No Job For Georgina- (Not one of Labour’s Nomenklatura)

Poor old transsexual commie Georgina Bayer has fallen on hard times and can’t get a job. According to an article by Jack Barlowe in the Dominion Post, she’s broke and living off the unemployment benefit in a one-bedroom granny flat.

When she was flying high, she was Mayor of Carterton, (elected by fools), and then became a Labour party MP. (again elected by fools)

She wails-

“While I have no formal qualifications, apparently my 20 years involved with politics … means nothing.

Ms Beyer admits she has been told to “lower her sights”, but says some jobs are off the agenda.

“I do draw the line at being a crew member at McDonald’s. I’m a little bit past that sort of thing.”

Still bludging off the taxpayer. If there’s a job at McDonald’s she should take it or have her dole stopped. Other people are working there to provide this commie with an income. Why not her?

Apparently there’s no openings at the UN, which is where some other equally useless dropkick commies have gone of late.

Former MP Georgina Beyer unemployed

43 thoughts on “No Job For Georgina- (Not one of Labour’s Nomenklatura)

  1. “…my 20 years involved with politics … means nothing…”

    No, it means you are FIT for NOTHING.

    Like

  2. Amen to that Os.
    Having helped make deviancy the norm she finds that deviancy is no longer a marketable commodity. Ain’t that a bitch?

    Like

  3. Is there anything more sad than a washed up ex MP, ex mayor, transexual Marxist who is out of work, unemployable and has fallen on hard times?!

    Probably … I’m picking a one legged version of the above might qualify :mrgreen:

    Like

  4. Didn’t Hillary Clinton recently pass some sort of UN accord on GLBTI human rights ?

    BTW, the “I” in that list is new, what the hell is that ?

    Like

  5. “Is there anything more sad than a washed up ex MP, ex mayor, transexual Marxist who is out of work, unemployable and has fallen on hard times?”
    Yes.
    NO washed up ex MP, ex mayor, transexual Marxist who is out of work, unemployable and has fallen on hard times.

    Like

  6. Angus, apparently the ‘I’ stands for “Intersex” – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex – make of that what you will.

    Hermaphrodites seem to make up the main portion of this grouping. So on that basis it is probably the ONLY genuine [and medical] “condition” of those who profess to fall into one of the five of LGBTI so called ‘orientations’.

    LGBT are, IMHO, simply labels applied to afford and excuse perverted sexual practices and are completely subjective. Intersex individuals seem to be [on the whole] the ONLY objective and medically based condition.

    Like

  7. She could always get a job cleaning public bogs. I do not think she would find the smell of shit all that distasteful.

    Like

  8. I refuse to call men who pretend to be women, “she”. These people mock us by their actions and actively work to create a society in which women and children don’t matter, and it’s all about sexual gratification. They live in a fantasy world, only they want the world to participate in their fantasy. I refuse.

    Like

  9. “… actively work to create a society in which women and children don’t matter …”

    Or men for that matter, Lucia.
    These perverts distort both normal male and female sexual roles; attack the family, the role of parents and biblical marriage; and create confusion in the minds of ckildren as to what actually constitutes normal male/female relationships. And we wonder why so many of our kids are screwed up.

    Like

  10. There’s always a job available for Georgina in K’Rd if she chooses to take it. Besides, it’s better pay compared to flipping burgers at Mc Donald, which is something that she doesn’t want to do.

    Like

  11. Thanks, Oswald.

    Erikter – he’s not a woman!

    Kris, actually, people such as George love men. It’s all about men. Men for sex – not men as fathers and protectors – unless they are protectors of those such as George.

    Like

  12. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

    Not to say that anyone else in the Labour party would be fit for actual productive employment. Bunch of unionist lackeys, ex heroin addicts, public servants and university lecturers.

    Like

  13. People like Georgina are not the problem. It is people that what to portray them as normal. People like her, him or it want a sex change and the government pays for it. Did any of you see the case of the young boy with buck teeth that protruded about 2 cm? It took a public campaign and fund raising for him to get the operation. Now I know some on this blog would say if a child is born to poor parents that he or she should die if the parents cannot afford to pay. My point is that it is outrageous that someone who has strange sexual desires should come ahead of a young boy who is fortunately going to get an operation he Shula have had years ago.

    Like

  14. Chuck,

    I agree, that is outrageous. I’d not heard of that boy, and I certainly don’t believe children should die if parents cannot afford to pay. The amount of money taken in by the Government to look after people should go towards those most in need. And those with strange sexual desires need counselling, not operations.

    Kris,

    We’re making two different points. 🙂

    What’s generally forgotten in our modern society is that men tend to have more choices. Children are dependent on strong families and women are dependent on men who look out for them. Tear all that down and men will typically be ok in comparison.

    Like

  15. “he’s not a woman!”

    I agree. Cutting your penis off, getting breast implants and estrogen injections does not make you a woman.

    Like

  16. … I might get easily confused and hit the damn button at the wrong time, but at least I’m not a hateful, homophobic, misogynistic know-nothing bigot like some of the posters here. Who are you people? Child-beating fundamentalist christians I bet.

    Like

  17. “Wow, this blog is really full of nut jobs.”
    Yup. You and Marty make a fine couple.

    “Child-beating fundamentalist christians I bet.”
    And I BET you really hate intolerance and bigotry too, right?

    Like

  18. Actually Angus, there are some fundamentalist christians who do not beat their children and who live gentle, peaceable lives. Good on them. Then there are those who do beat their children and who hate minorities and react violently to challengers of their brainwashed beliefs.

    From my reading here, I see some people expressing sheer hatred of people simply because they are homosexual.

    And others who do not understand that a transsexual is not a homosexual. Mind you, that might be a complex distinction for a thick bigot.

    Like

  19. Marty-

    You’re the one who is brainwashed. You come on here sounding exactly like the standard model state school educated secular progressive robot.

    Whirr click- “bigot”

    Whirr click- ‘homophobic”

    Whirr click- “misogynistic”

    Whirr click- “fundamentalist”

    Whirr click- “hatred”

    Whirr click- “child beating”

    Whirr click- “minorities”

    All standard socialist programmed responses.

    As well, you contradict yourself. Your allegations are all based on false premises. Your perceptions are stunted and shallow and tired and old.

    You’ve got nothing but a government programmed shock horror response that identifies you as someone totally incapable of thinking for yourself.

    Just an ignorant and blinkered spiritually bankrupt humanoid that is the typical outcome of decades of cultural Marxism in the West.

    Like

  20. To be fair, would *you* eat a burger prepared by this odious creature?

    A serial trougher and all-round waste of space oxygen thief, this scrote evidently lacks even the gumption and self-discipline to offer to put something back and keep busy by offering to clean the bogs at a local community group’s offices.

    Like

  21. I personally do not dislike homosexuals let along hate them. The reasons for them being the way they are are varied and complex. Many no doubt have been childhood victims. My issues is portraying something that is bad for society as desirable. It is common sense that if you promote something you get more of it. I certainly object to homosexuality being promoted as normal to schoolchildren. It makes them more vulnerable to deviants.

    Like

  22. “What’s generally forgotten in our modern society is that men tend to have more choices. Children are dependent on strong families and women are dependent on men who look out for them. Tear all that down and men will typically be ok in comparison.”

    Lucia, you’ve obviously never heard of the feminist/lesbian agenda to disenfranchise men [among other things]? – although I find that hard to believe.

    You might like to read Ian Wishart’s excellent article “The Velvet Underground” [see below for link to PDF article and quoted excerpt] which highlights the lesbian/feminist cabal sought not only on attacking the family and biblical marriage but the role of men in society as well.

    At the end of the day, Lucia, if these evil harpies have their way everyone will lose; women, children, the family … AND men.

    Surely you can see that?!

    Read on – from an old KB comment I made back in 2010:

    Ian Wishart’s article [PDF] on the Feminist/Lesbian “sisterhood” which has operated within the Labour Party for the last 30+ years:

    The Velvet Underground – Labour’s quiet revolutionaries

    [Excerpt]

    Despite that, Goodger argued that merely capturing people’s hearts and minds didn’t go far enough, that “the sisterhood” had to take control of the Government from within. “The deep roots the [Labour] party has in the working class, through the unions, makes it objectively an ally of the women’s liberation movement. Feminists working within the Labour Party can do much to further the cause of women’s liberation.” Again, John Tamihere’s account of what has happened to Labour eerily reflects that 1973 plan of action. “Oh yeah, there’s definitely a ‘machine’ all right. It’s formidable. It’s got apparatus and activists in everything from the PPTA all the way through. It’s actually even built a counterweight to the Roundtable – Businesses for Social Responsibility. Its intelligence-gathering capabilities are second to none.” Having those activists in place, with the power to write laws and decide what children will be taught in schools, is a dream come true for what Opposition MPs are calling “the lesbian/feminist cabal” running the Labour Government.

    It’s worth reading the whole article.
    And it’s scary just how much of what was planned over thirty years ago has become a reality over the intervening years; much of it during Labour’s last three terms under Helen Clark – one of the original architects of many of these changes.

    Like

  23. Being a flamboyant ponce is akin to having a tattooed face, in the job market. Almost all employers write you off as almost certainly ‘too high maintainence’

    It was about 60-40 when I was hiring staff- 60% trade competence and 40% compatability with my crew. I had no use for players of games, shit-stirrers or cry-babies. Curious George is finding out this is the case with most private employers.
    Probably got on the public service black list, too. (you can bet your bottom dollar there is one, although that will NEVER be admitted)

    As with the scribble-faces, this is a self-inflicted condition. No sympathy.

    Like

  24. Kris,

    Read it years ago.

    Feminism of that type is demonic, but it’s purpose is not to disenfranchise men, because when it comes down to it the State will fail before that happens in any real sense. It’s real purpose is to create war between the sexes, and to destroy family life. And when the State fails, men and women will be where they normally are in pagan societies. The men will be much better off and the women will lose their fickle protector (the State) and be at the mercy of men who really don’t know how to treat them. Feminism is far more destructive for women than men.

    Like

  25. Lucia,

    A lot of men who have lost their families through the family court; through their [ex] wives embracing the feminist world-view and subsequently poisoning their children’s minds against their fathers, and/or preventing fathers having access to their kids … might tend to disagree with you regarding men not being the victims of the feminist/lesbian agenda.

    And the fact that suicide rates are higher for men than women is also, IMO, an indicator of exactly how disenfranchised many men feel and are made by an increasingly feminsed society. And lets not get into the whole area of how genuinely masculine men are increasingly frowned upon and continue to receive pressure to conform to some metro-sexual fascimile of what it is to be a real man.

    I could go on about the many other disadvantages men suffer [all men are rapists, all men are paedophiles, numerous false allegations of rape (46% of all rape allegations IIRC)] … but I won’t.

    Like

  26. Kris,

    Not totally disagreeing with all of that, however, you need to stand back from it all and see the bigger picture.

    Men who have lost their families through family courts first lost their families through not living their vocation of husband. It takes two to destroy a marriage, not one. The biggest victims here are not men, but the children who do not have the maturity to deal with the family breaking apart. The men are grown-ups – they had control of that situation before it all disintegrated.

    All those other “disadvantages” are trivial. Buying into this whole notion of victimhood effectively emasculates men. You should think of them as challenges.

    Like

  27. “Men who have lost their families through family courts first lost their families through not living their vocation of husband..”
    What??? Men haven’t lost their families through that Nazi tribunal because women have made false allegations against them, and often coached the children to do the same? Men haven’t lost their families because the family court is steeped in feminazi ideology?
    Men haven’t lost their familes through the family court because female lawyers haven’t colluded with women to hide the truth?
    Get a grip, Lucyna. That’s an absurd, unjust and inaccurate comment.
    And for real absurdity, “Buying into this whole notion of victimhood effectively emasculates men. You should think of them as challenges.”
    Think of them as challenges, eh..that’s a bit of trite pc-speak if ever I heard it. One doesn’t have to “buy into” anything in order to be a victim. And while your trivilising this, consider the case of a man who had his son kidnapped by the mother and taken overseas–the mother having forged his signature on the passport application. The man was subsequently told by lawyers and several politicians that the Hague convention was only of any use–and largely only enforced–in the case of a father taking a child from the mother.
    Spare me the glib generalities about what men should think, feel and do. I don’t believe you have a clue.

    Like

  28. Thanks for responding to Lucia, KG.
    I saw her comment prior to signing off last night, but thought I’d sleep on it before deciding whether to reply or not. I really wonder Lucia took the time to read Ian Wishart’s article I linked to above – which highlights the concerted attack on men by the feminist/lesbian cabal over the last 30+ years – and which picked up on many of the points both you and I have raised.

    And Lucia,
    I think I actually have a pretty good perspective of “the bigger picture”. If anything it is you who needs to re-evaluate your perspective on this issue. Sometimes I really wonder whether you live in the real world with many of the things you come out with.

    If you can’t see that the role of men as both the LEADERS of the family and broader society is the FIRST area of attack by feminists/lesbians – that by destroying the role of men as leaders you essentially destroy marriage, the family, and the role of women by default – then YOU need to realise that YOU actually assist this feminist/lesbian agenda.

    And sadly, like KG said, I too believe you don’t really have a clue. For the sake of your sons [I believe you have two] I hope you put some effort into remediating this …

    Like

  29. I was that father, Kris, and since it happened I’ve heard countless first-hand accounts of similar occurrences. I feel pretty bloody angry about the injustices perpetrated against men in the service of the feminist agenda.
    It makes me wonder…if my son had died of an illness -say – would people have the nerve to offer the platitudes Lucia does in her comment? Of course not. One would be a tragedy, and the other? A mere injustice against a man.

    Like

  30. KG,

    Before it gets to the family court, when the relationship is breaking down, that is the period of time I am talking about. You aren’t seriously saying that you had no responsibility whatsoever in the breakdown in your marriage and it was all your wife’s fault? Seriously?

    Like

  31. No I’m not saying that and neither did I infer it. So you’re right–I’m not “seriously saying that”.
    But shared fault is a damn long way from “Men who have lost their families through family courts first lost their families through not living their vocation of husband..”

    Like

  32. It’s perfectly possible–in fact inevitable–that a man can do his best as a husband and still fall short, at least in his wife’s eyes, since she brings her own set of faults and expectations to the marriage.
    Your dogmatic, thoughtless assumption outlined above has to rank as one of the most simplistic and unjust comments I’ve seen on the subject.

    Like

  33. KG,

    You’re right in your last comment.

    I’m sorry, I didn’t want this to be personal and reacted in my last comment rather than taking to the time to think about how best to communicate what it was that I was trying to say.

    Like

  34. Kris,

    Back when that article was published, I was blogging about associated issues. As an example, this post: Inferiority of Women. Notice the date, 29 May 2005 – same time period that the Investigate article was published. I even quote the Green blog in my post where they mention the Investigate article:

    The latest issue of Investigate magazine talks darkly about a lesbian/feminist (same thing, apparently) plot that infiltrated the Labour Party in the 1970s and then set about feminising New Zealand society, crushing the nuclear family, and taking ownership of children from parents and giving it to the state.

    I’ve read that article. I’ve been reading about all those issues mentioned in the article and thinking about them for years. I don’t miss the point at all, I just refuse to play by the rules. That’s the only way you can beat social engineers – refuse to play. Unfortunately, once you get to the family court, it’s too late. Men need to do their darnedest not to get there. Whatever it takes, basically. Heroic effort and all. Stop allowing them to define who and what you are – they’ve won if you do.

    Like

  35. Lucia,
    Why is it that “Men need to do their darnedest not to get there [family court]”, but you fail to even mention any equal responsibility on the part of women?

    And of course your earlier statement “… actively work to create a society in which women and children don’t matter …” – which highlights ONLY women and children but fails to mention men even entering your equation.

    After KG and myself outlining the issues I think you still completely miss the point.

    I could mention the feminising of the education system; hardly any male teachers, and the resultant and endemic failing of male students – but I feel you are so myopic regarding this issue that no matter how much evidence is presented you still wouldn’t get it.

    With your views I imagine your sons are going to enter the world already pre-programmed to accept that no matter what goes down in their relationships with women THEY will ALWAYS be at fault, and the woman will bear no responsibility. I just hope for their sakes their father, and other male role models, will give them a balanced perspective about how they fit into the world, and what it is to be a man.

    Like

  36. Lucia, do you also think that men should have to put up with being assaulted by their female partners or wives because the criminal justice system is also very bias against men?

    A woman convicted of a premeditated murder can be eligible for parole after 2 years and 8 months.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1112/S00222/lack-of-consistency-in-sentencing-for-murder-in-new-zealand.htm

    July 2011. Jacqueline Wihongi took her conviction for the murder of her partner Vivian Hirini to the Court of Appeal. The reason for the murder? Wihongi had been the victim of violence in an abusive fifteen year relationship with Hirini. However it took two to tango and such was their history of violence that Hirini had already lost an eye to Wihongi after being hit by her with a bottle. At the trial the police submitted over 500 pages of police reports of domestic disputes between the two. Wihongi had been just the second person convicted of murder in New Zealand to escape the mandatory ‘life’ sentence of ten years on the grounds that in Justice John Wild’s view it would be manifestly unjust due to her “history of victimhood”. This was despite the fact that her stabbing him in the chest was deemed by the court to be pre-meditated. The Court of Appeal deemed Wild’s sentence of just eight years (eligible for parole after two years and eight months) was too lenient and increased it to twelve years but also refused to impose the mandatory life sentence so Wihongi will be eligible for parole in four years.

    Like

Comments are closed.