Menu lock

Federal

Aug 9, 2017

This postal plebiscite bullshit is nothing but fear, wrapped in cowardice, inside stupidity

The plebiscite is a delaying tactic, and eventually we'll end up right where so many said we should have started: with a vote of the federal Parliament to amend the Marriage Act to deliver equality before the law.

What really gets me about this marriage equality farce is the brazenness of the deceit. Malcolm Turnbull stands there telling open-faced lie after lie about his government’s policy, knowing that we all know he’s lying. Not a single person believes for a second that a plebiscite was ever anything but a delaying tactic pulled from Tony Abbott’s homophobic arse. Nobody thinks the postal vote has the slightest credibility or value. I am a “strong leader”, Turnbull has the gall to say with a straight face.

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

60 comments

Leave a comment

60 thoughts on “This postal plebiscite bullshit is nothing but fear, wrapped in cowardice, inside stupidity

  1. Charlie Chaplin

    ” Not a single person believes for a second that a plebiscite was ever anything but a delaying tactic pulled from Tony Abbott’s homophobic arse.” Nope. Unfortunately quite a few people honestly believe the proposed plebiscite is about “Australians having their say”. They think the plebiscite result will be legally binding and that marriage has always been legally defined as between a man and a woman, and that’s why need a plebiscite to change it.

    In short, quite a few people are so indifferent to the whole issue (and politics in general ) they have no idea of the facts and the LibLabs know it. The marriage equality “controversy” couldn’t exist without this good hearted apathy and indifference. Good hearted, because as we know the majority of the electorate support marriage equality.

    1. lykurgus

      They don’t believe it Charlie; they SAY they believe it.
      They know they’re on the wrong side of history; that they’re fighting the rearguard action of a few troglodytes; that the whole point of the plebiscite is to stop the law from saying that gay marriages are the same as their own; that the only friends they still have, are the fellow geriatrics cramped into their bunker chewing on their farts; and that their demographic gets lonelier every day.
      But they can’t ADMIT their visceral fear that if we allow rainbow nuptials, their neighbours will start trying to marry your cat. At least, they can’t admit it in public.
      So they SAY that it’s not about worrying that they might catch gay; that it’s about democracy. They know that they can’t sell it to non-homophobes (they’re not buying it themselves); but they CAN sell it to a wet-lettuce PM with no convictions of his own.

      But I can understand the confusion; the secretly-gay plebisciters shout “Australians having their say” so loud and so long, you could easily think they were being sincere.

  2. Charlie Chaplin

    Excellent read, Michael. Anger springing from decency.

      1. David Barrow

        Thirded. A crave these Letters of Marque!

      2. leon knight

        Politically correct means a lot of different things to different people, but politically incorrect has a clear definition…..’Tony Abbott ‘

        1. Dion Giles

          Essentially “politically correct” means “on message, without regard for what is true”, but maybe the best description of politically correct language is that given by the French philosopher Pierre Monent: “The language people speak when they are terrified of what would happen if they stopped lying”

  3. pritu

    Unaccountable and corrupt.

  4. Scubaal

    best line I have read for a long time:
    Quaintly, the sole demographic that still opposes marriage equality (men over 65) is also part of the sole demographic that remembers how to post a letter.

    1. Suzie_darling

      Exactly right Scubaal!

    2. Iskandar

      Hey Scubaal! Ease up! I’m 70, which means born a baby-boomer, wannabee beatnik in the 50’s, hippy during the 60’s and 70’s, protester against the criminal military misadventures of Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, and currently raging against the daily propaganda which passes for “news” in our mainstream media. It’s not age, it’s inherited mindset. Look at Abbott and Co. Nowhere near 65, let alone over.

      1. Bill Shaw

        I’m with you Iskandar. 72 and for equal rights for all. As much as I like to see Abbott remain in politics to enhance the ALP he has crossed the line well and truly and needs permanent removal from public discourse.

      2. John Hall

        I am close to 65 & prefer emails and support marriage equality. Malcolm and Tony are both a sad reflection on the illiberal throwbacks that the Liberal Party has degenerated to. Howard’s demolishing of Menzies Memory is complete – the dark/dim side is complete. The Jedi are all but extinct.

      3. John Hall

        I am close to 65 & prefer emails and support marriage equality. Malcolm and Tony are both a sad reflection on the illiberal throwbacks that the Liberal Party has degenerated to. Howard’s demolishing of Menzies Memory is complete – the descent to the dark/dim side is complete. The Jedi are all but extinct.

    3. tmcconne@outlook.com

      Yeah, that sounded good, but I reckon its wrong. Everybody can post a letter, but I agree not everybody “wants” to post one.
      It’s just a rotten idea because its daft, not because some people are supposedly too dumb to figure out how to post a letter. Nobodies that dumb.

  5. Jim McBryde

    This sums up exactly how I feel and think about this issue. Well written Michael, absolutely spot on. I hope I can exercise my democratic right soon to give this government the last rites.

  6. Geoff Thomas

    As the postal plebiscite approaches, think about the same sex marriage debate as a civil rights issue, pure and simple. However there are those who have a slightly different motivation. I refer to Tony Abbott, Kevin Andrews, Eric Abbetts and other members of the coalition government. For them it is all about undermining Malcolm Turnbull. For them, the impact of this debate on ordinary Australians is mere collateral damage for what they see as the greater good. This is not just cowardice, it must be the pinnacle of immorality.

    1. tonysee

      Quite right, Geoff. Abbott is an ideological warrior, no doubt, but if he was in power he’d soon change his principles if it had a significant voter backlash. He doesn’t really give a toss about the issue and probably accepted some time ago that a change was inevitable, but, using the cloak of ‘principle’, he’s out to achieve maximum carnage against his ouster.
      Turnbull can’t win against this ruthless bastard by compromise or by delay or by plebiscite. Every delay is a win for Abbott because it keeps the issue front and centre.
      There are no palatable options for Turnbull but he could at least stick with his own principles and that would free him up to call Abbott’s bluff.

  7. graybul

    The “opinion poll” is dangerous. Allowing politicians to subvert a primary responsibility to uphold parliamentary governance by redirecting house business to an alternative and unaccountable process establishes a precedent.

    If a non mandatory opinion poll eventuates . . . aside from Yes/No or non participation; might one consider adding a third option? A simple symbol of rejection of the two Prime Ministerial protagonists currently governing Australia. Such as: “AT”? Stick that in their pipe and count how many Australians are completely pissed off.

  8. Paul

    I cannot understand why you are so kind to the travesty of a PM. If the suggestion that Julia Gillard, one of our best PMs, should be drowned in a sack is the benchmark for dealing with a PM that some people don’t like, what should be done to Turnbull?

  9. Venise Alstergren

    “this isn’t government, it’s wantonly corrupt wastage of public money.”
    “Stupidity piled on cowardice arising from ignorance and, at the bottom of it all, fear. Fear in the hearts of bigots, and fear in the mind of the man who wouldn’t stare them down. This tawdry, demeaning, traumatizing journey we are on, it is the marker of this Prime Minister’s legacy to the country he said he wanted to lead to a better place.”
    Exactly, precisely and certainly. Thank you Michael, thank you!

  10. Iskandar

    Agree fully with Michael. A complete non-issue, total bullshit and stupidity, and at best a political football. Most of us don’t give a toss about who marries who or what, or marries at all, as long as there is equality under the law. There are far more vital issues to be dealt with. The “postal plebiscite” however reminds me of Little Johnny Winston’s terror fridge magnet episode. The Terror! Terror! Terror! fear campaign was an irresistible political football he pulled out all stops to kick along with his wide postal mail out of the, well, terror-pack, with fridge magnet. Cautious alertness was one thing, but this was over the top. Cynics like myself tried to return unopened packs to the sender as “Unwanted Junk Mail” but Australia Post refused to do so. Carmen Lawrence, then Member for Fremantle, collected them with the intention of plonking them down during Question Time as a protest, though I’m not sure this ever happened. This may be an example to follow should the “postal plebiscite” actually proceed.

Leave a comment