I was just thinking..

with all of Gillards Misogynists and Blue tie jibes at Australian men like she was some Feminist Nazi...

everyone that stood down with her after she lost the PMship were all men...

what happened to Gillards Sisterhood?

all these gutless Buzzards ran off sucking up Rudds rectum hoping to pick at the scraps of a front bench position...

like diseased fleas who's dog has died so jumped to the next top dog sucking on its blood instead..

have these Buzzards no shame?  >:(

its any wonder that there's no confidence in women in Australian politics...

The left used the sexist and misogynist angle against Abbott for the last 4 years and now he's PM winning 92 seats (more seats that Rudd in 2007)

Based on this - I would encourage the ALP to continue with this tactic

True Blue... wrote on Sep 17^th, 2013 at 9:19pm:

I was just thinking.. with all of Gillards Misogynists and Blue tie jibes at Australian men like she was some Feminist Nazi... everyone that stood down with her after she lost the PMship were all men... what happened to Gillards Sisterhood? all these gutless Buzzards ran off sucking up Rudds rectum hoping to pick at the scraps of a front bench position... like diseased fleas who's dog has died so jumped to the next top dog sucking on its blood instead.. have these Buzzards no shame?  >:( its any wonder that there's no confidence in women in Australian politics...

And wasn't she spot on?  The boys in their blue ties are back!!  Long live the boys!

no she was wrong in regards to her own party...

the men stood by her...

the women left her for dead...

True Blue... wrote on Sep 18^th, 2013 at 6:51am:

no she was wrong in regards to her own party... the men stood by her... the women left her for dead...

why do the women need to stand by her?  Isn't it their individual choice who they vote for? Or does sexism in the liberal party expect people to vote along gender lines all of a sudden?

Those boys in blue ties. tsk tsk.

Who cares?  Ancient history in politics - the new boys are in - time to pay the piper.  ;D ;D ;D ;D

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 18^th, 2013 at 7:28am:

True Blue... wrote on Sep 18th, 2013 at 6:51am: no she was wrong in regards to her own party... the men stood by her... the women left her for dead... why do the women need to stand by her?  Isn't it their individual choice who they vote for? Or does sexism in the liberal party expect people to vote along gender lines all of a sudden? Those boys in blue ties. tsk tsk.

you forget the 40% quota of Emilys List...

they dont have choices as such in the ALP...ask Paul Howes..??

Maqqa wrote on Sep 17^th, 2013 at 9:24pm:

The left used the sexist and misogynist angle against Abbott for the last 4 years and now he's PM winning 92 seats (more seats that Rudd in 2007) Based on this - I would encourage the ALP to continue with this tactic

Obviously female conservative voters can not count past 1 ?

They should be very proud of themselves.

Any Woman stupid enough to vote for the conservatives will only get what they deserve.

Around 12 to 14 Million Australian women can manage only representation by 1 person between them.

With that much potential power they must be horrendously stupid to allow this type of result.

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 18^th, 2013 at 7:28am:

True Blue... wrote on Sep 18th, 2013 at 6:51am: no she was wrong in regards to her own party... the men stood by her... the women left her for dead... why do the women need to stand by her?  Isn't it their individual choice who they vote for? Or does sexism in the liberal party expect people to vote along gender lines all of a sudden? Those boys in blue ties. tsk tsk.

the point was that not one woman supported her.  they stayed and sucked up to Rudd.  Loyalty was apparently not their strong suit while Swan, Conroy and the rest - all men - showed her more support than ANY of the women.

longweekend58 wrote on Sep 18^th, 2013 at 9:22am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 18th, 2013 at 7:28am: True Blue... wrote on Sep 18th, 2013 at 6:51am: no she was wrong in regards to her own party... the men stood by her... the women left her for dead... why do the women need to stand by her?  Isn't it their individual choice who they vote for? Or does sexism in the liberal party expect people to vote along gender lines all of a sudden? Those boys in blue ties. tsk tsk. the point was that not one woman supported her.  they stayed and sucked up to Rudd.  Loyalty was apparently not their strong suit while Swan, Conroy and the rest - all men - showed her more support than ANY of the women.

so all women must support other women. ;D  That's why Tony has decided to have boys in blue? Because men must support other men?

What illogical rubble.

cods wrote on Sep 18^th, 2013 at 7:34am:

sir prince duke alevine wrote on Sep 18th, 2013 at 7:28am: True Blue... wrote on Sep 18th, 2013 at 6:51am: no she was wrong in regards to her own party... the men stood by her... the women left her for dead... why do the women need to stand by her?  Isn't it their individual choice who they vote for? Or does sexism in the liberal party expect people to vote along gender lines all of a sudden? Those boys in blue ties. tsk tsk. you forget the 40% quota of Emilys List... they dont have choices as such in the ALP...ask Paul Howes..??

And good - you can see how much women have stood up in the Labor Party vs. the Liberal Party where they are shoved into the very very far back corner.

That's the point - the Labor Party is breaking down the old pillars in their culture. The liberal party refuses to and instead puts up wonderfully coloured "merit" balloons around their problems.


And again, Emily's list membership doesn't mean they HAVE TO VOTE WITH the "sisterhood".  What nonsense.