Why Hate Gillard? She’s a Fugly Woman, That’s Why! Um, Right?

Taken from the ‘Support Tony Abbott’ page on Facebook, here’s a quick look at the more common criticisms of our female Prime Minister. To be fair, we’ve taken comments from both females and males on the page. Julia Gillard (and feminists in general) cop insults such as fat, ugly, left at the alter (sic), misandrists, feminists (is that an insult?), lesbians (is THAT an insult?), bullies, hypocrites, thugs, obese, grumpy, stupid, McTurds, barge-arse, retard, red-headed cum bucket, face planking cow, evil, big butt, cunt, skank, gutter trash, piece of shit, bush pig, thunder thighs, lard arse, amoral slut. (The red highlighted words are female/appearance related).

Enjoy the read, and share it around if you so desire. If not to expose the hatred and unabashed sexism that exists within these people, but perhaps to highlight the irony that such internally and externally ugly people could be so hypocritical.

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.52.57 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.53.07 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.55.55 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.55.19 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.55.30 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.56.13 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 8.56.27 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.04.43 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.13.25 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.11.31 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.11.40 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.07.34 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.07.10 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.06.39 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.04.29 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.04.02 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.14.03 PM

Screen Shot 2012-12-13 at 9.14.58 PM

184 thoughts on “Why Hate Gillard? She’s a Fugly Woman, That’s Why! Um, Right?

  1. Ah, & of course all of these guys & gals are clearly such “lookers” themselves, that they feel the Right to make comments about others. Bet they’d get pretty angry if someone called them out on their lack of good looks or poor dress sense-hypocrites (indeed, some of them look like their parents may have been a little too closely related-if you get my drift).

    • Hi Matthew. Why do you like usign the word fag? Is it because you really want to have a relationship with a man, so you throw the word “fag” aroudn so you hope people won’t realise that want you really want is to be one?

      I’m not expecting an answer. I think these a questions you should actually ask yourself.

    • Seriously, when your PM people are going to make jokes about you etc. Old mate a few years back did a pretty good job of ignoring all the stuff about his appearance, his lisp etc. Some PMs seem to cop more criticism than others. I’ll finger my anus if Labour gets in again. I doubt that they will.

      • Please give examples of any criticism of any previous Prime Minister’s genitals, thighs, or other body parts. Please give examples of rumours of the sexuality or previous sexual life of any previous prime Minister. Please give examples of accusations that previous Prime Ministers were out to seduce foreign leaders or other married peopl.

        All of the above have been applied to Julia Gillard. None have been applied to any prime minister.

  2. Also, I don’t recall John Howard’s appearance ever being used as a reason not to vote for him, or Rudd for that matter. Didn’t need to in Howard’s case, as I just relied on his constant lying & misuse of his position as perfectly good justification!

      • I’d say its pretty evident shes a liar, look at all her policy back flips and the way she outed Rudd. That said though, both parties are full of liars and back stabbers…..Thats simply politics.

        • Rudd’s loss of leadership would have happened whether Gillard ran or not. His health problems coupled with his personality quirks ensured that the early promise he had shown as PM was not going to last for the long haul. No specialised insider knowledge needed to know that.

          Maybe you’d have had the same to say had a male won the leadership battle? You put a great deal of faith in the penis as an organ of government.

      • Dan is asked for evidence. His evidence “Well, it’s evident”

        Policy backflips are the same for all politicians, and aren’t lying, they;re responding to a difference circumstancei n a different way. For example, if a door is open you walk through it-if it is shut, you don’t, you open it and then walk through it.

        Now apprently, to be a good politician, according to you Dan, once you’ve said you’re goign to walk throguh a door, then you do it, whether the door is opened or not!

        Now that backflips are off the agenda-please list examples of times she deliberately lied.

        “both parties are full of liars and back stabbers…..Thats simply politics.”

        So, you’re saying that even what you’re accusing her of is the norm for politics-so why the anger at her particularly?

        • I was pointing out that all politicians lie. Liberal or labor. Male or female, I never mentioned a penis….so not sure why that was thrown in there. I’m not saying either party is better than the other or that Julia is no good because shes female. I replied to a post that seemed to insuate that only John howard was a liar. Sorry If this offended your Gillard supporting ideals. Perhaps you should remove your rose coloured glasses and have a look at the real world.

        • Dan is going through what I like to cal self revisionism He starts but saying one stupid thing, then realising it’s stupid, attempts to change what was said and hope no one notices

          “I was pointing out that all politicians lie. Liberal or labor”

          Except you didn’t This is an article entirely about how Julia Gillard is demeaned due to her gender and looks-a way that only women are being treated Your response was to ignore the comments and state:

          “Constant lying and misuse of her position, sounds like Julia Gillard to me. Nothing to do with her looks.”

          Yep, calling a woman a cum bucket is obviously a well thought out examination of her policies When someone points out that a few of these comments might have something to do with more than her policies, you tell us that all politicians lie

          I repeat now, as I said then, why then do we not see this about Tony Abbot, or people who you accept lie in the Liberal party No one is calling any Liberal party member I can think of a cum bucket, a c**t, a slut, or anything like that-correct me if I’m wrong Whereas MANY women in the Labour party are being called that

          Then you try to reshape reality by trying to take us into your blinkered world view:

          ” I replied to a post that seemed to insuate that only John howard was a liar.”

          Yes, there was a comment that could be interpreted as that, if you only read one sentence, and ignore the article it was responding to

          Here was the original line:
          “Also, I don’t recall John Howard’s appearance ever being used as a reason not to vote for him, or Rudd for that matter. Didn’t need to in Howard’s case, as I just relied on his constant lying & misuse of his position as perfectly good justification!”

          So, you ignored the first sentence, stating essentially: “I never judged the last two prime ministers on their looks,” leading to “Therefore I based my voting on my assesment of his performance as prime minister” to read “Only John Howard is capable of lying”

          Talk about one eyed!

          Then, of course, the final stage is telling us all we’re not living in the real world, and reality is something only he can see:
          “Sorry If this offended your Gillard supporting ideals. Perhaps you should remove your rose coloured glasses and have a look at the real world.”

          Dan, you went in saying Julia Gillard was not being judged on her looks, gender, etc That was wrong, and you could just admit it and move on Instead you chose to run around pretending that someone is saying John Howard invented lying Maybe it’s time to actually accept that sometimes you make mistakes. We all do, you know.

      • Please give examples of any criticism of any previous Prime Minister’s genitals, thighs, or other body parts. Please give examples of rumours of the sexuality or previous sexual life of any previous prime Minister. Please give examples of accusations that previous Prime Ministers were out to seduce foreign leaders or other married peopl.

        All of the above have been applied to Julia Gillard. None have been applied to any prime minister.

    • Please give examples of any criticism of any previous Prime Minister’s genitals, thighs, or other body parts. Please give examples of rumours of the sexuality or previous sexual life of any previous prime Minister. Please give examples of accusations that previous Prime Ministers were out to seduce foreign leaders or other married peopl.

      All of the above have been applied to Julia Gillard. None have been applied to any prime minister.

      And now you’re talkign about assholes. First you like talking abotu gay men, now you like arseholes. What are you trying to tell yourself here Matthew?

      I’m going to throw some things that I think are true about you out there:
      1-You are far more comfortable with men than women. Men you can be yourself around, women just don’t understand you, and you need to pretend to be someone else when they’re around.

      2- If you had to spend the rest of your life with only one gender, it would be men.

      3- You have been curious about having sex with a man at least once, and when you thought about it, you weren’t disgusted. And this shocked you.

      4- You prefer the company of your father to your mother, your brother to your sister, your son to your daughter.

      5- You have once thoguht to yourself “It wouldn’t be gay if I was entering a man”

      6- You would prefer to live with a man, if you could in a non-gay way.

      How close have I gotten? No,. don’t tell me, you just know the answer for yourself.

  3. Reblogged this on This Man's Voice and commented:
    In any argument, a couple of key requirements are that terms are defined and that and proposition or premise must be supported by evidence and a reasoned explanation.
    Sadly, I think most of the people showcased on this blog have never learned the basic needs of argument. Or decency. Or, possibly anything beyond a 9th grade education.

  4. Oh I have a really big problem with that woman who said feminists don’t speak for her or whatever. She really doesn’t get it. The point of feminism is not that all women should give up traditional gender roles and all that, it’s so that women are given choices. They can choose their career, lifestyle, their own partners. All rational feminists (of course there’s a few that are a tad more militant, but you get that in any group) want is for women to run their own lives.

    I hope she doesn’t vote. Or leave the house without her husband. Or wear anything revealing any sort of leg. Or work. Drive a car. Because you’ve got the crazy man-hating feminists to thank for those things.

  5. I dislike Julia Gillard, not for any of the reason or names she has been called but simply because she is incompetent, she lies, lacks integrity, belittles the Office of PM, all of her policies have been a failure on a grand scale. I detest the way she attacks Tony Abbott of being a misogynist, but defends Peter Slippers sending revolting text messages…it doesn’t get more hypocritical than that! I can’t stand the way she flaunts/flirts with Obama, it is nothing short of embarrassing, particularly on an international stage, to say nothing of being unethical given he is married. I detest the way during Question Time when questions are asked she doesn’t like, or know how to answer, she gets up and walks out.

    No doubt, my comments here will be treated with the same disdain that Julia treats all of us. Which comes as no surprise to me given the example she sets and how keen you all are to follow in her footsteps.

    • …simply because she is incompetent

      We like people to back up their statements with evidence. So please tell us how you have managed to ascertain that Julia Gillard is “incompetent”.

      …she lies

      Evidence? And please do not mention the “carbon tax” without giving its context.

      …lacks integrity

      Evidence? And that is a subjective judgement at best.

      …belittles the Office of PM

      Err…how?

      … all of her policies have been a failure on a grand scale

      You mean the more than 300 pieces of legislation which have gone through the Parliament? Is the NDIS a failure? Is Gronski a failure?

      So please outline in detail all of the policies which you consider to be a failure and how they have failed. In your rebuttal you are not to use commentary from right wing columnists.

      I detest the way she attacks Tony Abbott of being a misogynist

      But he is. And has been since long before he entered Parliament.

      …defends Peter Slippers sending revolting text messages

      If you read the legitimate news reports you will see that Gillard in fact has vigorously condemned Peter Slipper for those text messages.

      I can’t stand the way she flaunts/flirts with Obama

      Jealous are you? Obama is an attractive man and the two leaders are actually good friends.

      …to say nothing of being unethical given he is married

      Being married did not stop either Berlusconi or Sarkozy conducting affairs with much younger trophy women. Or is your moralistic ire reserved for the mild flirtation between leaders on the the left of politics?

      I am quite sure that the formidable, super-intelligent and attractive Michelle Obama has nothing to worry about.

      I detest the way during Question Time when questions are asked she doesn’t like, or know how to answer, she gets up and walks out.

      Go and learn about parliamentary procedure and the protocol during Question Time before you come here and parade your ignorance.

      • perfect.

        and I think that there is no other parliamentarian (apart from maybe Bob Carr whom she recruited) who could’ve walked the tightrope of a hung parliament this vitriolic for (what will be) three long years and survived. She’s not perfect, and her stances on things like gay marriage certainly annoy me, but you can’t deny that she’s a marvel at negotiation: at maintaining the loyalty of the lunatic fringe in her own party and navigating the minefield of independents with frequently conflicting stances and still to front a legitimate, functioning government. Its not like the libs have not tried everything in their power to unseat her, and yet, she survives. I think she’s amazing.

      • Want evidence go to ___________this web site supplies plenty of evidence to support what a total disgrace Julia Gillard her Government are.

        • We are not interested in dodgy websites. We want YOU to present verifiable evidence (you know, the stuff with facts in it?)

          Please note we do it frequently here when we are not gasping in amazement at the idiocy of racists, bigots and homophobes.

        • we have no evidence you’re NOT a total fucken wanker who loves sucking Labor Cock…mindless fucktard!!

          Your a Pro Labor WHORE mindmadeupofshit…go walk in front of a train and save us all your boring zombie bullshit!!

          oooh no…fuck me…HOW MANY TIMES WAS HE PUT SHIT ON FOR BEING SHORT< FUZZY EYEBROWS, THE WAY HE SPOKE…SHORT MEMORY ASSHOLE!!!

          show your face you gutless fag!!

        • We thought we’d condense the utterances of one Matthew Thomson into one post to spare our readers the ongoing mutilation of the English language therein.

          we have no evidence you’re NOT a total fucken wanker who loves sucking Labor Cock…mindless fucktard!!

          I am not in the habit of dating right wingers. They have dreadful attitudes to women.

          Your a Pro Labor WHORE mindmadeupofshit…go walk in front of a train and save us all your boring zombie bullshit!!

          I am sure when I send the URL of our blog piece to several Liberal politicians I know personally that they will be suitably impressed with the quality of their supporters.

          oooh no…fuck me…HOW MANY TIMES WAS HE PUT SHIT ON FOR BEING SHORT< FUZZY EYEBROWS, THE WAY HE SPOKE…SHORT MEMORY ASSHOLE!!!

          I assume you are referring to John Howard. May I remind you that it was Senator George Brandis, your Shadow Attorney General, who referred to Howard as a “lying rodent”. Think about it.

        • Now Matthew is writing about sucking cock. Why do you do that, Matthew? What is your obsession with men having sex?

          Are you attracted to men, Matthew?

          And, to repeat myself:
          Please give examples of any criticism of any previous Prime Minister’s genitals, thighs, or other body parts. Please give examples of rumours of the sexuality or previous sexual life of any previous prime Minister. Please give examples of accusations that previous Prime Ministers were out to seduce foreign leaders or other married peopl.

          All of the above have been applied to Julia Gillard. None have been applied to any prime minister.

    • “. I detest the way she attacks Tony Abbott of being a misogynist, but defends Peter Slippers sending revolting text messages…”

      Give me an example of her defending Peter Slipper’s messages. Also, are you saying mysogyny is badf, but it’s better when someone acts in a sexist way publically (Like Tony Abbot), rather than says it in private (Like Peter Slipper)?

      “it doesn’t get more hypocritical than that! ”

      How about accusing the Government of lying, then using words which you know to be false to mislead the government? Is that misleading? (Example is Tony Abbot continuing to call asylum seekers “illegal” despite being repeatedly told, and agreeing that they are not).

      What about accusing the Government of having no plan, but pretty much disagreeing with everything they say, even things you’ve previously agreed with (Tony Abbot-on the Carbon Tax-agreed during the rudd regime)? That’s pretty hypocritical too, isn’t it?

      “! I can’t stand the way she flaunts/flirts with Obama, it is nothing short of embarrassing, particularly on an international stage, to say nothing of being unethical given he is married.”

      How exactly is she flirting? I see nothing in the relationship between Obama and Gillard that I didn’t also see between Rudd and Obama, Howard and Bush, etc. Or is it a case that you can onyl have a friendly relationship with a world leader if you’re a man? (Alternatively, are you saying that every Australian Prime Minister since Whitlam has been attempting to seduce the President, whomever he is?)

      Do you have friendships with people of the opposite sex? Do you sometimes laugh at the same jokes, and enjyo their company? To you enjoy talking to them abotu things? If you said yes-congratulations, according to you you’re flirting with these friends and are trying to steal them away for yourself. If you said no-are you telling us that people are only allowed to be friends with people of the same gender? Should make workplaces a bit difficult.

      “I detest the way during Question Time when questions are asked she doesn’t like, or know how to answer, she gets up and walks out. ”

      How often has that ever happened? Give me specific examples. Whereas I know of at least one occasion where Tony Abbot ran out of the House, and another time where he was ordered to leave.

        • I’d do any of the subjects of this post, but I fear that Cory Bernardi may consider me to have taken things just little bit too far.

    • Bullshit. Julia Gillard has never walked out of Question Time and has taken all questions, even if they are ridiculous crap. Whereas Tony Abbott was completely silent in Question Time, leaving his deputy to put the malicious allegations about her involvement in the AWU non-event.
      In addition there is no specific lie that the Abbott cult can ever point to. Whereas Tony Abbott says it is okay to lie to the media and the people. Not to mention Abbott’s lies about the Carbon Price, ie. everyone losing their jobs, $150 Lamb Roasts, Whyalla closing down etc. Lies about his $1 Billion cuts to public hospitals etc.

  6. From a post by the admin on the ‘Support Tony Abbott’ FB page:

    ALSO A WARNING FOR TROLLS OR POSTERS. IF YOU RUBBISH GOD OR CHRISTIANITY ON THIS SITE, YOU WILL BE OFFENDING ME AND MOST OF THE SUPPORTERS ON THIS SITE. YOU WILL BE INSTANTLY DELETED, BANNED AND REPORTED TO FACEBOOK!!!

    Beautiful! So you can be a foul-mouthed, racist, misogynistic, homophobic tool – as long as you don’t take the Lord’s name in vain. Yep – that totally makes sense.

  7. What a load of rubbish people, EVERY PM has been made fun of and not very often in a nice way, Gillard is copping the same treatment but falls back on being a woman as a defense, she isnt hated for being female shes hated for her performance and lies!

    • Please outline in detail verifiable factual evidence that Gillard’s performance is somehow “lacking”, given that all available economic indicators say otherwise.

      At the end of the day most sensible people will vote on economic issues and not on bogot fears and smears.

    • Please give examples of any criticism of any previous Prime Minister’s genitals, thighs, or other body parts. Please give examples of rumours of the sexuality or previous sexual life of any previous prime Minister. Please give examples of accusations that previous Prime Ministers were out to seduce foreign leaders or other married peopl.

      All of the above have been applied to Julia Gillard. None have been applied to any prime minister.

  8. Gary and Debski are made for each other, they both write crap, they lie, they are scared to face reality (Peter was cleared by The Courts) etc No more Dating Agencies for these two losers?

  9. Can’t say I’ve had a problem ever getting laid with people infinitely more attractive, on so many more levels, than this revolting people could even imagine.

    What irritates me though, is that by the looks of them, they should be voting Labor, which means if TA gets in next year they’re going to get shafted and probably still blame Gillard for it.

    Well done the LNP, for reducing Strayan political discourse to revolting lows in the name of winning votes.

  10. Sadly the Support Tony Abbott site does not have the ethical rules and respect for all ALL individuals and comments posted that Destroy the Joint does…..This ME ME ME I am important I am the only one with anything worth saying attitude smacks of egotistic nihilistic and ignorant traits that appear to look for negative topics to ravel in, possibly because they are so bitter and unfulfilled in their own lives…. A sad thing really…. They bring me down, and depress me….I pity them. Were as people who can fight a cause not for personal justification but for the benefit of a whole group, society or world…. especially if they cultivate a environment of inclusion, equality and respect are optimists and secure enough in their own self worth to follow something through for the long term goal. I admire these people. :) They motivate me and I enjoy being around them….. :) :) Go DTJ GO JULIA :) :) thanks for making Australia No 1 in the OECD Better Life Index We REALLY ARE SO WELL OFF BECAUSE OF THE POSITIVE WAY YOU GUIDED THIS COUNTRY THROUGH THE WORLD RECESSION!

  11. Its funny seeing all the comments complaining about the country being ruined and horrible, yet they all look healthy and well while enjoying many luxuries in the photos they post.

    Oh the irony.

    • The irony of posting an uneducated throw away insult (slut- really?) under an article focused on unsubstantiated claims and highly irrelevant gender-based insults?

    • If you don’t want a prime minister who is not clear with the turth, why are you supporting Tony Abbot, a man who said he doesn’t always follow througho n his promises.

      If you have allegations that Julia Gillard is a criminal, please, present the evidence. I wait to hear it.

      But seriously, the above are things that can be argued for and against with facts. You want to use those words, tyou demonstrate clear lies or crimes-and these are either substantiated or dismissed, depending on the proof.

      The word “slut” on the other hand-that’s not something that can be backed up with facts or evidence. That’s a slur that you put on her, because you want to demean her further. It was not enough to call her a “lying criminal”-you wanted to through in “slut” to, bcause hse is a woman, and this is a way to knock her further down.

      Now try to tell me that this is not a sexist response. Tell me how all prime ministers have been called sluts. I’ve never heard of any former prime minister being called that, yet can think of many other female politicians (By no mistake, all Greens of Labor members) who have been called that by your ilk. Do you have a problem with succesful women, Wendy? Are you going to tell your female family members “Don’t disagree with a man, or try and get a good job, because only sluts do that”?

      On what basis do you call any women a slut, Wendy? Would it be fair to call you one?

      And let’s be perfectly honest here. You don’t care about any criminal allegations like the AWU. I doubt you understand the allegations. You don’t care about any alleged “lies”-you don’t actually know enough about the Carbon tax to know how it has effected you. Those words came later-the word “slut” is the long term one. You hated her, because she’s Labour, and you’re a conservative, and that’s reason alone for you to call her a slut. Again-is this okay for me to call you one on that basis alone?

  12. So funny; because Julia Gillard is the first PM – or politician for that matter – to be accused of lying. How dare she play the game like every one that came before her!

    I love that the first refuge for insulting women is to fall on those tired accusations of promiscuity or homosexuality, like either of those things are supposed to be a crime. Yawn. Wake me when these miscreants pry themselves from their armchairs to say somethng worthwhile.

  13. Look at you people. The comments you lot have made yourselves makes you just as bad as this lot. I love how childish this page is. “they don’t agree with my opinion so i’m going to name and shame faces.” I hope you’re aware that using somebody elses photo without their permission is illegal and i’ll be passing this on.

    • What’s the problem? If you have a problem with people knowing you called a woman a cum bucket, surely it’s your fault for saying it? If you don’t have a problem with people knowing, why aren’t you happy more people know?

      Do you blame other people for your own actions most of the time? When you speed, is it a conspiracy of evil speed cameras? When you get drunk and lose your job, is it because your manager is a dick? I think this is the case.

      Maybe if you start acceptign responsibility for your own actions you might grow up a little.

    • I doubt Julia Gillard gave her permission for a picture of her head to be put on the body of a naked woman either but I see it’s on that same FB site you frequent. Suck it up sweetheart.

  14. I don’t see the problem with my comment where I called her an Amoral Slut

    a·mor·al
    /āˈmôrəl/
    Adjective
    Lacking a moral sense; unconcerned with the rightness or wrongness of something.

    slut
    /slət/
    Noun
    A slovenly or promiscuous woman.
    Synonyms
    trollop – strumpet – harlot – streetwalker – slattern

    According to the definition she’s an amoral slut…..she lacks morals, is unconcerned with right or wrong and is a promiscuous woman, who sleeps with other women’s husbands, so what’s the problem? Or do you need to have the dictionary definitions changed?????

    • Bill Clinton
      John Gorton
      Harold Holt
      Winston Churchill
      John F Kennedy
      Dwight D Eisenhower
      Bob Hawke
      Robert Menzies
      Ben Chifley

      Tell me something Vanessa. What do these eight men have in common. Let’s see if you can guess…

      Any amoral sluts there? Please tell us. We need your obvious highly attuned moral sensibilities to guide us…

      Extra-curricular activities are usually irrelevant and have nothing to do with ability to lead otherwise Henry VIII would have been a dud of a king.

      However Edward VIII let his private life intrude upon his duties with disastrous results.

      So are you concerned about perceived “immorality” in leaders generally – or just when it is a woman who is perceived to be doing it?

      And there is a small matter of one Tony Abbott and an alleged child conceived out of wedlock – tsk…

      • Then there’s the small matter that it is the men who are (allegedly) sleeping with more than one partner, not the PM… so surely that would mean that they are in fact the sluts if anyone is?

        • Let’s also not forget that there are rumours of marital infidelity swirling around a couple of very prominent Coalition figures.

      • yep they’re all pigs for cheating on their partners, and as for the supposed Tony Abbott child born out of wedlock, check your facts:-

        For much of his adult life he also famously believed he had fathered a son out of wedlock with his first girlfriend, Kathy Donnelly, who had given up the child for adoption as both were opposed to abortion.

        That son, the sound recordist Daniel O’Connor, made contact with his mother in 2005, which forced Abbott — by then a married father of three — to confront his past.

        But even though it later emerged via a DNA test that another teenage squire had been the father, Abbott, as is his style, refused to paper over the cracks in his personal life.

        next!!

        • So Tony Abbot had sex with a woman out of wedlock? Is he a slut too? Or is it okay when a man does it?

          Or alternatively, are you telling us that Tony Abbot is so stupid that he believed he had a child out of wedlock despite never having sex?

          Which is it, Vanessa, is he an idiot or a slut?

        • By the way, Vanessa, if you object to men cheating on thier wives, please direct us to examples of you posting online about how much you hate men who cheat on their wives. Or do only women get that sort of treatment?

        • …refused to paper over the cracks in his personal life.

          You know, no one in Australia would have really cared (apart from the Christian Taliban) – we are not as unsophisticated as the Americans are about these matters – and would probably have had sympathy for him had he not made such a stuff-up in his revelations about his relationship.

          He managed to embarrass Daniel and his mother and made a mockery of those women forced to give up their babies for adoption because of the attitudes of the time – something which I hope came back to haunt him when the forced adoption apologies were made. A bit of due diligence and fact-checking would not have gone astray – skills which one would hope an alternate PM would have. Imagine trusting national secrets to this man.

      • I really must comment on the issue with Edward VIII.. What results? By all reports he and Ms Simpson shared a happy and fulfilling life. He chose the woman he loved, deemed unfit to be a Queen due to her former marriage. You guys are really funny. Bad Example. AS for listing the men who had keeping it in the pants issues? Certainly the infidelity of Clinton and JFK are legendary. Of course that doesn’t really progress any argument. They were both left leaning if you recall. It would be good if you saw a few facts.

        You want evidence for the failings of the PM while involved in the Slush Fund affair. I recommend undertaking a review of the law relating to solicitors conduct. It makes for compelling reading for the ALP. Simply put she has by her interactions with the client’s representative displayed actions below the standards of a legal practitioner.

        Failure to open a file and appropriately record transactions
        Letter to the WA Commission. She clearly knew that this was not above board.
        Providing legal advice based on what the client wanted to hear not needed to know. I note in this regard the long held doctrine that a lawyer is not a mere mouthpiece for the client. Gillard justifies the position by saying she was merely providing advice and that was based on the instructions. She failed to comply with the AWU rules, She did not bother with little technicalities like the law.. She was YOUNG AND NAIVE.

        Come on. This woman has failed the country, The mining tax, Carbon Tax. Halls for School, The Pink Batts debacle, The Thomson Affair.

        Keep up fair debate but show some thoughts. Naming and shaming is tacky.

        • By all reports he and Ms Simpson shared a happy and fulfilling life.

          Must have been a ball of laughs cosying up to the Fascist elite of Europe. Maybe Wallis enabled Britain to dodge a bullet, because her brother-in-law made a far better King than her David would have.

          They were both left leaning if you recall

          So how do you account for the infidelities of Churchill, Menzies, Gorton, Eisenhower, Holt? A sudden onset of socialism?

          Explain Sarkozy and Berlusconi then.

          Get real

          I recommend undertaking a review of the law relating to solicitors conduct.

          We know it. So did Slater and Gordon, her employers.

          http://www.news.com.au/national/tony-abbott-happy-for-legit-investigation-of-julia-gillards-former-law-career/story-fndo4eg9-1226454963433

          Slater & Gordon partner Andrew Grech has repeated that an investigation 17 years ago found no wrong-doing by Ms Gillard.

          “Upon the Slater & Gordon partnership learning of what has been described as the AWU/Bruce Wilson allegations in August 1995, it conducted an internal legal review as it would do, and has done, whenever any such allegations might be made,” said Mr Grech in a statement.

          “Ms Gillard co-operated fully with the internal review and denied any wrong doing.

          “The review found nothing which contradicted the information provided by Ms Gillard at the time in relation to the AWU/Bruce Wilson allegations and which she has stated consistently since the allegations were first raised.

          Slater and Gordon would have had too much to lose by protecting someone who did wrong. So just move on will you? You lot are as ridiculous as the birthers.

          The mining tax, Carbon Tax. Halls for School, The Pink Batts debacle, The Thomson Affair.

          The mining tax – essential to ensure an equitable distribution of the tax burden. Only affects the biggest players – or do you think they should have a free ride while PAYE bear the tax burden?

          Carbon tax – more correctly a pricing mechanism which ensures firstly that the big polluters bear some of the cost of combating climate change and secondly to position Australia to be able to trade internationally in carbon credits instead of being left behind when the global economy moves to renewables. Industries which innovate, do some R&D and act themselves to minimise their carbon footprint will be the winners. Renewables are going to be cheaper than traditional fossil fuels for the consumer.

          Halls for School – we don’t get our info from shonky journalists. Nor should an educated man like you. Due diligence old boy! :)

          http://foi.deewr.gov.au/documents/building-education-revolution-implementation-taskforce-final-report

          The Pink Batts debacle (sic)

          See previous comments. There was the unfortunate death of four workers thanks to their shonky employers.

          http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/new-report-finds-insulation-scheme-will-save-billions/4258678

          Should have been done by Albanese’s department which is better at rolling out and managing large-scale projects. My only quarrel with the principle of the scheme – and thanks to the nay sayers, our home missed out.

          The Thomson Affair – predates Gillard, some evidence of shady activities by the Libs

          http://www.independentaustralia.net/2012/politics/craig-thomson-under-the-rain/

          And Jackson allegedly had a boyfriend in Opus Dei? *snigger*

        • Really that’s your response.

          1. Pink Batts and Halls for Schools. I agree that the policies were sound in principal. In practice it was poorly run out and the Halls program so much wastage. If you truly believe we have an effective 4th Estate you forget that no longer is real in Australia.

          2. Mining Tax. Are we a socialist country now? Well distribution. It is bad enough with HFI and VFI. They destroyed Federalism but lets not get picky.

          3. Carbon Tax. MMMM What does it do to save the effects of Climate Change (on that read up on Dr James Lovelock, the ultimate doom and gloomer has admitted oops we made a mistake and the consequences will not be as dire as forecast. ) Lovelock even notes that this means Gores inconvenient truth is now a convenient lie. http://generationim.com A wealth creation vehicle for the lying king of climate fear. Did you know that he is a gross user of resources yet GWB has water tanks, solar etc. Gee that is inconvenient.

          4. Conduct and the slush fund. OOPS. I worked for Slater and Gordon bud. The reality is that there is no investigation into a lawyers conduct without a referral and/or complainant. If she was so above board why the recorded interview. Your argument fails down here. Have you ever met Andrew Grech? No But I have, a number of times. I was paid over and above required contractual obligations when our unit was downsized. They are about profit. If you truly believe that it is not in there interest to protect the truth knowing that it would now potentially impact on the share price. A drop of 10c a share kills $2 million of Grechs personal wealth. OOPS there goes your argument again. I do recommend you read the regulations. She was non-compliant. That is why she was shown the door. It is why she has not practiced law since. Her 2-3 year hiatus while she sought pre-selection? seriously do you believe that ?

          5. Infidelity. You are right, it is not partisan nor is it gender based but the comments about all the above and the rumuor and conjencture show that Gilliard is as open to fair comment as men. It is not a measure of ability as a parliamentarian, but it is a measure of morals.

          6. Name calling. I agree. Use of that term is pretty ordinary. I will call her a liar and show the facts, corrupt and show the facts etc. (now interpretation of facts is a subjective issue so we will not agree but I respect your right to disagree if you do the same).

          7. Thomson is a worm and should be hung out to dry by the whole of Australia, I think we all agree that his conduct (and that of many union officials – and I accept that big business is not innocent of fraud.. Nick Leeson anyone!!) is below par and he has been far from truthful about any thing.

          Nice trick with posting my details. Of course you appreciate that as I have young children it would be appropriate to remove that. I have not abused you nor do I intend to.

          Feel free to email, you may find we have some common views on decency and politics even if clearly you are left and I am right.

        • “) Lovelock even notes that this means Gores inconvenient truth is now a convenient lie. http://generationim.com A wealth creation vehicle for the lying king of climate fear. Did you know that he is a gross user of resources yet GWB has water tanks, solar etc. Gee that is inconvenient.”

          Oh wow. Nice use of a fake chain email to bolster your case.. fruitloop.

        • Davoe. No fake email chain there.
          The link is to a website. Al Gore’s company. The one with whom he shares directorship with a couple of ex Goldman Sachs goons. Really?
          As for the lovely home of Al Gore which he has every right to own I add. Don’t you find it a tad laughable that these climate change doom and gloomers own seaside homes?

          Climate change is real.. FACT. WE will on current knowledge and science ever be able to accurately determine what amount is anthopogenic in origin. I know what the response will be. That came directly from a UN climate scientist. His response was actually “you know you are a smartarse, and you know you are right, but some countries do not have the funds to go into a philosophical debate”. Lets work out if we can mitigate the effects and leave it to the future to work out what caused it. That would be a better use of resources. A carbon tax (semantics be damned check the High Courts rulings on levies and taxes ok) is not going to achieve anything unless we invest in infrastructure to adjust things.

          I can debate the issue all day. But you will not agree that I may have merit in my claims

    • “she lacks morals,”

      And what morals do you have? what’s right and wrong to you? It’s apparently okay to call people sluts, so on what highground do you have to call another person immoral?

      “is unconcerned with right or wrong”

      How exaclty is she not caring about right or wrong? Specific examples please.
      And again, you’re a person who rusn around calling people sluts-what is right and wrong to you? Do you tell your children “It’s okay to call people names-if they’re a woman!”-and then encourage them to swear at their (majority) female teachers?

      ” and is a promiscuous woman,”
      So, as it’s fair to judge women on how many men they have slept with, please disclose Vanessa, how many men is a woman allowed to have sex with before they become a slut? And pray tell, how many have yoyu had sex with?

      And just to be clear, it’s not sexist to judge a woman by her sexual past, while never judging men by the same standard, right?

      ” who sleeps with other women’s husbands,”

      Evidence or I allege thatr you have been the mistress of Osama Bin Laden, and continue to canoodle with his rotting undersea corpse. After all, so far there’s just as much evidence to my allegation, as there is to yours.

  15. perhaps you would like to consider that the physical attacks to ms gillard are manifestations of their hate towards her for doing a bad job. they hate her because shes a crappy pm, which leads to derogitory comments.
    two more things to note
    2. insulting people over the internet is as old as the internet
    2. hating people for having different beleifs is as old as having beleifs.
    Every person listed, almost every commenter aswel as the original artical are guilty of this and im sure the author would use just as foul language if they werent trying to dis these people for their language. in addition, the author posts personal photosof the people. I would consider this to be far more vile than anyword that any of those people used to discribe gillard and her supporters.

    • the physical attacks to ms gillard are manifestations of their hate towards her for doing a bad job

      That only highlights their immaturity. And none of the attacks are witty – they are simply hate speech.

      they hate her because shes a crappy pm

      Evidence?

    • “perhaps you would like to consider that the physical attacks to ms gillard are manifestations of their hate towards her ”

      Let me see if I get this straight. It’s oaky to physically attack someone IF, and only if, you hate them. So all you people who are brutally assautling,t hreatning or attacking someone because you’re mildly ambiguous in your feelings about them-that’s wrong!

      Yoyu do know in that one sentence you’ve now justified all assault, murder, and all other violent crime, right? Go you!

      Or is it only okay to have physical; attacks and insults when it’s someone you don’t like?

      “2. insulting people over the internet is as old as the internet
      2. hating people for having different beleifs is as old as having beleifs.”

      Some bogans can’t count. Some spell. When we’re very lucky, we get both in the one person.

      So, are you trying to tell us that hating people for having different beliefs is okay because it’s been around forever?
      By that understanding, we should also:
      -Not investigate any illnesses (Because they’ve been killing things forever)
      -Legalise murder, robbery-hell all crime (People have been doing this forever too!)

      You didn’t think this through, did you?

      “Every person listed, almost every commenter aswel as the original artical are guilty of this and im sure the author would use just as foul language if they werent trying to dis these people for their language.”

      That’s what you like to tell yourself, isn’t it Jono? Thati t’s okay to say “She a filthy dyke” because everyone does it, righT?

      But they don’t. Find me a time when I’ve made comments about the genitals, sexuality or body of any politician, left wing or rgiht wing, then you can start saying “Hey-what I’m doing is okay, because everyone is doing it”?

      ” in addition, the author posts personal photosof the people. I would consider this to be far more vile than anyword that any of those people used to discribe gillard and her supporters.”

      So, let me get this straight. Spreading rumours about a person’s sexuality or sex life, drawing disfiguring pictures and pornography of a person, making disparaging comments about their body parts including their genitals, all of this is better than showing an actual picture of a person that the individual voluntarily posted online, is that right?

      So you’d prefer if someone said that you had sex with married men, and talked about your penis, then draw a picutre of you fucking a sheep, as long as they don’t show your profile pic?

  16. JM, you are an idiot, I never said he didn’t have sex, she let him believe that the child was his…..

    So by having sex outside of marriage with a single woman and not a married woman makes him a slut in your eyes, but Gillard screwing anything that is married and moves is ok??

    Yep who’s the hypocrite?!

    Also I object to anyone cheating on their partners, but never let a good lie get in the way of your hate fueled rants against anyone who doesn’t love your poster girl for morality!

    • “JM, you are an idiot, I never said he didn’t have sex, she let him believe that the child was his…..

      So, under proper Catholic law, he was promiscuous. But that’s okay.

      “So by having sex outside of marriage with a single woman and not a married woman makes him a slut in your eyes, but Gillard screwing anything that is married and moves is ok??”

      No, never said this. I’m looking for your definition for why it is okay for a man to have sex outside of marriage, but a woman who does it is a slut.

      By the way, still waiting on the evidence of any married men that Julia Gillard has slept with. so far there’s as much evidence for this as there is my claim that you have been and still are Osama Bin Laden’s msitress. Please, prove me wrong.

      “Also I object to anyone cheating on their partners, but never let a good lie get in the way of your hate fueled rants against anyone who doesn’t love your poster girl for morality!

      Prove it! You calledo ur Prime Minister a slut on facebook. Prove you’ve done that against other world leaders who have slept around. Where’s your diatribe against Berlusconi, Clinton, etc? What about paragraphs of hate filled bile for Ross Cameron?

      And this is what Vanessa ignroed, because she’s too busy shotuing “Slut” in the middle of the street:

      1. And what morals do you have? what’s right and wrong to you? It’s apparently okay to call people sluts, so on what highground do you have to call another person immoral?

      2. How exaclty is she not caring about right or wrong? Specific examples please.
      And again, you’re a person who rusn around calling people sluts-what is right and wrong to you? Do you tell your children “It’s okay to call people names-if they’re a woman!”-and then encourage them to swear at their (majority) female teachers?

      3. So, as it’s fair to judge women on how many men they have slept with, please disclose Vanessa, how many men is a woman allowed to have sex with before they become a slut? And pray tell, how many have yoyu had sex with?

      4. And just to be clear, it’s not sexist to judge a woman by her sexual past, while never judging men by the same standard, right?

  17. All those people being retarded bogans and using personal insults against Julia gillard doesn’t make her any less incompetent. Your point is invalid. Maybe you’ll why a majority of Australians dislike her.

    • It’s all legal. The comments are legal and we have let the non-defamatory ones through to highlight how idiotic they are and to let our formidable team of regular posters rip new arseholes.

      The ones we are citing are not. Some are actionable under the Commonwealth anti-discrimination laws. However I doubt if Gillard would bother with a bunch of obviously failed human beings.

  18. I wouldn’t put it past GetUp, Unions and any other ALP supporter to post the extreme comments you are displaying here. John McTernan could also be the creator of this slight of hand…..make the Opposition supporters look like foul mouthed yobbos by making comments on the LNP/ Supporters Facebook pages. The more I think about it, the more I feel this is the truth. Nice try, but it won’t save The Gillard or her minority government. You people just don’t get it. Australians want truth, openness, accountability and integrity with some responsible leadership…..we just ain’t getting that with this present “government” and so, come next election, we will make a change happen, a change for the better, for the best, a Tony Abbott led LNP government.

    • I wouldn’t put it past GetUp, Unions and any other ALP supporter to post the extreme comments you are displaying here

      Paranoid much? Check out the posters on that page – there’s a long history of boganish entitlement disease there.

      Australians want truth, openness, accountability and integrity with some responsible leadership

      We won’t get that with the creators of Work Choices, the original panderers to the anti-immigration vote, the facilitators of the AWB scandal…want me to continue?

      And your preferred PM was in all of that up to his neck.

    • Wait wait wait wait wait. So, you see incredibly sexist comments coming from people hating Gillard, and your first idea is “Oh, well this is obviously a left wing conspiracy because no one conservative could ever be sexist to any women, let alone a Prime Minister”-then you tell yourself “I’m right-therefore it is os”

      So, just to be clear, if any conservative makes a hate filled comment they are obviously Labour supporters trying to bring down the Liberal party, even if they’ve been workign in conservative causes for YEARS.

      So, Alan Jones, Bill Heffernan and Larry Pickering, you’re telling us, are all secrtly Labour supporters, right? And just look at these pages, no one is condemning these comemnts-it means the entire site must secretly be a Labour supporter site.

      But Liberal party politicians were reluctant to condemn Bill Heffernan or Alan Jones too, right? So, under that reasoning……the entire Liberal party is secretly the Labour party.

      Oh, it all makes sense now.

  19. Facebook Statement of Rights and Responsibilities:-

    3. Safety -

    You will not collect users’ content or information, or otherwise access Facebook, using automated means (such as harvesting bots, robots, spiders, or scrapers) without our prior permission.

    So how is this not a breach of Facebook rules for you to capture the screenshots and post them not only on a Facebook page, but on a website away from Facebook???

  20. Really? Is that what the rights and responsibilities actually say?

    I’m amazed they can keep this up, considering everyone knows facebook sells our information to advertisers, yet never asks for consent.

    I think you’ll find that facebook rights and responsibilities, while important, are not actually the law of Australia. I know, shocking, right?

    But hey, feel free to complain to facebook. But considering that (a)-this site is not owned by facebook, and (b), this site was created out of frustration at facebook not following their own rights and responsibilities, I don’t have high hopes for your success.

    Anyway, while we’re talking, what the problem with reposting things here Nesqua? Do you think the above comments are wrong and shameful? If that’s so, then surely it’s the people who make the above comments that are responsible for them? Alternatively, if you think the comments are great, surely you don’t have a problem with more people reading them.

  21. I don’t know Nesqua. I take more issue with the sanctimonious hypocrites who claim they are Christians and then go on to make the vile, racist and hate filled comments that they do. Really, would Jesus be saying those things? Do you think Jesus is giving the big thumb up like to their comments?

    • So, no one bows down as say “Oh mighty Nesqua, you are so wise”-and so you go “You don’t like people having other opinions, so I’m leaving”

      You’ve come here and called everyone names, called the prime ministr a slut, disparage anyone who disagrees with you, and you want us to remain a respectful silence? Try that in real life, see how far it gets you.

  22. So you think the above comments are fine? You think it’s okay to call a woman a slut, a cum bucket, etc?

    “accusing them of being racist, sexists, etc, etc”

    Please point out where you think people have been incorrectly called sexist or racist.

    “calling them the very things that it is apparently unacceptable to call anyone from the Labor party.”

    Please tell me where I’ve made sexist comments about members of the Liberal party. Please tell me where I’ve made remarks about comments that were not sexist, racist, etc but were just political?

  23. I weep for humanity, but here is some law for you. The terms and conditions do not somehow represent a law that everyone must obey, regardless of the situation. There is a case that if a member of Facebook did this, they could have the account terminated, not illegal. However, this is a public page viewable without signing into Facebook, therefore, not accepting the terms of conditions. BE SMARTER!

  24. There is certainly a lot of anger in the electorate about the way the ALP and it’s masters the Union movement have positioned a criminal in the Lodge, but I do not think it justifies the language used. I will do all I can to have her removed, but I will not sink to that level of language to do it!

  25. I think it’s an indication of how strongly people feel about the failures of this Govt and the hypocrisy that pours from her mouth. I do not recall any other PM being subject to this kind of criticism, but she does bring it upon herself with her lies, deflection, and absurd delusions of grandeur. She just brings out the worst in people. I’m guilty of it myself.

    • Isn’t with holding evidence a crime in itself?

      So those who claim The PM has something wrong be proven you are breaking the law yourself by not providing evidence tp your claims or be proven you are a liar, your choice? Law Breaker or liar?

    • Examples of both the lies, and delusions of grandeur please

      “She just brings out the worst in people. I’m guilty of it myself.”

      So people say terrible things, yourself included, now you could admit, as others have done “No, I shouldn’t say those things, I should check out what I say before I say it, and think whether I really want to be that sort of person”-but that would actually require you to assume some level of responsbility

      No, instead you say “It’s Julia’s fault that I’m saying terrible things about her I call her a slut because she made me call her that-it doesn’t make me the sort of guy who calls women sluts-she just makes me do it”

      Or, to put in the old rapist justification: “She was asking for it”

      Do you feel a bit dirty now for thinking like that?

  26. The abuse here attacking The PM proves to everyone, that The Abbott and Liberal Supporters themselves have no morals.

      • Notice the above criticism about the PM is not about policies, or ideologies, it’s about demeaning slurs, usually gender or sexual based

        So it’s not just a matter of saying your piece, because the above commentators have no piece-they are just attacking without any actual meaning behind it They bite and bite, but don’t actually know what they want

        • Notice none of the comments you refer to we’re actually published in this article? Balanced and logical argument please.

        • Oh, I don’t doubt that some of the above posters also object to some policies-but that’s not what is coming out, KB They’re not saying: “I hate her policies and I think she’s incompetent”-they’re saying “She’s a slut whose policies I hate”

          Are you not seeing the difference between those two types of arguments there? One is actually thinking about the issues, the other the issues are irrelevant

  27. “(The red highlighted words are female/appearance related).”

    So shouldn’t ‘feminist’ and ‘lesbian’ have been highlighted in red as well then? Ok, men can be feminists as well but most feminists I think are women and the movement is mainly aimed at delivering equality to women and empowering them and ending sexist discrimination of them isn’t it?

  28. I took a look at the Support Tony Abbott page to see what kinds of people support it. It’s for the same reason I peer under rocks to see what’s crawling around underneath. Curiosity I guess.

    I figured it would represent the minority of people who actually endorse Tony Assbot, the guy who is more unpopular than the carbon tax he desperately wants people to hate. I figured they sought the solidarity of others who also confessed feelings of guilt for having a poster of Tony Asshat in his budgie smugglers hanging on their wall.

    Sadly I was wrong. My cursory perusal found no-one actually offering words of support for Tony Abort. It’s just a standard bunch of bogots floundering at the wrong end of the bell-curve. Racists, misogynists and other desperately insecure people looking to enforce their own perceived ingroup credentials. Tacitly supporting freedom of speech unless you disagree with them and freedom of religion unless you’re a Muslim.

    Alas, it’s just an emotional crutch for the gullible and the stupid. Sort of like ACA/TT really. I particularly like his quote: ‘Each of us has talents, I am doing what I know best’.

    If setting up lame Facebook pages to spread hate, racism etc is his talent then I feel really sorry that his God dealt him such a shitty hand.

    • Morgone. I am torn in how to respond. You lose credibility when you use a poor term such as Tony Assbott. I actually find your gross generalisations offensive.

      1. I am certainly not at the wrong end of the bell curve. In fact all indicators have shown I am on the very right of the bell curve intellectually. But that is not at issue.

      2. I am a potentially a rarity. I am both conservative and have strong social justice leanings, I have spent large amounts of time supporting the cause of Palestine as I see it as one of the great areas for our generation to change global politics by creating a national state via the UN. This is hampered by both sides of politics in the West when our PM refused to vote with the majority on Palestine I was disgusted but I expect even worse from the current opposition position on the matter. You may find that there are a number of non-laborites that have strongly held views on these issues. A bipartisan position would be wiser. I agree with your comments and if you do check out my comments you will find that to be the case.

      3. I support freedom of speech, sadly it appears that our current PM doesn’t in that she feels she is not accountable to the people of this country. This flies in the face of Whitehall accountability under the Westminster system does it not? Ministerial accountability has flown …

      Happy to discuss … don’t expect a swift reply though as ironically I am completing my assignment on Accountability.. Isn’t that a thrilling topic!! (yes sarcasm)

What do YOU think about this?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s