Can you believe this?
Senator Coonan agreed with Mr Turnbull that Mr Howard's remarks were unfortunate. But she also suggested that the former prime minister's assault was justified at the time because Mr Obama had supposedly not renounced terrorism.
I could call this bimbo every name under the sun and it still wouldn't do her justice. Where do you begin? I don't believe I have ever heard Helen Coonan declare that she's not a terrorist either- are we to presume that she is until she says otherwise or does it seem, you know, reasonable to assume that she isn't?
Despite the lunacy of idea of a US presidential candidate having to declare that they're against terrorism (do they need to state that they're against murder and drunk-driving as well? Littering? Jay-walking?), Obama had indeed made clear his opposition to terrorism, at the moment he announced his candidacy:
Contrary to Senator Coonan's claim that Mr Obama "hadn't made it clear his very strong opposition to terrorism" at the time, he did that very thing when he announced his candidacy.
[...]
Later yesterday, Senator Coonan went into damage control, telling Sky News she disagreed completely with Mr Howard
Duh... oops!
Australia would be mightily benefited by the invention of a lipstick that could superglue Helen Coonan's stupid trap shut.
4 comments:
She wears too much eyeliner.
That's to help her to look like a witch.
Or the Joker.
That is just beyond moronic. That's like saying he supports pederasty because he specifically hasn't said pederasty is wrong.
Where does the Liberal party find these "people"?
Post a Comment