Right Thinking From The Left Coast
The price of anything is the amount of life you exchange for it - Henry David Thoreau

It Doesn’t Even ROOK rike Me!!

Australian politicians are catching on to America’s ‘hypocracy imitates politics’ agendas. the newest has become a cantidate named Andrew Quah, a ‘Family First’ cantidate. Haven’t read much on the party but the article indicates that the title has something to do with ‘putting the family first.’ In a shocker (not really) Mr. Quah has become another politician to have a scandal that involves the key words, “nude” “gay” and “drugs and alcohol.” Rike a virgin, taped for the vewy filst time...Rike a viw-w-w-gin....

IF YOU thought John Howard was having a bad election campaign, spare a thought for Andrew Quah, a candidate for the Family First Party. He has been dumped as its candidate for the western Sydney seat of Reid after photos of him parading his private parts appeared on gay websites and were emailed around the country.

Mr Quah, 21, has also admitted to looking at porn websites in the past two weeks, which made his position untenable given his party’s strong commitment to protect children by making porn harder to access on the internet.

Mr Quah told the Herald yesterday he thought it was possible that he had posed for the compromising photographs. “I might have been drunk off my face or my political enemies might have drugged me.”

By the way, if you needed any further proof that stereotypes aren’t always fictional, Mr.Quah has earned himself a new nickname in the wake of this scandal.

Already Mr Quah is being called “Australia’s smallest loser”. The Other Cheek blog even put up what it alleged were full-frontal close-ups of him but used Family First stickers for optional modesty.

Damn, I can’t berieve this outlage!! this is, rike, the thiwd time I told you it wasn’t me, it was my poriticar enemies!!

Posted by Manwhore on 10/29/07 at 03:35 PM (Discuss this in the forums)

Comments


Posted by HARLEY on 10/29/07 at 06:41 PM from United States

so what wrong with hims showing his wanger?

At lest he is tryign to keep minors from looking at that crap, but adults are very much welcome....
and here ii thought the Aussies we not as uptight…

Posted by Manwhore on 10/29/07 at 06:53 PM from United States

so what wrong with hims showing his wanger?

It seems the voting block he’s trying to appeal to is not the group to want to be represented this way. A part of thier campaign is to limit interet pornography.

I’ve actually entertained his point of view, and it could hold water. What if he was framed would anyone believe him? No one believes our politicians, and all it takes is one story like this.

Posted by on 10/29/07 at 07:05 PM from United States

Accusations of hypocrisy are often misapplied, for it’s not when somebody says one thing but does another — it’s when somebody says one thing while actually intending to do another.

for drink but strives to abstain from alcohol and preaches sobriety for others. Then suppose he attends a party, comes across free beer, is overcome by temptation and becomes soused. While this isn’t good, it also doesn’t mean he is a hypocrite. It simply means he is weak. Really, we’re all weak, in some areas and to some extent.

In point of fact, being flawed humans, it is unlikely that we could even measure up to even the most reasonable standards. If that’s hypocrisy, then we should stop advocating anything but failure. But just as an athlete strives for perfection, knowing all the while that it’s unachievable, we will fail to fulfill our moral potential unless we shoot for the stars. This is why we not only can, but must erect high standards for our fellow man; to do any less does humanity a disservice.

Posted by Manwhore on 10/29/07 at 07:13 PM from United States

In point of fact, being flawed humans, it is unlikely that we could even measure up to even the most reasonable standards. If that’s hypocrisy, then we should stop advocating anything but failure. But just as an athlete strives for perfection, knowing all the while that it’s unachievable, we will fail to fulfill our moral potential unless we shoot for the stars. This is why we not only can, but must erect high standards for our fellow man; to do any less does humanity a disservice.

Or, more simply put, be a carpenter who uses wood, an artist who uses brush, or political member who aspires to the same measure he would advocate for society?

Do I have you read correctly in that post?

Posted by on 10/29/07 at 07:14 PM from United States

Ah, my paragraph got chopped. Insert

*Say a man has a weakness

At the beginning of the second paragraph

Posted by on 10/29/07 at 07:19 PM from United States

No. You’re turning an effective analogy into a shitty analogy.

Posted by Manwhore on 10/30/07 at 12:22 AM from United States

No. You’re turning an effective analogy into a shitty analogy.

Enlighten me, then. I like your attitude (pushy and yet insulting) but I’m curious.

Posted by on 10/30/07 at 01:11 AM from United States

Pushy and insulting? I mean to be neither at this time. I’m just saying that my original analogy conveyed the point. Your additional examples muddled it.

Furthermore, I don’t think that overanalyzing an analogy, a tool of elucidation, is really an effective way to tackle the underlying point it is being used to convey.

But since you’re curious, allow me to try again. What I am saying, is that promoting adherence to values which are impossible to universally achieve is about all any human being can do if they intend to actually affect societal improvement.

If you yourself cannot conjure the strength to follow this idea, then that makes you weak, not evil.

Posted by Manwhore on 10/30/07 at 11:56 AM from United States

If you yourself cannot conjure the strength to follow this idea, then that makes you weak, not evil.

Well, I have to disagree. I think an honest assesmetn of what is possible is necessary in this and many aspects of life.

I’d also challenge the assertion that the alcoholic who drinks and the sexual addict who abuses are merely weak in thier effort not to do so. Otherwise, one shouldn’t ever be let out of prison for anything. I realize that even my statement can easily be rebutted, however, I’d rather have an honest political leader who stuck to achievable goals than a politico who sold me the idea of a nice car and I find out is is a piece of shit later.

What I am saying, is that promoting adherence to values which are impossible to universally achieve is about all any human being can do if they intend to actually affect societal improvement.

Hmm, didn’t Judeo Christain society travel this road? The danger in this thinking is that if the bar is too far out of reachwhat is the motivation of the individual to rise to the impossible occasion?

<< Back to main