The Leftist Disease of Double Standards
What was that word again? You know the one: it starts with “h” and ends with “ypocrisy”. If there was any one term that perfectly describes the left, it would be this one. How many times have I pointed out their blatant double standards?
This is simply the gift that keeps on giving. Every time a leftist opens his or her mouth, you are almost guaranteed of another colossal example of hypocrisy. But before I highlight the latest cringeworthy example of such blatant hypocrisy, let me offer a brief historical and etymological lesson.
As some of you might know, our English word “hypocrite” actually goes way back to the world of ancient Greek theatre. The old Greek word hypokrites, means “actor” or “stage player.” Greek actors wore masks as they took on different roles.
Related to this is the phrase “two-faced”. It refers to a person who is insincere or puts on an act. It again ties in with the notion of double standards and hypocrisy. While most folks at times can be two-faced and hypocritical, it seems that those on the left have turned this into an art form.
Let me present to you another perfect example of this rank hypocrisy. And it seems in this case that the hypocrisy is clearly in vogue. The editor-in-chief of US Vogue, Anna Wintour, is in Melbourne lecturing us about intolerance in tennis, of all things.
I must confess that I never heard of this big cheese, highfalutin British-American until now. But here she is down under, preaching to us about intolerance. Here, in typical Sydney Morning Herald fashion, is how they open with the story:
Anna Wintour has thrown her support behind the push to rename Margaret Court Arena over the tennis champion’s opposition to same-sex marriage. “I find that it is inconsistent with the sport for Margaret Court’s name to be on a stadium that does so much to bring all people together across their differences,” the US Vogue editor-in-chief said in a speech delivered at the Australian Open Inspirational Series in Melbourne on Thursday, to applause.
“This much I think is clear to anyone who understands the spirit and the joy of the game. Intolerance has no place in tennis.” Wintour went on to say that, although Court was “a champion on the court” a “meeting point of players of all nations, preferences and backgrounds should celebrate somebody who was a champion off the court as well”.
Court, a one-time tennis great turned Christian minister, has said the legalisation of same-sex marriage in Australia raised alarming issues for Australia, controversially describing homosexuality as “all the devil” in 2017. Martina Navratilova has joined calls for Margaret Court Arena in Melbourne to be renamed after Aussie tennis great Margaret Court said she would boycott Qantas due to the airline’s stance on same-sex marriage.
Wintour, who is in Australia for the first time, also expressed her views on Prime Minister Scott Morrison, and notably his previous ambiguity regarding proposals to amend the Sex Discrimination Act such as to allow religious schools to expel LGBT students. (Morrison has since said schools should not be able to discriminate against students based on sexuality.) “I have been alarmed by your prime minister’s record on LGBTQ rights, which seems backward in all senses,” she said.
OK, let me see if I got this straight. A visiting Yank, speaking at a tennis function, solemnly assures us that we can NOT have any intolerance in the world of tennis, all the while showing just how intolerant she is of a certain tennis player. OK, I think I got that.
‘Intolerance MUST be stamped out, and we will begin by showing full-scale intolerance to those we differ with.’ Right, I see how that works. In the name of tolerance let us become as intolerant as we can possibly be, because we are of course ‘in the right’.
Mounting the high horse and showing your moral superiority while engaging in gross hypocrisy is such a hallmark of the left. This is their signature dish. This is what they do. That is their trademark. And the only thing more ugly than this appalling hypocrisy is their complete unawareness of it.
They are seemingly oblivious to their own despicable double standards. On a scale of 1 to 10, their ability to see the stench of their own duplicity and phoniness is around -13. No wonder average Australians and Americans have had a gutful of these frauds.
No wonder most folks are fed up with these fakes and their fake news, their fake outrage, their fake moralising, and their fake posturing. Enough already. Ms Wintour likely knows absolutely nothing about Margaret Court. She wants ‘somebody who is a champion off the court as well’.
Well I can think of no greater champ than Margaret. While many former tennis stars are simply living the good life now, and looking after Number 1, Court has devoted her life to helping others. As but one example, in 1999 she and her church opened the Margaret Court Community Outreach. This is a small part of what it does:
MCCO food hampers are one of our largest requests for assistance, with 24 tonnes of fresh, frozen, perishable and non perishable food items going out per week. These food donations are made by various companies around Perth such as IGA, British Sausages, National Foods and Dobra Garden Trust. We give away over 3,000 meals per week and since commencement, to date we have given away over 900,000 meals.
It sure sounds to me like she is a champion off the courts. Just how much is Ms Wintour doing for the poor, the homeless, the drug addicts, etc? Yet because Court has the audacity to believe what nearly everyone in human history has believed – that marriage is between a man and a woman – she is now the devil incarnate, and we have to hear mega-hypocrites like Wintour building herself up while tearing Margaret down.
I would not doubt that the Perth pastor does more good for more people in a month than this uppity New York bigwig has done in a lifetime. So spare us the lectures lady. They reek of your ugly arrogance and duplicity. And why not try learning about what real tolerance actually looks like?
How does that old saying go? If it wasn’t for the left’s double standards, they wouldn’t have any standards at all.
20 Replies to “The Leftist Disease of Double Standards”
I have known Pastor Margaret for more than 17 years and have never observed her showing or speaking any hatred towards anyone. She could have retired quite happily but instead devotes her time to helping others – regardless of who they are.
Once again the intolerance of angry people who are furious that anyone dare disagree with them.
Today’s supposed stamping out of ‘intolerance,’ is not the same as the former Roman Empire and Constantine’s eastern European view of ‘tolerance.’ You would logically think these 2 policies, though different in name, were one and the same, and would produce similar results, similar protections of religious freedom, including that of practicing Christians. Wrong!
Today’s warped leftist view of tolerance is sheer, utter and total intolerance of bonafide, orthodox, Biblical Christianity. To accept only Scripturally-sound, primitive, as it were, Apostolically taught, Scripturally-based Christianity is to be labeled haters and dogmatic troublemakers standing in the way of peace, of social progress in the name of a wimpy Christ who is all Kumbaya and asks us all to “just get along.”
This limp-wristed Jesus wants us all to sacrifice His Truth on the altar of compromise. He wants us all to board “the Peace Train” at any cost, even that of our souls and the souls of the many lost around us. This lovey-dovey Christ is all about being PC, all about crowd-pleasing and not offending anyone along the way. He wishes nothing more for us than to be comfortable, happy, well and prosperous. He wants none of us to suffer disdain and ridicule at the hands of the world and those around us who disbelieve the truth.
Not exactly surprised of course, but it seems that “Aunty ABC” has jumped on the bandwagon.
Well said Bill. Margaret Court is a great Australian and we should not allow her or ourselves to be bullied by these hypocritical leftist morons. We all need to speak up for what we believe in, even if it’s not considered PC or in line with the the warped thinking of those who watch The Project or Google Box.
You’re right! The recent ANMJ informed registered nurses and midwives in 3 separate articles that they must use the LGBTIAQ language, despite this language doesn’t discriminate against anyone and anything whatsoever. This language directly breakdown the English language which has discriminated every word from other words. Therefore, the pronoun words “he” and “she” must have had a different meaning in the original English language to be two different words, because the word “she” would have been called, “he” if these pronouns meant the same type of person. However, the LGBTIAQ language demands that healthcare professionals need to pretend that the pronouns “he” and “she” can now have no true meaning at all, and these words can be used to describe a person’s “inner feeling of gender,” rather than a biological reality of sex, as the original English meaning of “he” and “she” was based a male or female reproductive system that can be measured and tested all around the world and over the centuries. Kerryn Phelps and Christine Foster are both well known Australian women whom were originally were married to a man and they had children with their ex-husband, and later they have experienced a legal divorce, and now they’re both legally married to a woman. Bill, How will a healthcare professional identify them using the psychiatry/psychology words “cisgender,” “heterosexual,” “bisexual,” and or “homosexual”?
I am trying to inform the Health ministers and Equality ministers in both state and federal governments about the significant harmful consequences, and these things are directly caused by a change to the English language by including the LGBTIAQ language. The LGBTIAQ activists have no more special powers than I do, because I could deliberately change words to include my own definition, such as I could attempt to give a “fetus” their human right to be identified as a legal person.” I could use an oxymoron “unborn neonate” which means “unborn, newborn,” and these words currently doesn’t make any sense to most people, but I could convince other health professionals, as well as health authorities and health ministers that a “fetus” should have the same/equal human right to life as a “neonate” which means “newborn.” However, most health professionals would claim that an newborn isn’t the same as an unborn baby. Therefore, a “fetus” would now need to be identified as an oxymoron “unborn neonate,” until they gain the same legal status and protection of a “neonate” or “newborn,” and this identity would give them state benefit/protection of a legal “person” which includes a legal right to “live their life.” This change of practice could easily be accepted by pro-life people and they could gain support from the majority of Australian healthcare professionals and healthcare services in Australia by lobbying this idea. However, this idea would still come into direct conflict with the legal abortion laws and healthcare professionals and services, as well as governments and government authorities such as the courts, and they might strongly disagree with this idea within Australia and around the world, because it confuses the English language, as well as behavioural practice of abortions.
Politicians and the public can more easily identify the madness and chaos If the Australian Federal Parliament decided to please the 325 700 000 Americans by including Americans in Australian road rules. This crazy idea would allow Americans their legal right to drive on the right side of the road when they’re in Australia, and I’m sure this idea would make the majority of Americans feel happy that they don’t have to learn to drive on the left-side of the road when they live and or visit Australia. However, the 24 600 000 Australians would experience a head-on collision if they continued to drive on the left-side of road. Imagine the confusing road signs if the Australian Federal Parliament pretended that Australians don’t need to change practice of driving on the right-side of the road, and they shouldn’t discriminate against Americans, so the words “left” and “right” now means legal “road.” Teachers would be forced to educate students that they can’t discriminate between the words “left” and “right,” because all people should have an equal right to drive on the left, right or middle of any public road. I’m praying that politicians and government authorities can see the madness and chaos of including LGBTIAQ language into legal behaviours and practices, because this idea doesn’t make any sense to the majority of people all around the world and over the centuries, and all Muslim countries don’t include the LGBTIAQ language. Bill, Australian teachers will find it difficult to explain to Australian students that it is legal to have a same-sex marriage in Australia, but if they travel to a Muslim country they will likely experience the death penalty. Australian students will find it hard to believe that the word “marriage” could ever lead to their “death,” because they have thought “marriage” is a good behaviour.
A surgeon learns to discriminate a disease like cancer from an illness, spiritual distress, as well as from healthy cells, tissue and organs. Therefore, a surgeon has been preforming a hysterectomy and mastectomy on women with cancer of the breast and uterus, and women have been having hormone therapy for “hot flushes” and hormone imbalance. However, surgeons can no longer discriminate against people with a mental illness – “gender dysphoria,” because government and government authorities including the courts believe that females who have an “inner feeling of male” now have a legal right to a hysterectomy and a mastectomy, despite the scientific evidence shows that surgery isn’t appropriate treatment for a mental illness. Bill, Will the government force surgeons in the future to perform a hysterectomy and mastectomy on people who are clearly experiencing spiritual distress, as they believe they’re genderless and claim to be god or the devil?
I am trying to get politicians, government authorities including health authorities and lawyers to critically think about the reason government and government authorities including the authority boards and regulation authorities, as well as the courts are redefining a natural reality into a legal entity, such as legal ‘person’ – client, patient etc; legal “people” – same-sex and opposite-sex; legal “personhood” – banks, corporations, bridges, rivers etc; legal “couple” – married, partnered, and defacto; legal family – same-sex, opposite-sex etc. Governments and government authorities have the legal power to establish laws, regulations, guidelines and public registries to control and punish all legal entities.
The Lefties made a huge fuss about the Stolen Generation (Aboriginal children) – how about the STOLEN GENERATION caused by Gender Ideology?
Margaret Court is an absolutely fantastic woman and an amazing sportswoman.
Of course the ABC and SBS are likewise promoting divisiveness, hypocrisy and slander and the public is forced to fund this constant propaganda. This is what people should be outraged about. How often do we have to see high profile people speaking about matters they have not the slightest clue about yet are being promoted by the media, especially the public media?
Thanks again for another informative article.
Margaret Court does not seem a hateful person at all. Meanwhile, many of her critics would appear to show their own intolerance towards anyone who does not agree with them.
Tolerance and in-tolerance have to do about the level of caring as much as anything else.
Tolerance also has to do with allowing variation in engineering.
Mercedes were (once, at least) know to have higher quality engines because the tolerances in the machining was so fine. They would replace machine tools more often because they were thus able to ensure a closer compliance to the blueprints.
Mercedes cared about quality and so tolerated less variation.
So here we have a person a person talking about intolerance in tennis.
Tennis has to be intolerant. Intolerance is evidenced by the huge number of line referees who intolerantly call “out” sometimes, and then if someone doesn’t like it, an even more intolerant video judge may also call “out”.
And do they care? YES and extremely, YES. Expensive damage has been done sometimes.
Of course Margaret Court is intolerant. She cares.
Among other things she cares about people who are going hungry, or who are cold in winter.
She cares, or is in intolerant enough, to go out of her way and do something.
This other squawking person, preaching enthusiastically about the need for tolerance, and the need to put down intolerance. ….CARES…..
If she didn’t care we would hear nothing but crickets.
Thanks Bill for pointing out the double standard.
Bill, how dare you call Wintour a lady – do you not know that that is sexist? More to the point – do you not know that that may be offensive to real ladies?
This moron has no idea what it (I do not want to be sexist and say ‘she’) is on about: bad to be intolerant? Reality is that it is bad to be tolerant on many issues and we have a saying: ‘ those who tolerate crime are tainted with the same brush’.
The opposite of tolerant is intolerant: We must be intolerant on many issues such as crime, bisexuality, homosexuality, queer conduct, bestiality, pedophilia, dangerous driving, foul conduct etc.
So, let us ask this moron if there are any exceptions to tolerance? If its answer is no, we have the evidence that it is a moron and so too all others that agree with it.
“Intolerance has no place in tennis”? Not quite true. That’s not what appears in every single tennis match I see on TV. In fact, I see a very high level of intolerance.
You see, when a ball fails to catch a court line that matters, we have devices that detect such a miss down to the millimetre. A nice graphical animation instantly depicts a 3D representation of the flight of the ball, and marks the exact spot it actually landed. Near enough is not good enough. Your feelings don’t come into it. No overlap with the white line? Sorry. And nobody argues with the 3D box; physical reality matters.
So, no matter how badly a player wishes the call to be a certain way, the laws of physics dictate to the player what the ruling will be, not their personal wishes. And strangely enough, everybody seems to accept that, but Wintour doesn’t see the glaring incongruity of mainstreaming some people’s warped feelings dictating completely false and indeed dangerous views of the laws of biology.
But since she appears to accept the whole package of alphabet sexual identity madness, including that particularly delusional T (where people’s feelings take precedence over physical reality right down to the DNA in cells), and no-one that I heard of from Tennis Australia denounced her declaration as the nonsense it is, I can see an opportunity for me in sport that I actually never fully considered before.
So, latching onto Wintour’s thinking, I now identify as the winner of the current Australian Open, and for good measure the French Open, Wimbledon and the US Open later this year. It will be gratifying to add a Grand Slam to my modest life achievements, especially as I never spent so much as one game of tennis on any surface, and my crook hip would probably prevent me getting to the second serve of a first round loser. Anybody calling my very occasional returns out, even when they end up four rows back in the crowd – of the next court – is a bigot and hater and should be in jail for intolerance. And taking eight goes to get a serve to land where it is meant to is just ‘diversity’. Roger Federer’s tennis career achievements at his age will be completely overshadowed by my own.
Can anybody advise me of where to buy a suitably large trophy cabinet?
Male and female, Anna Wintour. Your serve landed considerably wide of the mark, and science says so. Margaret Court gets it, why don’t you?
Some people are all smiles, love, and tolerance – until something is said that they disagree with.
I also wonder if the meaning of the word tolerance has changed in the eyes of many. Tolerance should mean something along the lines of this: I may disagree with what you do, but I will tolerate you doing it. However now I think many people think that in order to be tolerant you must actually more or less agree that what someone is doing is right. If one politely disagrees with certain things people do then they can be viewed as being intolerant.
or have again turned this into an art form.
Bill, Servant to the Most High. You are so right on! I call these type of people “Information Predators”. They collect info on good people and then they wield their swords of self righteousness against us. Thanks Bill for putting into plain English that which so many of us can’t. You speak the Lord’s Heart & our hearts with your words. You do more for protecting religious freedom and exposing the sanctimonious sewer than anyone I know.
You are living proof the pen is mightier than the sword.
Louise : )
“God’s Not Silent” [on evil] prayer partner
Spot on Bill, with your point about Wintour’s hypocrisy. Isn’t Vogue full of advertisements for luxury fashion brands, beauty products, and the like? I notice it whenever I visit a newsagent’s, or even my local library, and my eyes scan over the cover.
Thanks for this article. It’s always amusing when, despite your stated 100-word limit, you allow comments longer than the article! Perhaps people with that much to say should start their own blog or website. However, I trust Bill’s still in a lenient mood, as my comment puts me in the same boat.
How interesting that Wintour works for Vogue, as ‘vogue’ means ‘fashion’. What is in fashion quickly goes out of fashion. Wintour should remember that when pushing fashionable views, which she was so busy doing, that she forgot to tell the audience what qualifications she has to speak as an authority on tennis.
Another recent example of hypocrisy is Bob Brown’s recent High Court victory over Tasmania’s workplace protest laws. In 2013, Dr Brown’s Green disciples in Tasmania’s parliament all voted to criminalise peaceful protest against the abortion of healthy babies, with maximum penalties of 12 months jail and fines of $11,550; harsher penalties than those overturned by the High Court.
Later this year, the High Court will hand down its judgement on Graham Preston’s challenge to the anti-protest provisions of Tasmania’s Reproductive Health Act. Dr Brown castigates the Tasmanian government for wasting $350,000 defending its workplace laws, while refusing to condemn the state for spending similar amounts fighting Mr Preston’s challenge to its abortion protest laws.
Bob Brown has absolutely no right to masquerade as a champion of free speech, while failing to condemn harsher laws than those he overturned.
Should the abortion protest challenge be successful, I wonder if Mr Preston and Mrs Clubb will be featured on a commemorative 50-cent coin in 25 years’ time, as Eddie Mabo was last year, to mark the 25th anniversary of his native title win in 1992…?
Taking up one’s of J’s points,
Surely everyone has the right to drive on the right! When the LGBTIQ activists turn their attention to eliminating discrimination between left and right, then people who insist that all drivers keep to the left, will be prosecuted for bigotry and hatred. What consenting adults do in the privacy of their motor cars is no-one else’s business. People who were born to drive on the right hand side of the road are unfairly stigmatised, suffering bullying at school and in the workplace. Arbitrarily restricting driving to the left hand side, has no place in a tolerant, modern society. Instead, we should encourage right-wheeled youth to come out with pride, explore their motoring orientation, and stamp out dextrophobia.
We can start locally, but act globally on this one. Saudi Arabia recently allowed women to drive, but we can go one better. Tasmanian Senator David Bushy is about to retire, and take up the job of Consul-General to the United States, based in Chicago. He’ll be in an ideal position to lobby the Trump administration for positive change on this issue. Of course, the Americans already drive on the right-hand side, so they’ll need to be re-educated to overcome their fear and prejudice of us left-wheelers. Aussies in the US are the minority, so clearly, the majority US law and culture will have to change, and finally accept that the way Aussies expats were born to drive their cars, is perfectly normal and healthy. Even if the majority of US citizens continue to drive on the right, they can embrace their left-wheeled family and friends, learn to tolerate, love and accept driving equality.
Speaking of Chicago, today marks the anniversary of the death of Al Capone, who died of syphilis, aged 47. Clearly, his death was caused by the bigotry and prejudice of certain sectors of society, who failed to accept and celebrate his sexuality. Likewise, those terrible head-on crashes are simply caused by our failure to accept that some people are born with a different on-road orientation. Driving on the right-hand side is simply their way of achieving dextral pleasure. Remember, practise safe speeding, and always wear your seatbelt.
The tolerance practiced by today’s regressives is akin to the freedom practiced by yesteryear’s Auschwitz & Co.
The left owns the MSM, Academia (schools, universities, educational channels on TV.), and Hollywood. Therefore, all of those institutions have as much credibility as a paedophile giving childcare advice to my dad.
What we have are some of the best minds and arguments not to mention a good deal less hypocrisy. The lady from Vogue in normal times would not get an audience outside of those interested in fashion and gossip, however, the lefts media gives her a platform to deliver its latest outrage, the problem the left has is its outrage is very selective or put another way it’s to spread disunity and categorise their pets into groups of varying levels of value, therefore, if you happen to be a black person who is a transgender, disabled, Muslim, then you are at the top of the “let’s get outraged over some perceived injustice on your behalf”. If you happen to be a white male dying of a terrible illness that’s a good thing as white males are the cause of all that is wrong in the world. I ask such sick minds to try this, look out of the window, that car going by was created by a man, a white man at that. The roads, well women use them but men built and maintain them, oh look an aeroplane flying overhead did a Muslim lady in her Berka build that, no a white man. What about the house you live in? built by a man, white without any input from a woman. What about the cameras and electronics that transmitted the Vogue lady’s propaganda, that would be white males handy work (naughty white males couldn’t you have built a stupidity filter into that transmission device?) Are the white Christian males risking their lives to get into Saudi Arabia or is the Muslim Middle Eastern man trying to get to the west? Are the Gay, transgender, puppy play individuals going to Saudi Arabia to exercise their lifestyle or are they whinging like a 15-year-old since her dad won’t let her wear makeup? And no, I haven’t forgotten the main point. Look a mother and father going by with a child in a pushchair, that child will grow up to pay taxes so the liberal socialist may give it to a third world bomber to satisfy the lefts craving for blood. Did you help produce that baby Mr Homosexual? Tell me Mr homosexual when aids came to visit your community did the white heterosexual men spend millions to find a cure for you, putting others who needed research to find a cure for what they had on hold? Was it a far left, disabled, transgender, Muslim that brought slavery to an end? No, that would have been a white Christian male would it not. I haven’t finished does that Vogue lady even realise she is complaining about the disadvantaged gay community where there is no disadvantage. However, I can point her to where her propaganda will be received somewhat differently, in fact, she can prove her concern for the gay community and at the same time show she is willing to stand and fall with them where they have a real problem, therefore, if she is willing to give her views on the Muslims attitude to homosexuals in Saudi Arabia, Mrs Vogue, I’m sure we could crowdfund a one way ticket for you to Saudi. You will not be needing a return ticket since you will realise all too clearly not all men are the same, white men in the west are better. Of course, you could prove me wrong go to Saudi and put it to the test as some poor ill-informed people who have brought your lies and found to their cost that if you want to be sure not to be beheaded or murdered for being white in a Muslim country, then stay where the white Christian men concern themselves about women’s rights, the life of the unborn baby and yes concern for the homosexual such that they keep their heads and are not thrown from buildings, and yes, Christian men will still tell them their lifestyle choices are not what God intended for them and they will still cry, homophobic, but remember you have to be alive and free to do that.
This young lady would like to thank the western men for, hair-straighteners, Dads, Brothers (sometimes), Phones, Washing Machines, Dish Washers, Lightbulbs, Bras, yes a man made them (I do not know what they were thinking.), Homes, Schools (Friday afternoons at around 3:30), Pianos, Violins, oh, Central Heating, Sewing Machines (I could do with one that does embroidery daddy.), Vacuum Cleaners, Showers. Hmm, one needs to ask if you took every invention that originated in the west away, what would the world be like.
Cathie Stawim forgot to mention that when you wear your seatbelt it should be of the heterosexual complementary variety, not the homosexual, same-same variety popularised by KLM Airlines a few years ago.