfaction out of keying cars, eh? Now she wants people to die. How sweet.....and such a novel way to swing voters to the left.
Keep up the good work, Cathy!
Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 10 16 at 02:21 PM • permalinkDamn those “unprincipled” voters not voting the way their self-styled betters want them to.
Damn them I say!
.
.Sheesh.
Posted by Spiny Norman on 2007 10 16 at 02:33 PM • permalinkHmm.
Xenophobia generally is a fear and/or contempt of people that are different from one’s own self. By logical extension that would include people who think differently than you do, maybe including a different world view. That would seem to fit most of the left. How many conservatives does this bint know on a substantial basis? Has she ever considererd having a prolonged discussion of issues with a conservative?
The worst part is, lots of people are sitting around reading that crap and saying, “Yeah… Uh, huh… kill a few for humanity. That Deveny’s always right and I don’t have to think anymore.”
Posted by Gary from Jersey on 2007 10 16 at 02:59 PM • permalinkHmmmm.
Affluenza?
I wouldn’t mind dying of Beerfluenza.
Or maybe Gin & Tonic ... fluenza?
Ok that didn’t work. But you get the idea.
Posted by memomachine on 2007 10 16 at 04:27 PM • permalink#18, RebeccaH
When a political debate is telecast, the worm is a line at the bottom of the TV screen that indicates which way the debate’s going. It heads up or down, depending on what the speaker is saying and shows whether the TV audience approves or not.
I thought they’d got rid of it in Australia since the debate many years ago between Paul Keating and (can’t remember who). Viewers were asked to call in and vote for the speaker they preferred more.
The worm won.
#24, Thanks for the explanation. Sooo, Ms. Deveny’s nasty diatribe was triggered because of a… see if I have this right, now… a screen graphic. And she hates the general Australian public (obviously, since they’ve voted so often for the Evil Deputy Sheriff Howard) because this screen graphic has been taken away.
I bet somebody yanked her pacifier and security blanket away from her when she was a child.
Thanks, Catherine. What a shame that leftist moonbatism has a way of killing everyone except those who carry it.
Posted by SwinishCapitalist on 2007 10 16 at 05:08 PM • permalinkThe worm:
when a debate was held, the studio audience had little dials they could move to the left or right, showing what they thought of the person speaking. Our TV screens would show a second-by-second average of the dials, moving up the screen for “good” and down for “bad.”
The problem is that it made a mockery of the whole thing. You were getting people’s emotional response, even when the speaker was, say, half-way through a sentence about inflation. It was distracting, and it elevated knee-jerk reaction over considered thought.
Since leftism feeds on emotion like a vampire, who do you think does better under this situation?
There are no worm votes in explaining how workplace reform creates a more efficient labor market, thereby reducing unemployment. Yawn.
Try: “The workers are being oppressed!” Yay! Worm votes from the audience!Posted by daddy dave on 2007 10 16 at 05:10 PM • permalinkNot to worry. Those Howard voters who died due to xenophobia and affluenza will be balanced by Labor voters who died due to zoophilia or Margomania.
Posted by Mystery Meat on 2007 10 16 at 05:23 PM • permalinkAffluence is a bad thing.
Brutal, grinding poverty. Well, that never hurt anyone.It’s good for the soul.
Posted by daddy dave on 2007 10 16 at 05:26 PM • permalinkfeedback - at - theagedotcomdotau
“catherine deveny
Said:
“I just hope a few of them have died from xenophobia and affluenza.”
on 17.10.07.
It must be nice to have opinion writers wishing those with opposing views to die. Interesting democracy she has going on down there.
What an aweful woman.”YF
moir."I just hope a few of them have died from xenophobia and affluenza."
More than offset by the number of moonbats felled by Recto-Cranial Insertion.
Posted by Harry Bergeron on 2007 10 16 at 05:55 PM • permalinksince I never voted for Howard at all, does this mean I get to live forever and vote Republican for all eternity?
Posted by richard mcenroe on 2007 10 16 at 06:13 PM • permalink#18
RebeccaH, for you:While we’re used to Gallup, ICM, exit polls, and all the rest, worm polls are a relatively new phenomenon to the British electorate. These, too, appear to have their origins in the US, and have been recently used in Australia and New Zealand before worming their way into our political arena.
It’s a highly visible way of instantly taking the pulse of public opinion: using electronic handsets, the studio audience or viewers of a televised political debate or speech show their positive or negative reactions to the speaker(s) as the debate progresses. These reactions are displayed as a continuous rising and falling line at the foot of the TV screen - the ‘worm’.
(above from Ask Oxford)
"Affluenza. Hmmm
I thought that was when rich trial lawyers joined hedge funds that were putting ordinary citizens out of their homes in New Orlelans and New York."
It was just research. That rich trial lawyer joined a hedge fund in order to learn about poverty. Because that’s what hedge funds were invented for. Right????
#7. Affluence is a bad thing.
Brutal, grinding poverty. Well, that never hurt anyone.Cue: Python “Yorkshiremen” sketch:-
“Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o’clock at night half an hour before I went to bed, drink a cup of sulphuric acid, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad and our mother would kill us and dance about on our graves singing Hallelujah.”
But tell it to the kids of today, etc.
On reflection, the above sounds like a good basis for an anti-workchoices ad. I suppose if the bruvvers had a sense of humour, that might have occurred to them.
Posted by anonymous guest on 2007 10 16 at 06:56 PM • permalinkI hope I’m not standing anywhere near Catherine when she hears that Howard has won his fifth term, or at least that I’m wearing a biohazard suit. Those exploding heads can be very messy.
Speaking of vomit-inducing, Margo is to be heard on Adamski tonight, invited back to hear “what she’s been doing since ‘Not Happy John’” [3+ years ago]
Last night Adman had a foreigner on who said how much he wishes Howard loses heavily...Ah, the Balance on ABC!
I have worked out why Adams is so off with the fairies. He started life as a communist, then a career as an adman, went into the film-making business with government money, then joined the Committee for the Future or something. Along the way he was a rusted-on Whitlamite ALP man.
Finally, he got a 10 year gig on the far left of the ABC.
It figures, don’t it…”..Why should the Prime Minister be able to dictate the terms of the debate..”
Ask Bob Hawke, he started it.
/Puts on white coat, strokes goatee in a suggestive manner, tries to look like Freud
Proff mole: “Ms Deveney you say you are having fantasies about Paul Keating and now a worm, what is your attraction to invertebrates?”
Ms Deveney: “Their ability to squeeze into tight places, their lack of form or substance, their ability to be whatever i want them to be, whats not to love? And their self lubricating."/writhing on couch, running hands over body..
Proff mole: /nearly swallows own cigar, coughs and splutters, regains composure. “I see eerrm, tell me about your father...”
Ms Deveney: “Squeeal!!!!!”
Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2007 10 16 at 07:38 PM • permalinkDon’t worry Catherine Deveny you’re enough of a worm so we don’t need to worry about the lack of the worm in the debates.
Posted by Old school on 2007 10 16 at 08:06 PM • permalinkDoes Cathy remember that we’re a parliamentary democracy, and not a republic? That the only people who can “vote for Howard” are those in his electorate, or “seat”? I’ve never voted for Howard in my life, and neither has 99% of the population!
Posted by AlburyShifton on 2007 10 16 at 08:33 PM • permalinkAnyone for a Pork rib BBQ? sausage sizzle? lamb tail feast?
Could do worse than set up your stall at the end of this event
Not that id expect any self respecting RWDB to be so cruel of course, imagine 5000 vegan mung bean munchers having to endure the aroma of roasting animal carcass. Would be fun.Posted by thefrollickingmole on 2007 10 16 at 08:38 PM • permalinkDeveny is a condescending bitch and an appalling snob as well. Expect she is even worse in the flesh where she doesn’t have time to tone it down.
She once boasted in a column about some little shop she went to run by some little Muslim man - a coffee or a cake shop I think. The article was intended to tell everyone just how wonderfully PC Catherine was. Didn’t work. I felt so sorry for the poor man. You got the impression that he was expected to feel gratitude that someone as important as Deveny had acknowledged his worthless existence.
Leftards have long ‘predicted’ that conservative voters would simply die out. There latest fantasy involves the Liberal Party being split asunder and a new ‘middle’ party rising phoenix-like from the ashes:
LONGHAIRED OLD BODGIE FROM ANU: If John Howard is defeated and if he is defeated very badly, you’ll see moderates gain their voice substantially, rise to challenge the conservatives, and in terms of the blood-letting, the argument from moderates will be that it’s been the conservatism of the Howard years that has ultimately contributed to its downfall. So, the party will really start to fight over the heart and soul of what it really believes in.These are the same ‘moderates’ who haven’t won an election in New South Wales for 16 years.
HOWARD’S DIPSTICK BIOGRAPHER: The political climate at the moment is certainly well and ready for a centrist party to emerge. The decline of the Democrats as well as the year on year drift to the left of the Democrats in recent years has meant that there is a lot of room now for a centrist party to try to develop, particularly obviously if the Liberal Party does move to the right.
GERARD HENDERSON: I understand that these propositions appeal to academics who sit in universities and wait for the cheque to come around…
#60 El Cid
Performing a ballroom inpsection for Peter Garrett?#62 Despite 4 election wins, they can’t believe that large numbers of people actually support Howard’s policies.
Posted by daddy dave on 2007 10 16 at 09:25 PM • permalinkHow do you die from Xenophobia? Aren’t foreign bodies more likely to kill you?
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2007 10 16 at 10:24 PM • permalinkTake comfort that like nearly all lefties she’s a coward and will never take action on her twisted desires. We have similar folk here in the US, that periodically slip up and go public with their wet dreams about mass conservative fatalities (kind of like Michael Moore’s pathetic plaint that the 9/11 highjackers killed the wrong people) but they won’t ever do anything more than key the odd car or splash paint on somebody’s property. And when they get caught dancing around the bonfire celebrating some soldier’s death they immediately get defensive and accuse the right of hate speech for noting what they say and do.
Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2007 10 16 at 10:56 PM • permalink#65,
How must it feel to live inside her head?
Crowded?
Lonely? With the vacuum and all…
Posted by Matthew Lawrence on 2007 10 17 at 12:38 AM • permalinklove from 1.618 XXX
1.618!!! So racy!
(waves to 1.618)
Posted by Col. Milquetoast on 2007 10 17 at 12:48 AM • permalinkI think some are missing that Catherine Deveny makes a good if not entirely coherent point:
if it’s on telly these days we demand interaction; we want to vote off via SMS Big Brother-style.... We want votes to be pulled out of a coconut and announced Survivor-style
I propose that at some point after the debate people be permitted to make a binding vote. You could also consider making the voting compulsory.
Posted by Col. Milquetoast on 2007 10 17 at 01:09 AM • permalink#62
It’s already happened. It’s called the Democrats and we can all sit back and see what a wonderful success that was.
The whole (developed) world’s moved to the Right, even the Labor Party (headed by Mr Economic Conservative), mainly because Right policies actually work - why would a party think it could find electoral salvation by heading in the opposite direction?
Of course, only in the parallel universe that is Australian academia could such ideas be seriously espoused and then of course, given a wider audience by being aired as intellectual gospel by the AB frickin’ C!
I just have no time for the sheltered workshops that pass for universities in this country. Gerard Henderson - quote of the week for you, sir!
#77 that will happen either way. It will just be a delayed reaction with Labor.
Posted by daddy dave on 2007 10 17 at 11:26 PM • permalink#11 - “...just gets torn out, provided there’s nothing decent on the next page.”
Why do you even need to check?
Posted by Hump B Bare on 2007 10 19 at 03:38 AM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
So, Kevin Rudd is leading the search and rescue efforts of the Labor Ski Patrol after this catastrophic avalanche of Howardian corruption? We (or rather, you people) are saved!