dan’s look. thislook. this is the “phil you are so beauitful and i love you so much, i’d do anything for you and you are mine only” look. i think this pic is the closest caption of this look for now. look at the way his eyes are shining i mean hey. hey. can we take a while to just be happy that this look excists? because this is the best phan proof you will find until they come out or we find a kiss pic of them
Yearbook Entry No. 32: Farewell Party at Eren Jaeger’s House. 2:42 AM.
“’Best Friends’ Jean and Marco not leaving each other’s side as they say goodbye to their friends and batchmates. I think we’ve got like, 100+ photos of them - TOGETHER. It’s insane. Connie and I can’t wait to see the development of their relationship after graduation. If you know what I mean. ;)”
things that will literally never win a girl over, ever:
-telling her she doesn’t need makeup to be beautiful/she’s wearing too much makeup
-pressuring her to send you a picture even after she says no I don’t look great right now and you respond with the previous bullet point
-asking her if she wants to see your dick and then sending her an unflattering creepy ass picture anyway even after she says no with a caption like “oops ;)” and acting confused when she tells you to fuck off
-saying “wow I’ve never met a GIRL who likes [insert activity fuckboys think is strictly for males only]! Most girls would rather go shopping and do makeovers lolol” (as if you can’t like all of those things?)
-patronizing her when she shares an opinion or idea
-acting like you always know more or better about the politics of the world (literally shut the fuck up)
-comparing her to other women on a better or worse scale (honestly wtf don’t do it)
-shaming other women and praising her for “not being like those bitches/sluts/whores/[insert uncreative ‘insult’ here]”
-asking if she’s a virgin and then getting mad if she doesn’t give the answer you wanted due to some masculine fragility complex you can’t get over that’s telling you it somehow matters
-asking if she’s on her period whenever she shows even the slightest bit of displeasure in anything
“You think I’m just a doll. A doll that’s pink and light. A doll you can arrange any way you like. You’re wrong. Very wrong. What you think of me is only a ghost of time. I am dangerous. And I will show you just how dark I can be.”
this painting took me 4 days to complete! please don’t remove my caption or self promote, thank u!! 10 x 9 full color canvas prints available for 35$ usd - shipping!!! please help support yr local trans artists!!!
When you think Tae wrote a really sweet fancafe post about Jimin only to find out that it was Jimin himself who had hacked into Tae’s account and wrote all those things. I quote:
“I am Kim Taehyung. Dumb, an idiot, pathetic. Sometimes I don’t know why I’m like this. I respect Jimin. So cool! I get goosebumps when I look at his fingertips. It’s wonderful that I can have this kind of person as my friend. I am thankful and grateful to the heavens.”
He also posted an airport picture of himself captioning it “Aaah Jimin. God Jimin.”
Let’s tear it apart shall we? Strap yourselves in because I cannot stand misinformation and Bolt is an unlimited fountain of shit.
For starters: you’d think the image provided is satire. It looks like someone genuinely mocking the Prime Minister in some strange meme-ception with the unwitting Shrek reference underneath as a caption. Was that intentional? Is Bolt trying to be “hip” and “cool” with the kids by referencing Shrek? Can we “dig” a cool-diggity far-right commentator as Bolt? I doubt it.
Bolt’s entire article revolves around this 3rd paragraph (4th sentence):
“… you got one of the finest human beings to be Prime Minister.”
Why does Bolt believe this?
“In many ways he seemed too moral for the job, yet he achieved more in two years than the last two Labor prime ministers achieved in six.”
Too moral? Is Bolt’s idea of an adequately moral person for the job an amoral sociopath who doesn’t just leave people to die but actively is the one to shoot them? Now that Turnbull is “too left wing” for Bolt I suppose now we can expect Newscorp to start pushing for the next Prime Minister of Australia to be a T1000 Terminator - capable of change, but only to mold into something better at killing.
Pictured: the epitome of moral fortitude… a nearly indestructible killing machine.
Achieved more in two years than Labor? Bolt, Bolt, Bolt… Look, listen… let me teach you a remarkable word you’ve never heard of: reality. Actually, have another: statistics.
Bolt of course brings up the “feral senate” (echoing his no-homo man crush Abbott’s words because at this point is clear he has the strongest “no-homo” boner for Abbott ever) as an issue. Why yes, Abbott had a hard time getting policy through the senate… if it was terribly unhelpful.
Meanwhile, other policy ideas like data retention and the border force act got through quite easily. Those are both terrible, but aren’t economically damaging. Liberals can get policy through, even horrible policy, but the senate does have a sense of economic management and are only being labelled as feral for not allowing destructive policies that we have a real world example to see how they will negatively effect us.
Plus: at least he didn’t have a fucking hung parliament like Gillard did. Gillard wasn’t elected with a majority and the minor parties that Abbott blames for not allowing his damaging policies to get free reign in the senate were necessary for Gillard to get anything through too.
“Compare. Kevin Rudd and Julia Gillard left us with record deficits after blowing billions on trash”
1200 in 6 years vs Abbott’s letting 8000 people stranded waiting to die in a single month. I’m not going to defend Labor’s Asylum Seeker policies but if it is the competition that Bolt seems to be intent on making it - Abbott loses and he loses hard.
“They hyped the global warming scare and forced us to pay a job-killing carbon tax just to pretend they were saving us.”
Help. This physically hurts. Bolt, for those who haven’t figured it out by his constant opposition to the nature of reality is a “climate skeptic” as he’d probably like to call himself or, as scientists prefer, “an idiot.” I shouldn’t even have to have a fucking citation to point out Climate Change is a real fucking thing you should already know it is. That’s how fucking done I am with that debate. That is so goddamn stupid that I will not be required to argue with Bolt about something so utterly stupid as the existence of god. damn. climate. change.
I can go on BUT THERE’S JUST SO MUCH TO REFUTE! GOSH CAN YOU EVEN KEEP UP WITH HOW MUCH BULLSHIT BOLT’S COME UP WITH? Thus far the only thing that seems to be remotely correct is his “50,000″ number of NOT ILLEGAL arrivals since 2007. I mean, it’s more like 49,000 from what I could find but it’s the closest thing he’s got to a true statement. A rounded up number. Poor dude. He really tried on that one.
“But Abbott? I won’t go through the whole list: how he stopped the boats, curbed spending, scrapped the useless carbon and mining taxes, led the world’s defiance of deadly Russian strongman Vladimir Putin and made us safer from terrorism.”
“…he did all this in the face of astonishing heckling and even vilification from our media class, and despite often feral opposition in the Senate.“
Why yes. Abbott did do a lot of horribly pointless shit despite being told from every angle not to! And why are you talking about “vilification from our media class”, Bolt, when you are the embodiment of it?
“But your mistake was not to care about all that. Deeds didn’t count with you. Image was all.”
We’re halfway through and Bolt is so unused to being kind to someone and not viciously and unfairly attacking someone that he feels compelled to start attacking someone! Who? Who else is there but the reader! Aha! Why not just have a picture of you pointing at the reader with the caption “it’s your fault, you cunt” and be done with it?
“Fuck you” he says, pained at the lost of his no-homo soulmate, Abbott.
See: aforementioned deeds. The deeds go on. It doesn’t seem to occur to Bolt that somehow rational human beings are capable of understanding the world around them in a way different to him and thus it cannot possibly be that perhaps maybe the Australian public thought “hey, I don’t like what Abbott is doing to this country.” Instead he says we have failed to look through his way of talking and his onion munching.
Ah yes, the Australian people are a fickle bunch. Perhaps if Abbott had not eaten that onion we would magically be OK with sexual assault, torture, racism, destroying jobs, stalling the economy, and just accepted that the way things have to be is terrible for everyone who isn’t already rich. How silly of us to actually care about the middle/lower classes/foreigners/our country as a whole.
“Your mistake was that you couldn’t look behind the flim flam…”
Your mistake was thinking anything you had to say was worthwhile.
“When he defended women, he was called insincere.”
Let me just quote Abbott on a few things to adequately summarise his attitude towards women:
Then there’s “The problem with the Australian practice of abortion is that an objectively grave matter has been reduced to a question of the mother’s convenience.”
Abbott’s sexism is a lengthy topic worthy of it’s own essay. I find myself overflowing with so many points to refute simple sentences when it comes to Bolt’s writing I must leave some points trailing behind me as I go. BOLT’S STUPIDITY AND UNFOUNDED APPROVAL FOR ABBOTT IS SO DENSE I CAN BARELY UNPACK IT BEFORE I MUST CARRY ON!
Bolt then goes on to start providing information about how Abbott did a lot of volunteer work and I must admit that yes, Abbott did work as a lifesaver and a firefighter and I commend him for these deeds. He has done some good work as a firefighter and lifesaver.
This is some strange reverse ad hominem logically fallacy where instead of attacking someone’s argument by attacking their character instead Bolt is defending Abbott’s Prime Ministership with unrelated aspects of his personality. I don’t care if Abbott saved a Sydney home from a fire in the same way that I don’t care if he masturbates to pictures of pine cones. Neither of these are related to his policies or how he ran the country.
I don’t kink shame. I do policy shame.
Bolt says that we “let” the media trash him. He shifts the blame of Tony’s mismanagement of the country to the reader. How did the media trash Tony and the Liberals? By citing legitimate criticisms that the nation had? That experts had? That analysts had? That their own reports had on their own failings? That their own party members had? His own party revolted on him. How unpopular do you need to be before you admit that perhaps you did something wrong???
I forgot, media bias is only allowed to go one way and that way is to agree with the right:
“Now, I must declare straight up — I call Tony Abbott a friend.”
Tony confirmed to have at least one friend.
“So you’ll call me biased.”
Well water is wet and the sky is blue.
“You’ll laugh that I can write this massive praise of him”
Well, more of an aneurysm due to how high my bullshit meter suddenly sprang up. You broke the dial. The dial on my bullshit meter was broken thanks to how much bullshit you spew out, Andrew Bolt. Who is going to fix that? Not you I assume, you only help the far right gain power so they can cut funding to things that help people.
“He’s my friend especially because he’s not those things that so many journalists wrote — including some who must have known what they wrote were lies.”
By which you mean: almost this entire article? Bolt, you lie for a living. There’s no denying that. You cannot honestly tell me you do not get in front of a camera every Sunday and lie straight down the barrel of a lens on about at least one topic each week. The section where Bolt says that Abbott was a lifesaver and firefighter - a matter of public record and a well known biographical fact - is the first time I’ve encountered him not outright lying.
Bolt’s attitude towards issues is to somehow aggressively become uneducated and ignorant of the topic, then talk a lot about it with such passion and conviction as to convince those too lazy to fact check into believing he is correct. He is the exact opposite of a journalist in every single way in that he actively aspires to make people know less about the world around them instead of keep them up to date.
Now he tries to attack everyone else for doing it? He’s grasping at straws here, unable to form any kind of actual evidence or reasoning for his belief in Tony Abbott he resorts to literally making things up and then going “but Tony’s a nice person if you met him!”
“A crash-through insensitive bully with no people skills? Ask my children how gentle he was when he called around.”
Cool. I love anecdotal evidence instead of actually acknowledging the real harm his policies have done to thousands of Australian lives and the permanent psychological harm caused to detainees in our detention centres. You know what anecdotal evidence proves? That he’s not the kind of person who is a dick to his potentially only friend’s kids.
But given how Bolt’s head is so far up his ass to as to say Tony was a brilliant Prime Minister who was too “moral” for the job for all I know Bolt’s idea of someone being kind to his kids is “only kicking them two, at tops three, times before spitting on them and walking away.” I strongly believe that Abbott doesn’t kick kids, but I also strongly believe that Bolt has no concept of compassion either and thus his already useless anecdotal evidence doubly proves nothing to me.
Bolt even uses the “he’s not homophobic, he has a gay friend” excuse. That is not the measure of whether or not someone is homophobic. Even though he does care for his friends (wait: Tony confirmed to have two friends now apparently, thank you Bolt) Tony still said things like saying he’s “threatened” by homosexuality and denied that his friend and his sister and thousands of Australians should be treated as equals under the law by adamantly refusing to allow same sex marriage. The ACT briefly allowed it before he challenged it.
“You’re my friend… but I’m going to deny you the same rights as others and thus create a sense of you being a second class citizen… but I’m not homophobic.”
“Yes, I know Abbott made mistakes, and I was hard on the worst. I know he was too stubborn. And I know he was clumsy in selling himself.”
Plot twist: Bolt acknowledges reality. Abbott DID make mistakes, many many more than I can list in this rebuttal and many I have excluded for the sake of not writing an impossibly large post that no one will read… but it is clear that Bolt wishes to absolve Abbott of these flaws because… why?
Abbott is a saint apparently according to Bolt and that just doesn’t come across anywhere but the pages of Bolt’s AU fanfiction of Australian politics. Bolt’s love letter is just that: fanfiction. A creation of a mythical Tony Abbott who Bolt claims paradoxically managed to do so much for us, yet blames the senate for how he couldn’t manage to do anything. A man so moral and kind, yet his policies are rife with discrimination, illegal actions, torture, enabling of abuse, attacks on the poor while favouring the rich, and further putting the disabled and elderly at a disadvantage. Where does Bolt’s adoration come from if not from some bizarro fantasy world where Abbott is the literal opposite of who he is?
And with that comes Bolt’s closing address:
“That’s why I say: this country has despised and rejected a great servant. It is a time of sorrow.”
A “servant” renowned for his captain calls, going over people’s heads, ignoring criticism, and leading by his own personal desires instead of those of the people - even Liberals voters tried to dissuade him from his reckless course on some issues. The position of Prime Minister should be a servant to the people, but Abbott was infamously not one for listening and thus it feels wrong to call him one.
Again, we rejected him because he was terrible, Bolt. No matter how much you bleat on about his “achievements” the people will remember him for who he was: a disaster that should never of happened, and was thankfully stopped before it went on for too long.