Filed under politix …

Jun 17 2004
politix, queer

A line in the sand

I really should have more respect for myself than to listen to ignorant bigots raving on about their stupid, mean prejudices, but here I am, listening to Parliament on the radio.

The House of Representatives is debating the Marriage Act Amendment Bill – the proposed law which would “outlaw gay marriage” (notwithstanding the fact that same-sex marriage is not legal anyway) and ban same-sex couples from adopting children overseas.

Right now, Tanya Plibersek is speaking, and of course she is the voice of reason, compassion and common sense. The lone voice. The honourable gentleman preceding her (didn’t catch the old bastard’s name) is more typical of the discourse around this issue. The argument goes something like this: marriage is the fundamental institution of society (so homosexuals must be excluded), marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman (and it can never change), and children are better off with married parents (and here’s the catch-22, kids: queers can’t marry, so they shouldn’t be parents).

It’s a very neat and tidy circular argument. And it completely ignores reality. Family – not marriage – is the fundamental unit of society, and families come in many forms. Marriage is only one way of forming families, but it also carries special rights and privileges, and in a pluralistic society, while those special rights and privileges continue, marriage should therefore be available to all. And children are best off in loving, supportive families, no matter how those families are constructed.

The honourable old bastard can’t see any of this, of course. Instead he talks about the “threat” to marriage and society posed by same-sex marriage and the need to “draw a line in the sand” to stop it.

This is the nub of my feeling about this issue. It’s all about the line in the sand. We queers didn’t draw the line, we have only ever argued that we deserve equal rights, we have never asked for marriage. But the line has been drawn. Its purpose is to contain us.

Our duty is to cross it.

Tagged ,
Jun 09 2004
6 Comments
death, politix

Hitchens on Reagan

Christopher Hitchens on Ronald Reagan, in Slate:

The fox, as has been pointed out by more than one philosopher, knows many small things, whereas the hedgehog knows one big thing. Ronald Reagan was neither a fox nor a hedgehog. He was as dumb as a stump.

[“Not Even a Hedgehog: The stupidity of Ronald Reagan“, 2004-06-07, via Kirsty]

The postscript to this piece (about John Kerry) is deliciously sharp, too.

Can I also recommend “Reagan’s AIDS Legacy: Silence equals death” [Allen White, San Francisco Chronicle 2004-06-08] and “Ronald Reagan: Still the Teflon President?” [Joe Strupp, Alternet 2004-06-08].

Jun 07 2004
1 Comment
consumption, death, politix

Where there is death, there is…

…memorabilia!

"I miss President Reagan" cap
"Win one more for the gipper" button

(Found on eBay)

[Update: Maggie Thatcher is to deliver the eulogy at the gipper's state funeral on Friday. Apparently Reagan specifically asked her, although such a request must have come some years ago when he could still remember who she was.]

Jun 07 2004
4 Comments
death, politix

Gush-free Reagan material

Who says we don’t have a diverse range of viewpoints in the media? Just look at next week’s Time and Newsweek covers:

Time
Newsweek

There are alternative viewpoints out there (but there aren’t too many). I’ve been hunting.

The quality of the pages linked here varies (as does the viewpoint, not all of them are ‘anti-Reagan’) but they are worth a visit if, like me, you’re somewhat sickened by the mass hysteria of revisionist butt-kissing that passes for the mainstream media’s ‘analysis’. Continue reading →

Jun 07 2004
death, politix

No mention of the ‘A’ word, then or now

There’s a delicious irony in this, or there would be if it weren’t so appallingly dumb and insulting. James points out that the New York Times, in its four-page obituary for Reagan, cunningly omits the same word that the Ronnie himself had such difficulty with. AIDS.

This is beyond politics; it’s criminal neglect, if not part of a deliberate agenda, from the newspaper which was itself so guilty in ignoring or mishandling accounts of the plague during the Reagan years. Now that same newspaper would have us regard as serious journalism its account of the life of our second-most-disastrous president, the man whose administration, in surviving its general malfeasance and treasons, marked the final disintegration of American democracy.

Appalling.

Jun 06 2004
death, politix

“They that live in sin shall die in sin.”

Ding, dong, the witch is dead.

The world has one less AIDS Criminal this morning. Ronald “Maybe the Lord brought down this plague” Reagan shuffled off his mortal coil overnight, and perhaps you’ll excuse me if I don’t post a glowing tribute.

His legacy: millions dead and dying of AIDS, the former Soviet Union now a mafia state, the Iran-Contra scandal, a decade of greed, the War on Drugs, and Star Wars. Thanks, Ronnie, how can we ever repay you?

Now, has anyone checked the Pope’s pulse this morning?

Jun 01 2004
1 Comment
politix, war

Secrets and lies

Australian defence personnel have been aware of the abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib since at least last October. The Prime Minister, the Defence Minister, the Chief of the Armed Forces and the rest of the pack of goons that runs this country have been claiming, up until the end of last week, that Australia had no knowledge of the abuse before the release of the photographs in April.

Now Howard is performing a classic Howard manoeuvre: the Prime Ministerial buck-pass. “Blame the officials,” says our fearless leader. “Blame the ‘relatively junior officer [Major O'Kane]‘,” he says. (O’Kane not only witnessed the abuse, but lectured the Americans on “interrogation techniques” last year — can’t wait for those details to come out.) “Blame anyone but don’t blame me,” says Howard, “because nobody told me.”

Not good enough. The buck has to stop somewhere. Whether you “intentionally” misled the public or not, we have been misled. Someone’s head should roll.

Not bloody likely — not in an election year under any government, and not in any year with this duplicitous gaggle of morons in charge.

May 29 2004
politix, queer

Government hypocrisy, government cowardice

Support from unlikely quarters. Alan Ramsey is in form in today’s SMH column:

Colin Hollis was a Labor MP who went to New York to represent the Australian parliament at the United Nations the same year the Liberals’ latest political basket case, Trish Draper, took her newest lover to Paris as a taxpayer-funded perk. Except the besieged Howard Government now argues, in panic, that what Draper did four years ago was entirely proper and “within the rules”, while it insisted in July 2000 that Hollis must pay the air fare of his live-in partner of 36 years to go with him, even though his partner, a bloke, so scrupulously met all the rules of an MP’s “nominee” that Janette Howard hosted him one year at her annual afternoon tea at The Lodge for MPs’ “spouses and partners”.

How’s that for hypocrisy fit to choke.

Trish Draper takes her toyboy off for a fling in Paris at taxpayer’s expense. Bob Woods, Malcolm Coulston and allegedly a lot of other as-yet-unnamed MPs are guilty of the same. But Hollis, who rang Ramsey and gave permission to be outed in today’s paper, had to take out a $10,000 bank loan so he could take his partner with him when he went to represent Australia at the UN.

And Howard wants us to believe he’s defending marriage.

May 28 2004
agit-prop, politix, queer

You know what to do…

Online polls relating to the Gay marriage issue:

May 27 2004
2 Comments
politix, queer, war

Shame, Latham, shame

So the ALP has (wish I could be surprised) decided to support Howard’s homo hate bill. What a fucking disgrace.

The legislation was rushed into parliament this afternoon, and the sad fucks in the Labor Party couldn’t wait to announce they’d back the bill. No conscience vote, no debate, nothing. Instead we get Nicola Roxon champing at the bit to announce that the ALP is just as pro-hate as the conservatives.

Mark Latham, you lost me today. You’re weak and you’re desperate. Screw you.

To say that I’m appalled is an understatement. I’m saddened, sickened and disgusted to see this happening in my country.

Where is the need for this “urgent” legislation? Australia does not have gay marriage, nor can it unless the parliament decides to change the Marriage Act. So we’re outlawing something which is already outlawed. The common law is unambiguous about the definition of marriage — and has been since 1866. One man, one woman.

So what’s this about? In this afternoon’s Prime Ministerial presser, Howard was asked about the political intent of the bill. He had the gall to say to the journalist asking the question: “You are so cynical.”

Pot. Kettle. Black.

What a pack of swine we have running this country.

← Older posts
Newer posts →