Sky News Sack Latham

Remove this Banner Ad

Chief said:
Present day libertarianism is more like "white guy empowerment and liberation" than concerning itself with the liberty of society as a whole.

Great distraction tactics by the rich.


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
I looked up what 'red pill' theory was for MRA types. Even dumber than I thought. Apparently they think women are wrong for not wanting to be housewives:
Enter 'red pill' theory. This is the belief that what women really want from men is a bit of good old-fashioned subjection. Rather than focussing on the very real issues affecting men today such as mental health stigma, suicide and the under reporting of sexual abuse, the activists focusses on how women 'should' behave instead. Red pill aficionados, who mostly hang out on Reddit boards, really believe that women are wrong when they claim that they want respect and equality. Apparently what we really want is dominance and traditional gender roles. We’ve just been brainwashed by feminist propaganda.
Click to expand...
So if there really was a red/blue pill scenario, they're actually very much pushing blue pills. They're saying women should not have taken the red pill which showed them they can be more than domestic goddesses. If you remember your history - this red pill was metaphorically given to them when most of the young men went to war two generations in a row, and advanced manufacturing reduced the domestic workload. The fantasy that the blue pill metaphorically represents is about compliance, and this theory says women should be there primarily to assist the man in a 'traditional gender role'. Compliance & a fantasy.

Further to the irony is the fact that The Matrix states the 90s as the perfect time period for maintaining a compliant humanity, and that was a time when feminism was arguably stronger, before media was drenched in sexual imagery (following the normalisation of that via relatively fast, accessible internet).
 
Chief said:
Just some atrocious ideas he is aligning himself with.




On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app
Click to expand...
Tbf to Latham he did say he found the doco "dull". He is searching for relevance as he's become less needed at home (or bored of the house husband role he had previously promoted). Or he's just searching for even more of a pay packet. I think it's the former though. He would feel guilt about the parliamentary pension, so probably wants to be published in order to have an answer for the point of him receiving that money.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Ratts of Tobruk said:
Tbf to Latham he did say he found the doco "dull". He is searching for relevance as he's become less needed at home (or bored of the house husband role he had previously promoted). Or he's just searching for even more of a pay packet. I think it's the former though. He would feel guilt about the parliamentary pension, so probably wants to be published in order to have an answer for the point of him receiving that money.
Click to expand...
It seems like his comment was about presentation, not content.
 
Chief said:
Present day libertarianism is more like "white guy empowerment and liberation" than concerning itself with the liberty of society as a whole.

Great distraction tactics by the rich.
Click to expand...

The very rich typically don't like libertarianism because its too hard to engage in rent seeking. The easiest money they make is dealing with moron politicians and public servants. How did Goldmans and Macquarie grow so big so quick?

ByQfpeZIcAAZ9EN.jpg
 
AM said:
It really hurts me to say this but Bolt's polemics sells papers. And those of us who are lefties and who so often arc-up at his unmitigated tripe are largely to blame.
Click to expand...
I have not given a cent to a newspaper for more than 2 decades. I bought a copy of the Herald Sun after the 1990 GF win to the Pies...was the last newspaper I payed for.
Bolt is still vegetable.
 
medusala said:
Didnt Latham force Howard in to making mp pensions less generous? IIRC that was the one good thing he did.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's why I think it's easy to imagine that he wants to justify the fat one he is on by remaining 'relevant'. Of course he has always been a bit of an angry guy, so primarily he may be motivated by wanting to think he is smart (like so many men), but he was relatively well behaved in the past when being a house husband, or when getting published in more respectable media outlets.
 
I had to click the link to remember who they were. Good for the Lib Dems, considering most analysis suggested they only got in off people accidentally thinking they were the Liberals. It will be a fun test of Facebook's viewers algorithm too. Their numbers have been a bit dodgy, but Facebook reckons they fixed that. We'll get a nice clear sign of how many people back Latho come election time.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

His Twitter feed reveals a guy who is clearly not playing with a full deck of cards.
 
Bomberboyokay said:
How does a young-ish Labor leader fall so far? Full on ****wit these days.

Latham is probably incredibly bitter Rudd and Gillard got to be Prime Minister and he didn't.
Click to expand...
My generous hypothesis is he's on a fat pension and wants to stay relevant to justify his ego and his pension. He has always been angry (punching a cab driver), and got annoyed at media focussing on him post-politics (on one occassion he justified it on the basis his kids were eating HJs with him), after he used his 'Latham Diaries' to take pot shots at everyone. He lost jobs after claiming Rosie Batty was doing it to raise her profile and the transsexual Catherine McGregor copped barbs that were probably coming from a similar place. I think he's annoyed that after thinking to himself he was the smartest one in the room, he lost to John Howard, and then didn't like that Labor wanted to remove him too. Then he wanted to have a crack at anyone else doing well. He does it on Twitter now. But his 'brand' even in politics was a 'tell it like it is' style. So it could just be that the angry internet men and him found each other and they're in a tight embrace. After all he apparently said this in 2010:
I'm a hater. Part of the tribalness of politics is to really dislike the other side with intensity. And the more I see of them the more I hate them. I hate their negativity. I hate their narrowness. I hate the way, for instance, John Howard tries to appeal to suburban values when I know that he hasn't got any real answers to the problems and challenges we face. I hate the phoniness of that.[8]
Click to expand...
 
IMO Latham was always unbalanced, even in his ALP days.

He threw Howard off guard sometimes, but he was never gonna win an election because his obviously volatile temperament unsettled people - apparently women in particular.
 
Ratts of Tobruk said:
My generous hypothesis is he's on a fat pension and wants to stay relevant to justify his ego and his pension. He has always been angry (punching a cab driver), and got annoyed at media focussing on him post-politics (on one occassion he justified it on the basis his kids were eating HJs with him), after he used his 'Latham Diaries' to take pot shots at everyone. He lost jobs after claiming Rosie Batty was doing it to raise her profile and the transsexual Catherine McGregor copped barbs that were probably coming from a similar place. I think he's annoyed that after thinking to himself he was the smartest one in the room, he lost to John Howard, and then didn't like that Labor wanted to remove him too. Then he wanted to have a crack at anyone else doing well. He does it on Twitter now. But his 'brand' even in politics was a 'tell it like it is' style. So it could just be that the angry internet men and him found each other and they're in a tight embrace. After all he apparently said this in 2010:
Click to expand...
he thought he was the next keating but then as opposition leader became embittered after he realised he was not and that was basically the end of his serious career
 
nobbyiscool said:
The people who want to decry our lack of so-called "free speech" in the 18C debate are the same people supporting Latham today.
Click to expand...

I'm against 18C and in favour of Latham being sacked. In fact a lot of people I know do.

I guess you just havent bothered to hear opposing arguments so you can understand them properly.

If you open your eyes, you will find more colours than you think there are.
 
Fire said:
I'm against 18C and in favour of Latham being sacked. In fact a lot of people I know do.
Click to expand...

Then you have 2 juxtaposed positions that are at odds with each other.

You can't be in favour of the right to humiliate and offend and at the same time argue that Latham deserve to be sacked for humiliating and offending.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

nut
Sky after dark
Replies
14
Views
796
Not Important
N
P
  • Poll
News Media- Poll
Replies
9
Views
541
Rob R
R
sherb
Launceston Newspaper Gets Caught Publishing Letter About Non-Existent Transgender Incident
Replies
7
Views
797
schneebly111
S

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top