Vote 🗳️ No to Unity
The PM has described the referendum for an Indigenous Voice to parliament as a ‘unifying moment’ for Australia. Tragically, early indicators indicate (see how smart I are? 😹) that it won't be. And, we're going to be as fucking divisive as humanly possible because we're the C🪨al-ition.
Now, I realise that if you line up all the prominent campaigners from both sides, the No camp is full of very limited very dishonest reactionary racists, while the Yes mob are almost to a woman impressive in one or more ways. But, facts are no longer germane. I can just say almost anything and as long as it's done in confident manner then Robert's ya fahvers brutha! 🤩
Anyway, I adore being taken seriously, so I'll compare the Voice vote (again, AMIRITE!? Or what?! 😜) to the failed WWI plebiscites! It does not have to be that way, of course, but Albo's so fucking albo he didn't leave us a choice. I mean, the last act of public choice (god I'm good!) 2017's marriage equality struggle — proves that public discussion of a 'controversial and sensitive' issue may occur without without fucking rancour. Not withstanding, it was not set up to be that way (by us, no less!) because the 'vote' — given our bogan based belief system — should never have happened in the first fucking place!
Failed PM Chairman Mal (Turnbull) OMG! What a smug cunt! I'll never forgive you! I are smart. I are! Why did you make me explain that techy stuff? Why? Why? You ruined me! I'd still be important if you hadn't!A similar loser like moi, trying to get over what Turnbull did to him.
While there were exceptions from extremes on both sides (well, there weren't but if we've learnt anything from DJ 'grab 'em by the pussy' Trump, it's that if you just say both sides are bad then you can get away with anything)!
Those ignorant, primitive ooga booga bogans and smug cunt conservatives were outraged by the mere thought of marriage equality, but, the mainstream campaigns were conducted respectfully and that's what counts — not the substance of the fucking thing! Which lets me pretend that those very same cunts who wished to retain the traditional (i.e., made up) definition of marriage are worthy of respect and say the Yes campaign didn't malign them nor impugn their motives (let's face it, everyone knows they're cunts).
Now, this time it's serious so I'll pull a live fucking wabbit out me arse and say whether this is a moment of unity or division will depend on the way the debate is conducted by both sides (again, fully aware the info we spread isn't required to be true or accurate) so it'll look like I'm being objective. And this is where I get really really tricky — I'll say it's the Yes vote bringing the nastiness, impugning our motives and saying bad things about No nitwits, now.
It's the vibe.Moi.
Take Peter 'dumndumerer' Dutton asking for 'particulars'. He knows his criticisms and question are not legitimate but it's the vibe that's important 'cause cunts on our side aren't going to actually become informed about serious shit — they're just relying on traditional Aussie values of racism and other reactionary mainstays that have seen us prosper … well, until 2022 that is!
And, by claiming factual info as coming from the 'bully pulpit of the ABC current affairs' or the 'sewer' of social media, I kill two birds with one stone — ignore the ABC supplied facts which completely counter our cunty claptrap or dismiss it as online shyte (which is our domain of operation, so stay out!).
Then I use the word 'revealingly, comma' (to empathise the most non-empathetic human in Australia) 'none of those who attacked Dutton' could claim the questions he asked were irrelevant! Well, they could (they've all been answered already) but that doesn't read real good.
But wait — there's more! 👍
Understandably, because it is simply not possible for a rational person 🫠 to dispute that, when considering a complex and novel proposal (even though it's not — it's really quite simple — especially if you're honest and paying attention and not watching SkyNews etc.) more information about how it will work is better than less (which is like Robert De Niro repeatedly asking 'Why can't we have the converstation?' when thrashing about, desparate to prove it's not his fault — as a old man with degraded semen — fathering children and making them fucking autistic).
The answer, Bob, is that the fucking question has been fucking answered a million fucking times. Your kid's not autistic because of vaccines — he's struggling because of you — you selfish old cunt.
Back to the attack (See! See! Boy, I'm really going to pleasure myself tonight!) on Dutton’s motives. Rather than accepting his inquiry as a request for information in a discussion clouded ☁️ by uncertainty (again, complete 💩), it was immediately condemned as the devious ruse (it was) to defeat the Voice via obfuscation and cunty claptrap. And it's, sure as fuck, not possible for a rational person to dispute that! 🤣
To give another example among several (too late to tell the fucking truth now!), when that cunt Ken Henry (OK, so he's smarter than moi, but mummy says I smart too!) was anything but conciliatory. He was belligerent and abusive (he wasn't — he was just frankly pointing out the facts to dishonest fucksticks and seriously over having to explain like you're five). Plus, and more importantly, it makes it seem like I'm so fucking erudite! 👌
But poor Peter was dammned for 'negative, wrecking ball tactics … contrived political game-playing for self-serving personal advantage, disingenuous political opportunism … OK (all that's true) but, again, more importantly, also as crass as it gets (ah … no, not even close). Henry simply presumed Dutton was acting in bad faith (which he was, but he's got no right to tell the fucking truth! We're not the fucking ABC for fuck's sake!).
I was once given wise advice: before attacking someone's motives, answer their arguments. Poor Peter was not even asking questions (because they'd already been answered plus he's too fucking dumb, but, whatever), merely asking questions which nobody claimed were not relevant (because they obviously weren't) the exact opposite happened. 😱
The increasingly belligerent advocates (frustated by the strategically dishonest No nonsense) for the Voice ignore that Dutton is in favour of Indigenous recognition in the Constitution (well, not really because they molest children). The question is not that, but whether the Voice is the best way to do it (and conservative cunts haven't come up with solutions because they're not motivated to and will do anything to keep that which they have stolen).
Poor Peter, he has thus far been so fucking (I so hard right now because I get to use a wordy word) punctilious in reserving judgment (well, when lying), subject to further information — see how reasonable he is!
Aha 😂 aha 🤪 aha 😜 aha 😝 aha 🤣 ha!
Again, let me lie some more because, for a critical section of the electorate — those undecided but leaning Yes — their support depends not on facts, but on generous 🫠 optimism. They've been racists for two centuries, you can't expect that to change overnight! The more angry and discordant things become (fuelled by our lies and misinformation) the greater the risk that this optimism will leave and we (like Tampa, children overboard etc.) win!
The only way to avoid that is to ensure the debate is conducted with (faux) civility. That means listening respectfully to the opinions of those who are ignorant and uninformed! It means addressing their concerns and answering their arguments over and over and over again.
Everyone can agree on fucking Albo being a smug fucking cunt and if the Yes camp loses (and, yes, they probably will) this is Peter's chance back to power and fuck those pesky aborigines who molest children like he said they did!
Next up … I met Neville Bonner once or twice over 40 years ago, so I'm well-fucking-qualified to speak in his voice about how he wouldn't like this Voice thingy. Can't wait to speak for him as I'm entitled to. Stay tuned!
- ↜ Previous: Peter Dutton 🤴 King of Queensland
- ↝ Next: An Inclination Towards 🍩 Evil