Former Aussie PM Takes a Headbutt, Presumably Over His Views on Traditional Marriage

It looks like the Crocodile Dundee stereotype of Australians as rough-around-the-edges in all things has a grain of truth, even when it comes to the debate over same-sex marriage in the country. The run-up to the upcoming referendum on marriage appears to have become particularly unconventional and passionate.

Former Prime Minister Tony Abbott was on the receiving end of a bizarre act of violence upon leaving a dinner with proponents of traditional marriage in Tasmania. On the walk back to his hotel, Abbott received a head butt from a man claiming to want to shake the former PM’s hand. You read that right – a head butt.

“I was walking from the Mercury office across that docks area, that beautiful docks area in Hobart, towards my hotel,” Abbott said to Steve Price and Sky News host Andrew Bolt on Melbourne’s 3AW radio on Thursday.

“A fellow sung out at me ‘Hey Tony!’ I turned around, there was a chap wearing a Vote Yes badge. He says ‘I wanna shake your hand’. I went over to shake his hand and then he headbutted me,” Abbott continued. “Now he wasn’t very good at it I’ve gotta say, but he did make contact. The only damage was a very, very slightly swollen lip.”

Thankfully, his staff member “grappled with this guy” before he “ran off swearing his head off basically.”

“It was just a reminder of how ugly this debate is getting,” Abbott said.

Fortunately, Abbott only sustained a fat lip from what could’ve been a horrible assault.

Alex Greenwich, a member of Australia’s parliament and head of The Equality Campaign, condemned the attack on Twitter.

For what it’s worth, the alleged assailant, a DJ named Astro Labe (can’t make this stuff up), who is also an anarchist, claims that the headbutt had nothing to do with the marriage debate.

‘And I shook his hand and I was a little bit too drunk to actually connect particularly well.

‘Apparently he got a fat lip but he didn’t have one this morning.’

Mr Abbott told reporters he suffered minor injuries and was left shocked by the encounter.

Mr Labe said he was wearing a ‘yes’ sticker supporting the same-sex marriage campaign but the attempted headbutt was inspired by a general dislike for Mr Abbott and not one issue in particular.

Regardless of the real motivation behind the assault, the crazy incident just goes to show how out of control politics has gotten, not just here in America, but all over the world.

Anatomy Of Political Violence: Charlottesville Police Chief Cites ‘Mutually Engaged Combatants’

Charlottesville Police Chief Al Thomas unpacked the events leading to violence and tragedy last weekend, providing a forensic anatomy of political violence. In his press statement, the words “mutually engaged combatants” seem to stand out.

It’s now obvious that both the “alt-right” and the counter-protesters (antifa and others) expected and welcomed violence. They did everything they could to subvert the careful plan police constructed to keep the groups apart and maintain the peace.

They didn’t want peace. They wanted headlines.

Let’s consider something for a moment here, that the leftist press would never, ever think or allow to be spoken or printed.

What if the ill-named “Unite the Right” (aka “J Crew Nazis,” “Tiki Cosplay Brigade,” “David Duke Dorks,” “Basement Brony Racists,” etc.) jackasses showed up, and nobody was there to counter-protest? What would have happened?

Would the Pepe-loving Trumpkins have suddenly gained national acceptance, added tens of thousands to their numbers, and consigned the works of William F. Buckley, Martin Luther King, Alexis de Tocqueville, Edmund Burke, Russell Kirk, and  John Stuart Mill to Fahrenheit 451, to be replaced with Ann Coulter, Milo Yiannopoulos, Jared Taylor and Matthew Heibback? (Not to mention Ayn Rand and the Mother of All Struggles: Mein Kampf.)

Does anyone really think these misled sheep are anything but the fringiest of the conspiracy-loving fringe? Yet, like moths drawn to a flame, the far-left conspiracy-loving fringe showed up with violence in its heart.

The two groups probably have more in common than they care to admit if they sat down with a bottle of cheap bumwine long enough to discuss it. For example, they probably share a despicable belief that 9/11 was either a Bush-led or Israeli conspiracy. They probably agree with the blood libel that Jews and Zionists are a pox upon the earth. They likely agree that large corporations and banks are conspiring to keep the “little people” down and broke.

And they agree that violence is the path to a new order.

The groups needed each other to supply the “them” for violence–since killing little old ladies at Walmart doesn’t win sympathy from a sympathetic press or Steve Bannon. Just like ISIS needs to behead soldiers on the streets of London and Toronto and on factory floors in Oklahoma City, both the left and right fringe need to play to their deranged base.

The left fringe shows up to incite violence even at genuinely peaceful events like campus speeches by Ben Shapiro (who could not, ever, be called “alt-right”). When they show up at an event where “mutually engaged combatants” have arrived hell-bent-for-violence, violence will erupt.

Yet the press continues to call the left fringe’s incitement “protest,” and the right fringe’s incitement “hate.” They conveniently forget about James Hodgkinson, or the litany of violent incitements and attacks Ben Domenech compiled.

Both sides are guilty–on that one point, President Trump is right. However, Trump’s refusal to disavow the support of his right fringe worshippers, and his condemnation of the press as “bad people” has destroyed the credibility of his public statement. Every time Trump condemns the right fringe, he always follows with a wink and a nod on Twitter.


The man simply can’t condemn people who love him so much, even if they are truly bad people.

And we know that they are: Truly. Bad. People.

If the leftist press really wants to end the growth of the “alt-right” cancer, they must first tell their favorite pet left fringe to stop showing up. Occam’s Razor: Not having “mutually engaged combatants” on both sides does tend to decrease the chance of violence happening.

Purge Them

As a nation and a civilized people, it seems we’re going backwards, not forwards. In 2008, Barack Obama swept into power, along with a newly-energized Democratic Party fresh from 8 years of attacking President George W. Bush and six years of bloody wars.

We knew Obama was questionable on issues of hate, racism and violence, as he faithfully attended black supremacist, anti-Semitic pastor Jeremiah Wright’s church. We knew Obama was schooled in Saul Alinsky tactics of community organizing. We knew he won both of his previous elections (before president) by knocking out his competition to run essentially unopposed. He had no voting record in the Senate to speak of–he only served a single partial term.

Obama turned out to be everything conservatives feared. He involved himself in race relations at every opportunity, always speaking about unity, but always fomenting division in his slanted views. I fervently believe that Obama’s eight years produced more police anxiety, brutality, and paranoia than there existed at any time since the early 1970s directed toward African Americans.

Now we have another political cypher in the White House, who came from a different path, without the Harvard Law pedigree, but with billions in the bank and unmatched name recognition. I believe President Trump doesn’t have a racially biased bone in his body, but he has a soft spot for police–law & order.

The left reacted by manufacturing every possible hate crime instigated by Donald Trump’s win. At the same time, they themselves resorted to violence when it served their purposes. From Arizona to Berkeley, they’ve used violence as a method to exercise a heckler’s veto over free speech, and to get camera time on the news.

Even in Washington, D.C., I witnessed camera crews setting up while “demonstrators” milled about shouting curses at inauguration guests. When the crews were ready, they started breaking windows and torching limousines.

The media has been no better at combatting this, since an enormous majority of them sympathize with the left’s causes. They’ve dutifully printed or broadcast every accusation of racism, Islamophobia and violence against LGBT individuals. Most of those accusations have turned out to be false, or even completely staged. Retractions always happened many pages back, if at all.

This isn’t to say that there aren’t genuine white racists, anti-Semites and violent homophobes out there. They certainly exist. But they’re not mainstream–or at least they shouldn’t be.

The toxic witches-brew we’ve seen has inevitably led to real political violence on a devastating scale: A man with a rifle shooting at Republican Members of Congress and their staffs on a baseball field. Now we’ve got actors talking about assassination (par for the stupid course) and Democratic officials saying they’re “glad Scalise was shot.”

My God. Are we barbarians?

There is only one answer. It’s one I don’t consider lightly because I believe free speech is precious. I don’t agree with college campuses shutting out speakers because they don’t agree with their viewpoint. I don’t agree with limiting opinion in the workplace. But there is no room for inciting political violence in a civilized nation, in the media, and in government.

Purge them.

Purge them all. Anyone who has ever condoned, incited, or agreed with violent means to promote a political aim should be removed from any government, political party, or media job–if they don’t recant publicly.

Yes, I know this rings very similar to the antics of the House Committee on Un-American Activities. It rings a lot like McCarthyism. But some guardrails are necessary to keep a civil society from breaking down into Lord of the Flies.

(As an aside, the HUAC was chaired by a Texas Democrat, Martin Dies, and sponsored in 1934 by New York Democrat Samuel Dickstein. Sen. Joe McCarthy’s anti-communism was related, but not directly tied to, the HUAC. Red-baiting was in fact a bipartisan tradition in the Cold War.)

I’m not calling for witch hunts. In age of the Internet, witch hunts aren’t required, as most statements are archived forever in digital form. If, and to the degree they exist, they should be repudiated by those who made them, or those individuals should face political humiliation, reduced employment options, and general criticism by a culture preferring to live in some form of peaceful society.

CNN did this with Reza Aslan for simply calling the president a “piece of s**t,” something he had done consistently since well before the election. Granted, that’s a nasty term to use for the POTUS, but it’s at least free speech, and far less than calls for “resistance” that can easily be interpreted as “insurrection.”

Phil Montag, the Nebraska Democrat who cheered Rep. Steve Scalise’s shooting, was fired by the state’s Democratic Party, where he was a technology chair. But others in the media and in political jobs have continued on, without bothering to edit themselves or express remorse in any way.

Television and newspaper editors continue to publish salacious pieces and loaded headlines only to “modify” them later. And the White House laughs and eggs them on. We can’t do much about Trump’s White House. If he wants to pour gasoline on the fire, it will just burn hotter–Obama did this for eight years without a single main stream media outlet calling him on it (with the possible exception of solidarity when he tried to remove Fox News from the White House).

But we should not let this trend continue. The heckler’s veto has to end, and become civilized society’s veto. We have that right, to veto individuals who, by their position, actions and speech, would make our nation more prone to violence and barbarism.

If we don’t take this into our hands through peaceful, civilized means using the power at our disposal, then it will be taken out of our hands through violent means.


This post is also published on The New Americana.