The Greens have issued a motion which asks the Senate to condemn various comments made by Donald Trump.
I would have thought that someone, anyone, in the media would have called this out for the hypocritical joke that it was. Lucky I didn’t hold my breath waiting.
Firstly, here are Trump’s remarks which have given rise to this issue. They were made some time ago and have now been released publicly:
“I moved on her like a bitch, but I couldn’t get there. And she was married.”
“I did try and f*** her. She was married.”
“Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.”
“Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.”
In fact, here, have the whole video:
I have no doubt that Trump’s made plenty more similar remarks in the past. Yes, they’re completely foul and classless – and while many a celebrity has said similar or worse in the past, they’re not the ones currently running for president. Bill Clinton has even done worse, but he was already President – a big practical (not moral) difference.
This kind of mud sticks and it sticks more than Clinton’s Benghazi scandal, email scandal and foundation scandal all put together?
Why? Because it’s easier for the average voter to conceptualise Trump being an obvious pig, than it is to dig down and understand exactly what Hillary has done in her scandals – scandals which are infinitely worse than whatever Trump might have said in the past. Most voters wouldn’t even know where Benghazi is, let alone care who might have died there and why.
The principle is no different to a corporate office meeting where senior managers spend 55 minutes talking about how they can save $200 in the annual stationary budget, and only 5 minutes talking about how they can structurally improve the poor safety record of the organisation – only to keep deferring the discussion until next time. It’s called Parkinson’s law of triviality.
I’ll leave you to decide what relevance Trump’s remarks have on whether he’d actually make a better president than Clinton (not the easiest of choices, I must admit).
As for the pathetic Greens, here’s their motion, chock-full of the left’s favourite buzzwords and phrases such as hate, hateful, hate speech, misogynistic, minorities, racist and sexist (yes, they’re all in there, some more than once):
I give notice, that on the next day of sitting, I will move that:
a) Condemns the misogynistic, hateful comments made by the Republican candidate for US President, Donald Trump about women and minorities, including the remarks revealed over the weekend that clearly describe sexual assault
b) Reflects on the divisive, destructive impact that hate speech from political candidates and members of elected office has on our community
c) Requests every member of the Senate to refrain from making racist, sexist comments in this chamber and outside it.
d) Calls on the Government to join the Senate in its condemnation of both Donald Trump, and hate speech in all forms
Now, let’s rewind four years and have another look at Peter Slipper’s remarks made regarding women:
About five minutes later Mr Slipper began what the Opposition has called “‘vile anatomical references”. Referring to women’s private parts, he said: ”They look like mussell (sic) removed from its shell. Look at a bottle of mussel meat. Salty C..ts in brine.”
That day Mr Ashby attempted to get the SMS conversation back to politics, but Mr Slipper persisted.
“Been to thw (sic) fish shop yet to buy the bottle of shell less Mussells (sic)?”
As you may recall, Slipper was the speaker of the lower house at the time these comments became public – and Julia Gillard needed him there to continue governing with a majority of two. Without Slipper, the heat would have been entirely on Craig Thompson. All up, the whole affair bought Gillard precious time – almost a year. On top of this, Slipper’s defection and appointment also meant that Gillard now only needed the approval of three of the four independents to pass legislation, rather than all four.
So where were the Greens at the time with their Senate motion condemning Slipper?
Lastly, what business is it of the Australian Senate to pass comment on an election campaign being conducted in another country?
Alternatively, if you want to argue that it is the Senate’s business to do such things (it isn’t), then where is the motion condemning the likes of Kim Jong Un, Omar Bashir and Robert Mugabe each time they are campaigning for ‘re-election’? Or others on this list for that matter?
Meanwhile, our federal budget continues to cry.