Pretty dreary weather around the Tavern yesterday; rain, quite heavy, and thunder much of the day, so it was not busy in the bars. So I went flying. The world is my playground. I have a moonlighting job as an airline pilot (simulated, of course. I am a knackered old shyte, you know) with a preference for medium haul. While I am qualified on many types, including 747's, I like my Bombardier CRJ700, in which, today, I took out of Tampa some 78 holidaymakers to one of the Bahama's Cays. As I cleaned up the gear and set course through the Florida rain (yes, there too) in the climb to 28,000 ft (South west by south for the nautical minded) and turned the seat belt sign off I gave thought to my passengers, amongst whom I had noticed a dad and his small girl. Get small girls in the air early and who knows what they will imagine. I am not a 'feminist' by any means, as anyone in the Tavern will attest, but I do think that anyone, male or female, with a good brain and a clean heart can set themselves to anything and succeed with effort and intent. Start 'em young, I say. Like little Lainey for example. I shall tell of Lillymae in a moment or two. Just watch this little girl's expressions as her Dad takes her up for a jolly while mum stays on the ground.
Dad is full of Love for his little girl. He is right there and she knows it. But heck, that's just a short, easy, steady flight. How would she have been doing aerobatics? A Canadian found out with his little girl, Lea.
Its the adventure, you see, with a loved and trusted Dad to keep them safe and knowing they are safe. Fear is kept in check. They can 'experience'.
Now, what happens when little girls grow up a bit?
You see, Dads are not just babysitters that mum has to keep an eye on.
Dads Grow the Next Generation.
Here's where Lillymae comes in.
Lillymae: Getting to be all grown up. Still young though.
I first noticed Lillymae back when I was flying gliders.. Well, ok, a bit after: not long back. Lillymae could not wait. She was eager and bright and had command of herself enough to be mentored. So at just under 10 years old she started on gliders. She was good. Very good. Cool as a cucumber, executing almost perfect control.
She is 11 there. The Instructor is ideal. He lets her do the task, gives good praise and correction and reads her well. He knows her limits and gets her to them and familiar with them. In no time at all Lillymae went solo. At 14 years old. That's the legal lower age limit. Now, I ask, would you let a 14 year old drive a car? Perhaps. But a plane. With no engine? You have to be very confident in her competence.
Lillymae was competent. And a full-on girly-girl with flowers in her hair. Before long she had graduated to powered planes and was doing well. She went 'solo' at 16, again the legal lower limit. Her second 'first solo'.
There is no holding back a girl with such competence, skill, talent, self-control and application. She has no need of feminism's false "empowerment". She has the power, carefully nurtured by several fine caring men. As my friend Moira says, ....
Mum gives them roots: dad gives them wings.
Last I heard she had moved up to Alaska where she started training as an aviation mechanic. She will be a well grounded, knowledgable pilot by now.
One day, perhaps, I shall board a plane and glancing into the cockpit, see Lillymae doing her start-up checks. From small beginnings, eh. See the potential. Nurture it. There's a drink on the bar for whenever she drops by. Pax
I don't know if animals have souls or not, although there are some customers who come in here that may not have 'working' souls either. Most of us have souls in some disrepair from years of abuse and neglect and sometimes simple denial of it. But animals? I have possums that come to the Tavern deck every night. Three of them. And three wallabys too. They stand around below the deck. It gets quite busy around midnight. Its a good job the restaurant always has left-overs. They don't all get along and quite often I have to give them a good talking to !
I talk to them often. Conversations. The old male possum says I am the only person or animal who says anything kind to him. The two above are the lady possum and her little one. She chases the old male off all the time, such that I have to run shifts at the plate. Possums are not the freindliest of creatures. Most do not like other possums. Night-time has the sound of possums growling at one another around here. They are scared of people, generally and they definitely do not like wallabys. Wallabys don't like possums either. We humans are strange. We very often prefer animals to our fellows. We like animals. Well, anglophile folk do. Mind you, they are small, and despite their claws being razor sharp and their propensity to try to climb up my leg, I am not at all concerned they are going to eat me. A nip perhaps, occasionally. It would be a different matter if we had really big wild creatures here, as they do in Africa. I would be far more cautious. I do keep my sword handy, nearby, behind the bar. An animal like this would cause more than simple caution.
I used to have a cat like that. A smaller version but a big lad. I named him Jean-Luc. He was a philosopher cat rather than a fighter. 13 kilos of him. Jet black. He 'loped'. From 20 yards away he looked like a panther at 75 yards. A story in the bar by some South African visitors had us all thinking of animal souls. Minds, perhaps. And ours. Can we and they be 'in touch'. Some matters exercise our ability to believe. Here is a woman - Anna Breytenbach - who could easily be dismissed as a loon, but...... she may be as extraordinary as Mozart. The story was about her and a big, black cat. The man in the tale looks and sounds pragmatic, but even he had to re-think.
Anna. She would be welcome in the Tavern.
A former police officer and his wife started a predator park in hopes of rescuing wild cats such as leopard, lions and panthers from bad zoos and cat hunting farms. They provide these rescued cats a nice home and freedom that they deserve. But in course of these rescues, this couple rescued a black panther who had a terrible past in a zoo. This cat wouldn’t let anyone near his night shelter and growled every time anyone gets near him. The caretakers didn’t know what to do and in desperation they contacted the famous animal communicator, Anna Breytenbach.
Watch how Anna breaks all the barriers between a human and a fierce black cat.
Need a drink? Need a think? A re-think? I shall pull and pour. You do the thinking. Pax.
Hillary's Village down the mountain loves its Australian of the Year awards and for some years now has shown its true colours by selecting the Drongo of Drongos. We had the racist footballer, Adam Goodes who made sport of harrassing to tears a small girl. He was followed by the sexist Batty woman who selected a lout as a husband who went on to murder her child. She then had the nerve to lecture us about domestic violence just as Goodes lectured us about racism. Now we have a General thrust upon us. But not an heroic chap but a politically correct wanker who has replaced his military warrior manuals with a Zozchial Justitz Warrior one. He is a disgrace.
I have known men like Lt General Morrison. Why Australia needs a Lt General for is a matter of speculation in any event, as the rank denotes someone who commands such a powerful force (which Oz does not have) and with such independence (which we do not have either) that he could Govern an entire Province with impunity. I would not trust Morrison to govern a fuel dump on the Nullabor Plain. Men such as Morrison are not serious. They do not know what serious is. They will take any trivial issue and blow it out of proportion. Ideal SJW material. They get promoted, not because they are competent, but to get rid of. Good soldiers despise his sort. And he has been very successful in being promoted so often and so far beyond his ability that .... well here he is. Several chaps were in the bar spitting chips. I have to find extra spitoons. Jeremy Morgan was at a loss for words but we did manage to piece together what he was saying after a while.
“At a Loss For Words” Over Australian of the Year
Lt Gen David Morrison who was named 2016 ‘Australian of the Year’ last night said today that he was “at a loss for words” over receiving the award.
To be frank, I feel at a loss for words after reading several of the remarks Lt Gen Morrison made this Australia Day.
It seems that Lt Gen Morrison is more concerned about changing Australia than celebrating the nation we have become.
According to Morrison, Australia is a nation of prejudiced discriminators, bent on stopping people from achievements and reaching their full potential at virtually every opportunity, based simply on gender, race, sexuality (the usual suspects).
“We hold people back in this country for the most peculiar of reasons — their gender or the god they believe in or the colour of their skin or sexual orientation,” he said.
I’m sorry Lt Gen Morrison, I don’t think “we hold people back” for these reasons. In fact, I don’t think “we hold people back” as a general rule at all.
Most Australians are simply too pre-occupied with their own lives and families to be bothered to maliciously try and “hold back others.” Most Australians are pretty happy for people to do what they like so long as it doesn’t impede on the rights and freedoms of others, and will wish them well even if they personally disagree.
The Australia Lt Gen Morrison describes is not the Australia I know.
Morrison talks about Australia and Australians as if we have the personality of the cartoon villain Yosemite Sam. In fact, the character traits Lt Gen Morrison casts on Australia are much closer to that of Communism in the 20th Century and Islamist regimes in our present time. Australia, and other Western nations are the places where discrimination is least likely to happen around the world.
Leaders they ain't
When asked what he would focus on in the year ahead, now as Australian of the Year, Lt Gen Morrison said that he would concentrate on campaigning a number of ideological issues, including pushing for Australia to become a republic.
The Australian of the Year award seems less to be an award for exemplary achievement and service to our nation.
Rather, it more appears to be an award for taking a particular and familiar ideological posture, and campaigning for our nation to conform to that ideology.
I agree. He could not have gone further though as he was overwhelmed by a small apoplexy It was up to Paul Zanetti to vocalise much of what people were thinking and muttering. By the Lord Harry I had to work the pumps, I can tell you. So much beer needed to cry into. I had to wander off for a bit while Paul was holding forth so you may have to go after him to hear it all.
SADLY the Australian Of The Year award has lost all meaning to millions of Australians.
It’s become a disconnected politically correct tool existing only for one purpose - to advance progressive grand standers and social causes, instead of reflecting the best in quiet achievers, the real heroes of our country.
The Australian Of The Year award has become a caricature, a parody, an exercise in hypocrisy, diminishing its own worth. It used to mean something.
Instead of rewarding the best of us, the Aussie gong is now a means for promotion of social engineers and fringe attention seekers who don’t practice what they preach.
Politicians will jump on board to be seen to be hip, but someone should tell them hipsters are a laughing stock to most of us. People without self identity, who leap onto the latest cause - or fad - to be accepted by, or popular to, other empty shells.
While real Australians go about their lives, serving their community, getting kids to school, heading to work, producing, creating, serving, fixing, building, manufacturing, inventing, caring, life saving, fire fighting, volunteering, transporting, loading, packing, mowing, cleaning, selling, buying, cooking, painting, welding, trimming, lifting, accounting, measuring, grading, driving, drilling, hammering, joining, engineering, drafting, in short, living in a real Australian society with meaning and purpose…we have an empty underclass fixated with themselves.
The rest of us actually have to be productive to make a quid. We create, we make, we fix, we serve, we do.
The underclass believes its purpose is to be ‘progressive’, to fiddle with ’social’ issues, Their purpose in life is to ‘seem’ to be advancing.
As they produce nothing they make stuff up trying to make it look like they’re actually doing something. We have whole government departments and agencies funded by your taxes devoted to inventing lots of nothing. It might even be excusable if we were swimming in surplus but we’re not.
The latest charade is the Australia Day Council’s most recent example - the 2016 Australian Of The Year recipient, David Morrison, the former Chief of the Army (June 2011 until retirement in May 2015).
I’m sure David Morrison means well, trying his best to be all things to all people - well most people.
Close your mouth and change your shirt.
During his time, Morrison admitted, the army became notorious for its systematic culture of sexual abuse and misconduct.
Well, so he claims. There is precious little evidence to show that any such thing is military culture.
Instead of dealing with it properly from within, using the proper criminal and military resources at Defence’s disposal, Morrison decided to read a speech written by someone else, record it and upload it online.
And who wrote it for him? Wait for it..... wait for it....
Morrison judged that the inner conflicts and disciplinary measures required to deal with misconduct within the army was everyone else’s business.
It was an orchestrated PR assault launched with military precision to get him and the army off the hook, after another public report of soldiers sharing offensive and private material online. Morrison, the man at the top was under pressure to be seen to do something. More seeming.
Morrison’s video, demanded that anyone who wanted to treat women unequally should get out of the army. The video, which went viral, made Morrison a hero.
a 'Hero' only amongst the messed ranks of 'progressives' and the media/ABC luvvies. NOT a Hero fit for the Tavern.
Meanwhile, at the same time Real Heroes, military men of all ranks were taking caualties and dying in Afghanistan.
The person who wrote the speech is a man who dresses and identifies as a woman, complete with lippy and makeup.
He admits he is still a man, used to be called Malcolm McGregor but now prefers to be called ‘Catherine’.
Now you know.
In an interview in The Women’s Weekly, Malcolm/Catherine told the magazine he isn’t a woman, but lives as one. He admits he is still attracted to women.
The Army has a reputed 15 transgenders - men who identify as women - all of whom are entitled to gender reassignment surgery funded by the Army, or more precisely, by you and me.
So, 15 out of how many tens of thousands of fine men (and some fine women too) in uniform? A phenominally small percentage who have not figured out whether they are boys or girls, down in the 0.00000s, yet one writes the Lt General's friggin' speeches?
In 2010 the Australian Defence Force announced it will pay for sex change operations for soldiers costing $30k and up per operation. One can only wonder how this assists fighting the likes of ISIS. Let’s hope none of them end up on the front line and get themselves nabbed by jihadists near a tall building.
The army’s generosity doesn’t just extend to sex change operations, it also allows men like Malcolm/Catherine who admit they’re attracted to women to have free access to the ladies’ showers even before they’ve had any reassignment surgery.
Is it just me, or does that come across to you, too, as creepy? Or sleazy?
In the proper world, the politically incorrect one, men who still have the hardware and attracted to women would get arrested if they were reported loitering outside or inside the ladies’ showers or toilets.
But not in the Army.
‘Onya David Morrison. Here’s a gong.
If there were ever an over reach in politically correct madness you’d be hard pressed to find a more extreme institutional practitioner than the Australian Defence Force.
Unsurprisingly, the Army has become the preferred employer of choice for men who want to be ladies. The ladies showers bonus would be a real deal sealer.
But back to Malcolm/Catherine who’s still more Malcolm than Catherine, if hardware is your gauge.
Malcolm still hasn’t had the nip and tuck, telling the Women’s Weekly, “I’m pretty sure that I will (have the operation). Let’s say I’m 80-20 leaning towards it…I would like to feel whole.”
Oh dear. Is that a mis-spelling? The bar erupted in spluttering laughter. It gives a real presence to the descriptive 'Girly-Men'.
But it’s not only sex change costs where Malcolm/Catherine is exposing the taxpayer to fists full of dollars for his/her personal indulgences.
See, Malcolm/Catherine doesn’t mind a bit of biffo at our expense.
Once involved in ALP politics Malcolm/Catherine described a NSW labor faction as, “….like the rest of the NSW Right, they’re all hard men in the way that a teenage gang kicking a wino are hard men. And I said there’s not one of ’em I wouldn’t mind going down a dark alley way with – unless Tom Domican was in tow with them.”
Being opinionated and outspoken, and not without a bit of extra bravado with his/her new found media fame, Malcolm/Catherine has engaged in a bit of online character sledging, resulting in the Army making a $25,000 settlement offer to a senior soldier who served for 40 years in east Timor and Afghanistan after Malcolm/Catherine publicly abused the person, without any provocation.
Malcolm/Catherine accused the person of having “defective DNA” apparently unaware how ironic that sounds coming from someone born a man, but wanting to be a woman.
What ads to the irony is that David Morrison’s award as Australian Of The Year was for a speech on unacceptable abuse, written by a person whose own online abuse has led to the army itself making a $25,000 settlement offer to the victim.
And that’s why this year’s gong is a farce.
Malcolm/Catherine was Morrison's personal adviser and speech writer which could go a long way to explaining the cultural dysfunction at the top.
But that’s not all.
Unbelievably, Malcolm/Catherine was also a finalist for Australian Of The Year 2016, pipped at the post by his/her boss.
Why was he/she nominated?
Officially, it was for being a ‘Diversity Champion’.
In other words, for expressing his desire to live as woman, and making sure everyone knows about it. That seems to be the qualification.
Once it was: Join The Army. Learn A Trade. See The World.
Now it’s: Join The Army. Get A Sex Change. Charge The Taxpayer. Tell The World. Get In Line For A Gong.
My issue is that the farcical Australian Of The Year gong rewards grandstanding and hypocrisy.
This year’s recipient David Morrison received the award for ‘commitment to gender equality, diversity and inclusion.’
Since retiring from the army last year, Morrison has been appointed Diversity Council of Australia chairman.
There’s another one of those government agencies I mentioned off the top invented for no reason other than to cost you and me lots of money we can’t afford to pay people to produce nothing but spend their time imagining ways to seem to be doing something.
But is David Morrison really the great 'diversity and inclusion' warrior we’re lead to believe. Not on face value.
On June 30, 2014 the Australian Defence Force sacked a Major Bernard Gaynor for his views based on his conservative Catholic faith and pro-family stance. Gaynor had served three tours of duty in Iraq while serving in Army intelligence.
The Courageous Bernard Gaynor has been mentioned in the Tavern before, several times. He is a real Hero. A 'Sound Man'. So I will let you follow Paul's descriptions by following the link above.
Gaynor, a reserve soldier, did not voice his views while on duty, but in his capacity as an off duty civilian on his private blog.
Instead of heeding the informed words of an intelligence officer, the Army chose to try to shut him up.
Bernard has his own questions about Lt Col McGregor.
But what really got up their nose is his firm view the army should not be engaging in political and social campaigns, frolics or causes. The army is there to fight and defend.
Not to pay for sex changes.
Not to become a beacon or magnet for social and gender engineering.
Not to march for political or social causes, as worthy as they may seem to the activists.
For his diverse beliefs, also held by many Australians, Gaynor had his commission terminated.
So much for inclusion and diversity.
I for one would prefer the Defence Force bosses practice what they preach. Exercise real diversity instead of throwing money at trying to shut it down.
Perhaps Bernard Gaynor could appeal to our new Australian Of The Year recipient, David Morrison, chairman of the Diversity Council of Australia.
Or maybe this diversity is just about the show.
Just like the Australian of The Year award.
I cannot offer a salute to General Morrison but I am damned glad he is no longer in the Army. With leaders like him, who needs an enemy? But does Oz need a weenie disgrace like him as Australian of the Year. NO.
Today was a Public Holiday in Oz, celebrating Oz Day: the Founding of Australia. The Aboriginal peoples found it first or maybe there were even people before them, who knows. But modern Oz was founded by the British after the Dutch, French, and sundry oddbods landed or saw at a distance, none of whom thought the place worthwhile to build a Nation upon. Tough. We speak English here now. Holidays were once all Holy Days. So I celebrated in a Holy manner, down on the beach at Sandy Bay. But only after my usual Tuesday Mass and Communion and a Rosary outside the abortuary.
My Supplier likes to be acknowledged. Thanks for this great wide, tall, brown land - and the beaches. Acknowledgement is becoming increasingly fraught these days, as the C of E chap in England found out recently. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the C of E top bod, commands a big budget but few hearts and souls. He hasn't got the hint. But he got a bite on the bum a little while ago. Acknowledging my Supplier of good Grace is really quite easy. His Son gave explicit instruction that even Protestants follow.
The Lord's Prayer.
I say it at least seven times a day* as I go around the Tavern wiping the bars and table-tops and hooking up barrels. But in England you have to say it very quietly and never in a cinema. Benedict Hince stopped by to tell. Ben is currently studying Philosophy and Anthropology at The University of Exeter and he startled us with a warning.....
WARNING: This post contains a video deemed offensive and as such, “carries the risk of upsetting, or offending, audiences”.
The video below has consequently already been banned from screening at UK cinemas despite having been cleared by the Cinema Advertising Authority and the British Board of Film Classification. The Odeon, Cineworld, and Vue chains – which control 80% of screens across England – have refused to show it.
What is this offensive video, you may ask? And who would make such a video? Well… that would be the Church of England… Confused?
Yes, the video which has caused such controversy is indeed The Lord’s Prayer as recited by individuals of various backgrounds and professions. It was created in order to promote a new website made by the Church of England which simply encourages prayer –www.justpray.uk – worth a look, it’s very beautiful.
Well, you and I could say that, but we already know the answer. They 'dare' because the 'Powers and Principalities' have been having a run of success lately.
Lets just look at the 'offensiveness' of The Lord’s Prayer.
1. ‘Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed be thy name.”
You mean to say that I am not the center of the universe?! That I have someone above me towards whom I should become childlike; to whom I should submit to in faithful trust, and with a humble and joyous heart. A Father whom I should will to be like. A Father who holds majesty and who loves me… How dare you.
Hmmm. And the 'Father' word, Ben. Don't forget that word. It is already excised from public documents in the UK so keep it in mind. Perhaps there would not have been a 'ban' if we addressed 'Parent B' (We all know who Parent A is, don't we. ) Who would be offended? Why Feminists of course.
2. ‘Thy Kingdom Come.’
You mean to say that my ultimate hope is not the establishment of my own kingdom, my own progression in my career, the satisfaction of my own ego by any means necessary, but the anticipation of Christ’s coming?… Well that’s just offensive.
'Officialdom' has something to say about that too. A King and a Kingdom !! No siree, Think of all those Committees out of a job. We already have a Queen, hog-tied in a Palace, out of the way. We don't want anyOne exercising Supreme Power that cannot be taken before an Affirmative Action / Discrimination Tribunal.
3. ‘Thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven.’
You mean to say that my will is not the be all and end all? That I am able to commit myself to another’s will. And that in committing myself to another – to Christ – I learn humility in seeing that virtue does not depend on my work alone but on grace from on high. That following this greater will is not just for me but for the good of the whole earth… the audacity.
There's Grace down here, too. In the Crypt and the cellars. In the Taps in the Bras. I serve it freely - 'by Appointment'. And back to the Powers that be, of course. They have no wish at all to be subject to a Higher Power than themselves. They insist we bow down to them and them alone. Unless its the EU of course.
4. ‘Give us this day our daily bread’
You mean to say that I should look to another for something that I want? That despite all the work that I do, everything I receive ultimately comes from God anyway and I should find a trustful surrender in this! And that I should be content with daily bread, and not submit to the destructive consumerism that surrounds me… Very rude.
At this point I can almost see President Obama jumping around the Oval Office shouting, "See. I told you. YOU didn't do that". Of course he would very likely credit the satanic Allah.
He certainly won't credit God for providing. He won't mention that the 'mentor' was Christ Himself carefully explaining what God expects you to do with the Talents he hands out.
5. ‘And forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us’
You mean to say that I am in need of forgiveness – that I am not sinless? And you’re telling me that the outpouring of mercy that I am in need of will only penetrate my heart insofar as I have forgiven those who have wronged me?! That I should show mercy to others if I want mercy to be shown to myself… this is an outrage.
The Powers and Principalities have done away with sin. They do not wish to be reminded. Want to kill a baby and sell its body parts? That's OK. Want to take a parent - well, a dad parent - away from thir children? Heck we have courts that make it easy. Want to invite a plague of satanic buggers and beheaders into other people's homes? Heck, the stroke of a pen and a quick phone call and we can have a million Muslims at your door by tomorrow. How about a bit of home-grown buggery? They are even now calling it 'Marriage'. Don't talk about 'sin' and 'forgiveness'.
They have nationalised Sin.
6. ‘And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.’
You mean to say that I am not completely in control of my surroundings and that I am capable of being tempted towards sin and death? And that I should turn to Another in prayer and call upon His strength so that the temptation I may feel does not lead to a consent towards that temptation? That Someone loves me so much that they would offer me a way out; a way to endure. To prevail against the evil one; a victory! – I find this all highly upsetting and offensive.
While movie theatres, and advertising companies, are allowed to pump us with falsities suggesting how one spray of a new fragrance will guarantee our career success, and have the ladies or gents flocking towards us in a rage of passion.
And how it’s the latest watch or fashion item that is exactly what we need if we want to become the strong individual we have always wanted to be.
We are told that we don’t need to turn towards others, certainly not towards God, and it’s considered offensive to assert otherwise.
You see, the outrage here, the offensiveness here, is that the Lord’s Prayer is something which is totally orientated towards someone else – towards The Father. It takes us outside of our own little worlds and places us at the feet of something – someone – far greater.
For further thought.
This video, and the banning of it, is a great way to get us thinking about what we’re really praying when we pray The Lord’s Prayer. Reflections I have presented above are built upon what we find in Part 4, Section 2, of the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC 2759-2865), and this is a great resource if you want to take a closer look at the authentic beauty of The Lord’s Prayer.
Why do you think the video was banned? Was it down to theological issues that may conflict with other religious outlooks? Or is there a deeper fear of prayer; a fear of the power of prayer, and the necessary recognition of something greater than ourselves that prayer entails? Does ‘religious’ instantly mean ‘offensive’ nowadays?
(*) If you are still here, ..... the seven times the Lord's Prayer I say are in the Rosary. (Plus one at bedtime). I say at least one full rosary every day. For my estranged daughter. Six 'Our Father's'; fifty three 'Hail Mary's', plus a couple of other prayers. You know what they are of course. I say one Rosary outside the abortuary on Tuesdays for the babies, their mothers and fathers, the nurses and the Doctors.
They do not deserve it, (apart from the innocent babies) but Lord save us from what we deserve.
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi. Miserere nobis.
The 26th Jan in Australia Day when we down under express our appreciation by having a BBQ on the beach.
Few, if any, give a nod to the Greatest Man in our History; a man even more important than George Washington is to the USA. Once it had been the practice of the Mother Country of both America and Oz, Great Britain (Hoorah!) to send recalcitrants on the 6 week voyage to the American colonies (where they all became the ancestors of today's democrats). That was well after the Pilgrims, of course, who made a real pig's ear of colonisation and had to be bailed out by the locals. But after the Revolution (largely fueled by those recalcitrants again) the Great British mind turned to where else it might send its riff-raff. Oz had been on few minds until then. But it was decided that Oz, being so far away, wild and well off the trade routes would be a splendid place to send the unwashed and unwilling and so it was that..... drum roll......
Captain Arthur Phillip
...was commissioned to take eleven boats on an eight-month trip to Oz with 1400 souls on board including 800 of said unwashed mob which in turn included 200 ladies of both day and night. He took some Marines with him too. He managed this huge task - akin to sending a small but unwilling Texas village to Mars - without losing one ship. And whereas the Atlantic crossing usually lost 10% to accident and disease, Arthur Phillip's foresight saw fewer than 2% lost on the epic voyage.
He established his base in what is now Sydney ( a real den of iniquity, known worldwide now for its Queer Mardi Gras) after looking around from Botany Bay. Its the quality of the folk you see. Within a shortish time he had established a viable and growing colony, doing a far better job with the Navy Manual than the Pilgrims did with their strange version of the Bible. (Arthur also had one but relied more on knots than nots). He did not need the locals to bail him out. Actually, by sailing the 40deg latitude he first arrived in Tasmania - or Van Dieman's Land as it was called - whence he turned north having not actually having missed Oz altogether.
So let us drink a toast to Capt Phillip, the Founder and First Governor of Oz. Cheers Arthur, maaaate. And throw another prawn on the Barbie.
How many times are we told that women are oppressed? Oppressed by men, obviously. Well, it ain't possums that are oppressing them, is it. How many times are we told that black people are oppressed? Oppressed by white people, obviously. (We won't mention Muslims still enslaving black people, because mentioning it would be Islamophobic, innit?) So, Bob was in the US room looking at Michelle Obama who has both buttons pressed and must really be suffering under the weight of all that oppression. Poor black lady.
He was taking a brief look at 'First Ladies', you know, the wives of Presidents of the USA. These are the bed and breakfast makers who take care of the family matters side of any relationship as a matter of 'Tradition' and America has a fine tradition of providing at least a little help to the lady of the White House. All 'First Ladies' have some assistance.
Total number of Personal Staff Members paid by Tax Payers.
Firstly, lets look at some past First Ladies.
Jackie Kennedy: -------One
Lady Bird Johnson:------One
Pat Nixon: ---------------One
Rosaline Carter: ------ One
Barbara Bush: ---------One
Hilary Clinton: -------- Seven
Laura Bush: ----------- One
Now the poor oppressed black first lady.
Michele Obama: ----- Twenty-friggin'- two
It this a tacit acceptance that she is totally incompetent and needs a bum-wiper? I bet she secretly wishes she could change places with Rachel Wozzname.
How things have changed! said Bob
If you're one of the tens of millions of Americans facing certain destitution, earning less than subsistence wages stocking the shelves at Wal-Mart or serving up McDonald cheeseburgers, prepare to scream and then come to realize that the benefit package for these servants of MS Michelle are the same as members of the national security and defense departments and the bill for these assorted lackeys is paid by YOU, John Q. Public:
Michele Obama's personal staff: This is their pay, before benefits......
One.. $192,200 - Sher, Susan (Chief Of Staff)
Two.. $160,000 - Frye, Jocelyn C. (Director of Policy And Projects For The First Lady)
Three.. $133,000 - Rogers, Desiree G. (White House Social Secretary for Mrs. Obama)
Four.. $122,000 - Johnston, Camille Y. (Director of
Communications for the First Lady)
Five.. $120,000 - Winter, Melissa (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Six.. $110,000 Medina , David S. (Deputy Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Seven.. $104,000 - Lilyveld, Catherine M. (Director and Press Secretary to the First Lady)
Eight.. $95,000 - Starkey, Frances M. (Director of Scheduling and Advance for the First Lady)
Nine.. $90,000 - Sanders, Trooper (Deputy Director of Policy and Project for the First Lady)
Ten.. $85,000 - Burnough, Erinn (Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
Eleven.. $84,000 - Reinstein, Joseph B.(Deputy Director and Deputy Social Secretary)
Twelve.. $82,000 - Goodman, Jennifer R. (Deputy Director of Scheduling and Events Coordinator For The First Lady)
Thirteen.. $80,000 Fitz, Alan O.(Deputy Director of Advance and Trip Director for the First Lady)
Fourteen.. $77,500 - Lewis, Dana M. (Special Assistant and Personal Aide to the First Lady)
Fifteen.. $72,500 - Mustaphi, Semonti M. (Associate Director and Deputy Press Secretary To The First Lady)
Sixteen.. $70,000 - Jarvis, Kristen E. (Special Assistant for Scheduling and Traveling Aide To The First Lady)
Seventeen.. $65,000 - Lechtenberg, Tyler A. (Associate Director of Correspondence For The First Lady)
Eighteen.. $63,000 - Tubman, Samantha a (Deputy Associate Director, Social Office)
Nineteen.. $60,000 - Boswell, Joseph J. (Executive Assistant to the Chief Of Staff to the First Lady)
Twenty.. $56,000 - Armbruster, Sally M. (Staff Assistant to the Social Secretary)
Twenty-Two.. $55,000 - Jackson, Deilia A. (Deputy Associate Director of Correspondence for the First Lady)
Total $2,075,200 in annual salaries - all for someone we did not vote for and apparently have no control over and
5 are Muslim and
13 are African-American
There has NEVER been anyone in the White House at any time who has created such an army of staffers whose sole duties are the facilitation of the First Lady's social life.
One wonders why she needs so much help, at taxpayer expense. (I'm wondering why there are no guidelines or restraints for this and other activities concerning our government officials and their kin.)
Note: This does not include makeup artist Ingrid Grimes-Miles, 49, and "First Hairstylist" Johnny Wright, 31, both of whom traveled aboard Air Force One on all ALL Trips, Europe included.
Note: As of 11/15.2015 the Obama Family has spent over
1.3 Billion dollars on personal family family trips.
They were personal not political or Government related.
I noted also that Bob's list was way out of date and in fact several years old. Time, holidays, hairstyling etc have all continued apace. Some may well argue that several of the other First Ladies had large staffs. No-one in the bar had data. But considering that no-one elected any first lady (apart from the President whose wife she was), it beggars belief that this woman takes the Taxpayer for such a ride. I have no idea what 'home help' the wives of Oz Prime Ministers get. I don't think Julia Gillard's 'first gentleman' - they weren't married but lived in sin - had help or a big staff but he WAS a hairdresser. Perhaps she managed to save us all a bit by having him do her hair.
OK, so yet another continuation of the 'trans' bizzo. The customers are keen to make the point. There are all sorts of folk in the world, that is true, and most will try to accomodate others. There are laws, you see. And it used to be that the Laws held to account and held in check those who are inclined to robbery and violence, perversion and cruelty. But our society is bending over too far to accomodate just those who would deliberately be that way. In fact the laws are supporting the dissolution of the very society that we have strived so hard to create. Many 'new' 'fair' laws are Bull Shyte.
Watch out for Bull Shyte
Personally I have some compassion for those who are 'dis-eased', who have mental problems. They do need help, even - and especially- when their illnesses are mild and easily accomodated. Someone who thinks he is Napoleon may well elicit some pity for his unreal views. He transgresses reality. But we do not bend over to confirm his meglomania. If he insists and forces others to bend to his diseased will, it becomes less a transgression and more an aggression. We may have some sympathy with a homosexual who is convinced he or she is more attracted to the same sex than any other normal person is. As long as they keep their sexual activities private, they can even come into the Tavern and have a drink. They need one. I can even have sympathy and compassion for the genuinely confused young person who thinks they are really in the 'wrong-sexed' body. Their mind is not apprehending themselves correctly. They are almost always 'dis-eased'. But when the Law is changed to punish those who would help them find 'ease' or even hinder them from damaging themselves and others, then we have a big problem. And that we have.
The transgressives are becoming aggressive.
With help from the Law.
Two items came up in conversation. Dan Gilmore was telling os those wierd places on the West coast in San Francisco and the East coast in New York. One might have hoped for a bit of privacy when going to the toilet. We have Gentlemen/Knights toilets here and Ladies/Wenches ones too. We don't let any one lot use the others.
San Francisco's Bathroom Crusade
The human rights commissions in New York City and San Francisco are not at all what their names seem to imply.
Rather than ensuring the rights of all humans, regardless of their of their biology or their beliefs, they have instead become advocacy organizations for LGBT interests.
For example, Shaky Town’s HRC introduced a measure that would require gender-neutral bathrooms across the city. But it goes a bit farther than a simple change to the building codes.
Gender-neutral is code for having some pervert chap interrupt the privacy of a lady or some aggressive, demanding harridan take a chap's place at a urinal.
“The measure would mandate that all single-occupancy bathrooms in the city be relabeled as places for all genders, rather than solely ‘men’ or ‘women,’” Time Magazine reports, “and that new buildings constructed in the city have a gender-neutral bathroom on each floor.
The bill would also go beyond similar laws in other cities by putting in place sweeping enforcement mechanisms, including a complaint process handled by the Human Rights Commission, an LGBT rights organization, and adding these facilities as a standard checklist item for building inspections.”
Tellingly, Time called San Fran’s human rights commission, a city agency, an “LGBT rights organization,” which shows that it’s no longer trying to ensure civil rights — some of which are enumerated in the Bill of Rights, hello Second Amendment! — but is instead bent on pushing leftist ideology.
The Big Apple’s HRC recently suggested a regulation that would fine people $125,000 to $250,000 if they were “willful, wanton, or malicious” in assaulting a transgendered person with the wrong pronoun.
This from a Nation that cannot spell, too !!
In Democrat fiefdoms like these, accommodation may be the best thing social conservatives can hope for at the moment. Unfortunately, groups like human rights commissions aren’t interested in equal protection under the law. They’re merely the muscle for the Rainbow Mafia, and it’s the model for the rest of the nation.
This is punishing normality. And it is put in place by the very people elected and appointed to serve society. They are hell-bent on destroying 'normal'. And they support aggressiveness on the part of nasy, vicious people who cry 'victim'. Take the unfortunate farming couple who made a little extra money by letting couples get married on their beautiful property. Their farm. They did not want to be supportive of homosexuals disgracing both the Institution of Marriage and their farm. They said no. The Lesbian couple (hello, we have been here before, with pizza parlours and florist shops) went to Court because they had their feelings hurt. Heck, the farming couple's feelings were hurt too, but that seems not to matter. So Dustin Siggins drank his pint and called for another while he told us about it.
Court: Farmers can’t refuse same-sex ‘wedding’ in backyard, fines them $13,000
Farmers who host weddings in their backyard cannot refuse ceremonies where two people of the same sex are trying to get married, a New York court has ruled.
The court's decision affirmed the state's Division of Human Rights (DHR) ruling against Robert and Cynthia Gifford, owners of Liberty Ridge Farms, after they declined to host a "wedding" for a same-sex couple.
The Giffords said they would host the reception for a lesbian couple, but the ceremony itself would have to be hosted elsewhere because of their religious beliefs about marriage.
The two argent-grubbing lesbian maggottes (excuse my French) Jennie McCarthy and Melissa Erwin claim they suffered 'mental pain and suffering.'
Pain and suffering, my arse.
DHR found that the couple violated New York's "places of public accommodation" anti-discrimination law. If the court's decision stands, the Giffords must pay $10,000 in state fines and an additional $3,000 in damages to the lesbian couple, Jennie McCarthy and Melissa Erwin, for "mental pain and suffering."
Note how the State takes a huge share. This is theft. Grand Larceny by the State.
Additionally, the Giffords – who say they have hosted a birthday party for a lesbian couple's adopted child, and employed people with same-sex attractions – will have to provide sensitivity training to their staff and prominently display a posterhighlighting state anti-discrimination laws.
Wot? No re-education camp and hard labour?
The suit goes back to a 2012 phone call that Cynthia answered. Erwin and McCarthy wanted to have their wedding on site, something Cynthia said couldn't happen.
In a statement issued by the New York arm of the ACLU, which took on their case, the lesbian women said, "Having your relationship judged as somehow unworthy is incredibly hurtful and disheartening and we want to ensure that other couples do not have to undergo the same treatment."
No it isn't 'incredibly hurtful'. There is no credulity in that claim. It is just fatuous nonsense.
Erwin and McCarthy say it took them months to find another site to host their "wedding."
"All Americans should be free to live and work according to their beliefs, especially in our own backyards," said Alliance Defending Freedom legal counsel Caleb Dalton in a statement after Thursday's decision. Dalton, who defended the couple, added, "The government went after both this couple's freedom and their ability to make a living simply for adhering to their faith on their own property. The court should have rejected this unwarranted and unconstitutional government intrusion, so we will consult with our client regarding appeal."
In 2014, another attorney for the Giffords told LifeSiteNews, "The entire interaction between the complainants and the Giffords transpired during a two- to three-minute telephone conversation, which, unknown to Mrs. Gifford, was being tape-recorded," Trainor said.
So, a prima-facie set-up. A deliberate entrapment. Its setting the police and courts on innocent people in the now-so typical homosexual game of 'Let's You and Him, Fight'.
"After communicating the fact that they chose not to hold same-sex marriage ceremonies at the farm because to do so would violate the Giffords' sincerely held beliefs (that God intended marriage to be between a man a woman only), Mrs. Gifford invited the couple to visit the farm to discuss handling their wedding reception, which the couple refused."
Trainor also says the state's law doesn't apply to the Giffords because their wedding and reception business is on their home property. However, Slate's Mark Stern noted in 2014 that DHR found that "[Liberty Ridge Farms] is a for profit business and directs its publicity to the general public. … LRF engages in widespread marketing to the general public through advertising at a bridal show and on the internet[.] … LRF is encouraging members of the public to lease the use of its facilities and purchase its services. Thus, there is no exclusivity and LRF is not 'distinctly private.'"
What is one to do when provoked by aggressive lesbians? And an aggressive State. I shall leave you to ponder that and come up with your own responses. Meanwhile a couple of other chaps at a table at the back called out....
Paul Bany said:
Really? $13,000 fine? For what? For lesbians and gays' mental pain and sufferings? What about million of women and men who follow the traditional marriage that have been abused everyday and they do not received any coin for their sufferings? What is special about this new group of gays/lesbians? The world is totally out of order and it has become worse than Sodom and Gomorrah
And David Wills suggested....
I would have said, hey girls, come on in! But I promise you that they would have had the noisiest, dirtiest, dustiest, STINKIEST, experience of their lives.
There would be a mountain of whatever fiendishly ripe animal shyte was on hand, piled up to the frigging sky!
They would have been welcomed by humming and snarling old farm equipment, a peanut gallery of as many toothless half drunk hillbillies I could find, and a pasture full of cows on hand being serviced by the randiest bull God ever gave breath!
Nope, the farmers need to consult with me if they want to help these disordered women experienc e a ceremony "out in nature!" Yes, I would give them nature al right...
I found that a very useful, if slightly overdone suggestion but worth considering. M'self? I too would host if I had to, here at the Tavern on our extensive and very beautiful lawns.... and I would put a Bull in there too. There is too much bullshyte in the laws that are coming to a place near you, so look out. In fact, hand it back. Pax.