Sunday, September 27, 2020

In which Dame Slap is banished to the 5 pm Sunday slot ...

 

 
 
Every so often, the pond decides to send a reptile to the corner, banish them to a slot, say late afternoon on a Sunday... perhaps for crimes of rampant stupidity and hypocrisy, or simply failing to recognise who and what they are.
 
This is always a likely fate for Dame Slap, an IPA shill and stooge, and a rampant hypocrite to boot, and her piece on her being an (alleged) feminist and being in thought spirit with Ruth Bader Ginsburg is about as low a form of trading off, and hypocritical duplicity as is likely to see at any time of day, any day of the week, in a reptile rag notorious for this sort of behaviour ...
 
Let us not forget that Dame Slap is an authoritarian, in love with all forms of authoritarian behaviour ...
 



That's it, that's Dame Slap ... now get on with your blather about teachable moments ...

 

Oh fucketty fuck, please, enough already. We all know that you're fine with pussy-grabbing, and that you donned the MAGA pussy-grabber's hat. Please, let's not have talk of feminism, let's just remember when you did it ...

 


And that's why your talk of Ginsburg and feminism really sticks in the craw, and sees you banished to a Sunday arvo slot ...

Here's your feminism in action ...

 


 

Do you think no one remembers what you wrote, and what you stood for, you IPA shill and stooge?


 

And so to the next stage, where we're supposed to forget all Dame Slap's endless blather about judicial activists ruining everything ...




And she still can't let it go ...


 

There was another one, way back in 2003, as recorded at the SMH here ...

...An opposing position was unveiled by Janet Albrechtsen in Wednesday's The Australian. She declared that the majority in this case have "hurled Australia down the path of wrongful birth . . . This was judicial activism at its most audacious".

The High Court had embarked on a "remarkable devaluation of human life". Thank God there are guardians like Alan Jones, John Howard and John Anderson to stand up and fill the moral void. And of course her legal hero, Dyson Heydon, wrote the most stirring of the minority judgements.

Where the Government's "Capital C Conservative" Justice Ian Callinan, sat in all this was most upsetting. He was firmly with the majority, largely because he found that was where the settled legal principle lay. How annoying.

But what of of Justice Heydon, who late last year made a speech that inflated the virtues of strict legalism in the course of denouncing the evils of judicial activism? The speech was thought at that time as his job application for the High Court vacancy created by Justice Mary Gaudron's departure.

Heydon decried judicial attempts to further "some political, moral or social program" and he denounced a tendency in judicial reasoning where there was "much talk of policy, interests and values". It is up to Parliament to change the law in a substantive way, not the judges. He has a glorious final flourishing swipe at judges who divine "community values". They were the "soigne, fastidious, civilised, cultured and cultivated patricians of the progressive judiciary, our philosopher kings and enlightened despots".

So it was with some amusement that we find Justice Heydon's thinking in the Melchior case shot through with moral and social values, carefully encased as they were in a fine coating of self-basting law. For instance we had this statement of fact as Justice Heydon grappled with the difficulty of accessing actual loss: "Many children, even well-behaved ones, cause their parents immense trouble, and ill-behaved ones cause even more trouble and very little joy."

Ah, Dyson Heydon... now there's a fine fellow for female company ...

Here, have a cartoon, it'll  help you get through the last gobbet ...

 


How handy it is to forget you donned the MAGA cap ...


Dame Slap talking of great listeners, while at the same time blathering on about sludgemakers and soupy offerings on social media?

Dame Slap a listener? Nope, Dame Slap is a MAGA cap wearer, and an IPA stooge and shill, and she doesn't listen to anyone outside her particular Heydon-esque, Donald-esque echo chamber ...

Meanwhile, in a galaxy not too far away ... with more immortal Rowe here ...

 




3 comments:

  1. For those of us not entirely entranced by a brainless "IPA shill and stooge", just a small distraction courtesy of The Saturday Paper:

    Richard Cooke:
    I bought John Kehoe a coffee in 2016, when we were both in Washington, DC. Too late now for a refund, and there was, as far as I can remember, no hint of any latent Oedipal drive behind his small talk, nothing to indicate that on April 9 of this year, I would open The Australian Financial Review and find him making the case for his father as a human sacrifice.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The pond loved the piece GB and shamelessly purloined another piece on Killer Creighton for Monday. What joy to discover an expert herpetologist ...

      Delete
  2. A fine way to end a week on a cold Sunday:

    Firstly, there's the wonder of the first substantial claim that humanity has witnessed the existence of a planet in another galaxy, M51 (ie, not the Milky Way):
    https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/first-evidence-of-a-planet-in-another-galaxy

    Fascinating. And then we have Ginsburg, Scalia and Dame Slap. Oh my, what a trio. Personally, I've never taken any notice of Ginsburg or Scalia - they've never impacted my life and even in retirement I don't have enough time to follow in detail the minutiae of the American way of life. Though from what little has filtered through, I did see Scalia as just another thick-headed "conservative" and Ginsburg as a selfish old woman who didn't have the sense to retire and let a younger, and longer lasting, "liberal" take over. So now she's handed one more SCOTUS lifetime appointment over to the baddies. And as for that "last wish" bullshit, she's just as delusional as a reptile.

    And from the little I've picked up, Amy Coney Barrett is a totally brainless baddie - worse even than Dame Slap because she's actually smarter.

    Then we get to Slappy herself and her theme about "feminism": "Case by case, Ginsburg fought for gender equity, winning five of the six cases she argued in the Supreme Court. She saw her role as an educator, not a zealot, who needed to persuade a male-dominated judiciary using clear, reasoned and irrefutable evidence that discrimination harmed women and men."

    Well that's nice, isn't it; especially when propounded by a crass zealot such as Slappy who has never presented any effectual evidence for anything - just a series of partisan and evidence-free rants. But as to Ginsburg, well: an "educator" who "needed to persuade" ? If so, she's failed utterly hasn't she, because there is Kavanaugh and Gorsuch - recently joined SCOTUS - and there is Barrett yet to come. Can anybody please point out where any of these show any "educated" understanding of why a "male-dominated judiciary" should end.

    ReplyDelete

Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.