Look, you’ve already come this far, so I must presume you’re prepared to play…
What do you mean, It’s not much of a choice!
Well, ok, I get you… but… you know… this is just a bit of fun and…
Oh, that’s what sexist creeps always say when someone objects to their obnoxious behaviour.
Right…
Now, I must confess that I’ve never been with anyone who played this but my understanding was that the way the game works is that you line up the three people with the three choices so that when Albo said “Kylie” he was demonstrating a lack of understanding of what he was meant to do, as well as a lack of understanding of several other things as well, but anyway, this was going to be my chance to actually play this game and now you’re refusing to join in.
Honestly, don’t people have a sense of humour any more.
So, I’m just going to ignore all your political correctness and tell you that my answer is this:
I’d marry Barnaby because he believes in family values.
I’d date Albo because I’d get to go on a lot of trips and meet lots of important people.
And I’d shag Dave Hughes because a man that angry is clearly in need of…
Oh, all right… I shouldn’t suggest that people’s problems could be solved with a shag, and in Hughie’s case, that’s probably doubly true.
And yes, it’s a silly game and that’s part of the problem with what Albanese did.
Now I don’t want to sound like I’m defending the Prime Minister here but what he did isn’t what should be attracting the outrage. It’s the fact that anyone thought that this is an appropriate question to be asking anyone in a public forum. (What consenting adults do in private is not my concern… oh yeah, all right, maybe it should be if they’re being dickheads…)
That said, one has to ask what was Mr Albanese and/or his minders thinking. Apparently Bush Barbie always plays this game with guests and the PM’s feeble attempt to swat it away with his assertion that he’s recently married may have worked, although it does beg the question: How long do you have to be married before you can publicly announce which person you’d shag?
This could have been a moment for leadership where our leader said that playing this game was inappropriate and he wasn’t going to allow non-consenting women to be used in this way. Then the narrative would have been all about how Albo isn’t a good sport and he lacks a sense of fun and he’s too politically correct… But if you’re going to get a negative narrative anyway, you might as well get it standing up for something and not doing something for which you have to offer an “unreserved apology”.
Speaking of which, has any ever announced that they’ll be making a reserved apology?
When it comes to narratives, there are some vary interesting ones doing the rounds. For example, Barnaby Joyce’s proposal that the RBA should be given more control over government spending… Rather strange that Barnaby wants to get government out of our lives but is happy for another institution to make the decisions.
And, of course, there are all the narratives about how the changes to the capital gains tax are hurting people. Now, as the changes haven’t come in yet, most of these involve a fair degree of fiction, but I really liked the article about the couple who were $140,000 worse off because of the changes.
- They bought their “dream home” just before the Budget.
- They bought it quickly becuase it was their dream home.
- They then sold their old place for a measly one and a half million when it had been valued at $140,000 more.
- Hence the changes had cost them six figures.
One could point out a number problems with this story such as the fact that they’re now living in their dream home and that it was their desire to procure it which led to them rushing. One could also point out that the price was over a hundred thousand dollars below the valuation and that maybe the valuation was a little optimistic.
But it’s the alternative narrative that the article didn’t bother with that intrigues me: Who was the lucky bastard(s) who bought their non-dream home for $140,000 less. Couldn’t we also be concentrating on the good news story of the people who’ve saved all this money instead of the couple who are now living in their “dream home” even if their mortgage is larger than they expected?
Or is that good news stories don’t fit the agenda?
I wouldn’t shag, marry or date any of the buggers. Let ’em deal with other, because no sensible person would be interested.
Yes, leefe, I think that may be the general consensus…
Still, one of the mysteries of life is that two women chose to marry Barnaby.
re. “one of the mysteries of life is that two women chose to marry Barnaby”… ’cause he’s a silver-tongued Casanova, especially after a few sherbs. Just look at his pavement improvisation performance next to the planter boxes… solid gold!
@ Rossleigh: The first one got swept up in the misogynistic cultural practices of the seventies, the second one wanted a career to replace ”journalism” that was obviously in its death throes, and which provided an ”interesting” life without too much effort, and was prepared to shop around for a sucker politician.
She won the booby prize, two kids, a luxury lifestyle that most voters can only dream about, with the reserve position of a large slice of the family agricultural enterprise to come upon any divorce.
Never give a sucker a even break.
So Beetrooter won the booby prize of the Canberra street planer box and New England voters got no change in the local MP’s quest for the Parliamentarian who has done the least for their electorate.
… the second one wanted a career to replace ”journalism” that was obviously in its death throes, and which provided an ”interesting” life without too much effort …
There is no way that being married to Bananababy – and especially shagging him – is easier than a full-time job. Any job.