|
Post by pim on Oct 9, 2017 10:40:17 GMT 10
Scrolling, scrolling, scrolling past the welter of "hidden posts" - there are no other posts so I'd assume this is still the "we-want-a-messiah" thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2017 18:40:29 GMT 10
Copper to the node was always going to be fucked....the conservative we love capitalism has no optical fibre vision.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 15:58:00 GMT 10
Cash and Turnbull created the raid it was they that told Registered Organisations Commission to go after Shorto.
|
|
|
Post by Yassir Rebob on Oct 26, 2017 19:08:00 GMT 10
Take your Cash and Go, Talcum
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 20:00:19 GMT 10
Like that Yassir...short and too the point.... Its the government that needs investigating.
|
|
|
Post by geopol on Nov 4, 2017 13:29:47 GMT 10
To describe things in Canberra as deeply mad at the present time doesn’t quite do the unhinging justice. The government, which is now only one forced byelection in a lower house marginal seat away from genuine oblivion, has dug in for now, with the prime minister declaring there will be no formal audit of MPs, that the old gentleman’s rules must prevail, with individuals responsible for ensuring they are eligible to sit in the parliament. Ever thus, and thus it must be.
Turnbull hits out at claim Josh Frydenberg is Hungarian dual citizen Read more
Late on Friday, Malcolm Turnbull decreed Australia, or at least the political class, needed to return to being a land of common sense and the rule of law. “We must not allow ourselves to be dragged into a sort of lynch mob, witch-hunt, trial by innuendo and denunciation,” the prime minister thundered in Perth, looking rather wild eyed himself. But Turnbull’s plea for the political world to bend to his command, and not careen into full-tilt crazy is about as effective as King Canute believing he could hold back the tide.
The fact of the matter is we are currently in the middle of a rolling eligibility audit, and have been since the middle of this year. With talk around the government that another three lower house MPs could have eligibility problems, that informal audit seems likely to persist, whether a process is established to try and make that audit more orderly, or whether it isn’t. For months, we’ve had citizens leading this audit, and journalists also on the case, looking at records, asking questions of parliamentarians likely to have issues, taking steps to flush people out. So we are already there. The pent-up momentum in this process can’t be halted by random decree of a prime minister, returning from a quick trip to Israel, only to find his government has managed to create an even bigger shambles this week than it did last week, when the Michaelia Cash police tip-off debacle seemed like it would be impossible to eclipse. Friday’s performance looked a whole lot a prime minister like thundering at the moon. The stress in the system is understandable. This week we had the Stephen Parry shambles, followed by the aftershocks of who knew what, when. Analysis Momentum builds for citizenship inquiry but MPs unclear on details Questions over Josh Frydenberg’s status and Stephen Parry’s late admission have raised calls ‘to rip the Band-Aid off’ the citizenship issue. The question is: can anyone figure out how? Read more
Playing out around that event were separate eddies of activity, which could just be chaos, because sometimes chaos is dressed up by plotters and malcontents as the inspired acts by great men of history, when it’s really just wild twitching and lurching and self indulgence. But the various breadcrumb trails look a lot like deliberate efforts to heighten a sense of crisis around the government as this tortuous political year builds to a close – behaviour which one Liberal characterised to me this week as “a controlled tsunami against Turnbull”. One reads in the Australian that Turnbull’s supporters, in this case, Scott Ryan and James McGrath, are “crab walking” away from the prime minister. Another Turnbull loyalist, Christopher Pyne, is also an apparent target. Advertisement
inRead invented by Teads Advertisement
Relations inside the Coalition are bent out of shape. Local factors in the New England byelection – mainly the need to put some distance between himself and the roiling Liberals which the good folks of greater Tamworth now perceive as children trapped in the bodies of adults – make it desirable that Barnaby Joyce hurl off some right-left combinations. Meanwhile, the Victorian Liberal Kevin Andrews notes archly that the prime minister is the prime minister “at the moment”, and various MPs share their deep feelings about the desirability of the audit the prime minister has attempted to shut down because the government has already lost its working majority and is just two steps and a gust of wind away from the cliff face. God almighty, what a mess.
The stories you need to read, in one handy email Read more
Assuming the current pot-stirring at the margins of the latest government cock up isn’t just random acts of chaos, chaos being the new #auspol normal – one really does have to ask what the game plan is here? As ragged as Turnbull currently looks, do people in the government seriously think another change of leadership will make the Coalition’s fate any different at the next federal election, that a change of figure head can deliver anything much at all? Are we really going to ride this mad cycle again, with the media made hostage to grand plans of delusional people? Before we all stride off together once again into bat country, tell me, who is the new centre-right political genius, just hovering in the wings, waiting to be unleashed? Who is the hidden King Canute of Australians politics, who can subdue the waves, tame the shrieking, ride the raging media cycle with the elegance of a Melbourne Cup jockey, make colleagues want to work together to achieve something for the country, and not dissolve into panic and acrimony in the face of adversity? Advertisement
After we identify the miracle worker, can we then identify the magic formula that makes a political party rebuild and cohere constructively when they tear down a leader? Does anyone have this magic formula? Because it’s been in seriously short supply over the past 10 years. Looking at the situation dispassionately, you do have to wonder whether any of the professional malcontents have a plan for government, or whether the various low-level plots and schemes is actually a plan to drive the Coalition into opposition, where scores can better be settled. Could politics really be that nihilistic and pointless? Sadly, we all sense it actually could. Topics Australian politics Katharine Murphy on politics Malcolm Turnbull
|
|
|
Post by geopol on Nov 4, 2017 13:44:57 GMT 10
I love nutty Aus politics.......I'm having so much fun, just like someone else.......
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2017 7:37:55 GMT 10
The only way out of the mad citizenship saga is to have an election and...bring in Labor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2017 7:12:51 GMT 10
The law isn't the problem its no big deal to jump through the hoops and remove all other citizenships.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 6, 2017 7:25:26 GMT 10
It's interesting that the people now complaining the loudest about the High Court's "black letter" ruling on Section 44 of the Constitution as it relates to the citizenship issue are members of the Coalition. Barnaby Joyce mutters darkly about the High Court parsing Section 44 line by line down to the last comma and full stop and milks his "victim" status for all it's worth. Works a treat in his electorate of New England and I'm sure he's a shoo-in in the bye-election late this month. Having said that, wouldn't it be wonderful if I'm wrong! But I digress ... Presumably what Barnaby would have preferred was a more proactive High Court which was prepared to be take a more creative and activist approach to Section 44 rather than the literalist "black letter" approach that Their Honours took last week. Oh the irony! Take the time to read an address given by one John Winston Howard back in 2009 in WA. This was the 2009 Menzies Lecture www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/politics/menzies-lecture-by-john-howard-full-text/news-story/d579cb42e24f5e9d9b1414a844571a2a I won't c & p it here but the link will take you there. Howard's lecture at the University of Western Australia focussed on his opposition to a Bill of Rights and how this inevitably led to judicial "activism". Judges were there to enforce the law, lectured Howard, and the job of lawmaking is the preserve of democratically elected parliaments. Sounds good. Who could argue with the division of power between the legislature and the judiciary? Except of course that Howard was being more than a tad disingenuous since the Australian version of the Westminster system has delivered the weakest legislature and the most powerful executive of all the countries that use the Westminster parliamentary system. So it isn't about where the dividing line is between Parliament and the courts but between the Executive Government (i.e. Prime Minister & Cabinet) and the High Court. High Court judges are constitutionally required to retire at age 75 and the responsibility of judicial appointments to fill High Court vacancies falls, quite properly, to the Government of the day - specifically the Attorney-General but in reality it's the Prime Minister. During his 12 years as Prime Minister John Howard decided to make good on the views he expressed in his 2009 Menzies Lecture - views that he'd always held so his 2009 lecture was more a look back than a look ahead (which pretty well sums up John Howard!!) - and as High Court judges retired he replaced them with "black letter" judges more to his liking. Not for Howard were these leftovers from the Hawke/Keating years of activist judges with their creative approach to the Constitution. No, Howard wanted judges who'd parse the Constitution literally and enforce it without "interpreting" it. So Australia got the High Court that Howard wanted to bequeath it: a High Court dedicated to "black letter" literalist readings of the Constitution. Enter the current fuss over Section 44. It comes before the Howard-appointed High Court and they fulfil the brief given to them when they were appointed by the Howard Government: they hand down a "black letter" literalist judgement - and Barnaby is out on his ear! Just when the Coalition could have used a more creative reading of the Constitution by a more activist High Court - they run smack bang into the Howard High Court with all of the Howard Stodge! Serves them right!! This Section 44 mess is a political mess. Not a constitutional mess. We don't need a referendum to change it and in any case the Australian people will not vote to make life less inconvenient for politicians. We live with Section 44 and candidates for parliament do their due diligence and take a bit more care filling out their nomination forms when standing for Parliament. There's nothing wrong with being a dual citizen - hell, over 50% of the Australian population are either dual citizens i.e. they hold Australian citizenship plus the citizenship of another country through their family background - but if you ask the average Australian punter if a member of the Australian parliament should be "Australian only" what do you think they will say? There's another way: the sooner there's a federal election that consigns the hapless and hopeless Turnbull Government to the dustbin of history, and delivers a Shorten Labor Government, the better. Australia doesn't need another fucking referendum that sucks the oxygen out of that referendum we should have held this year but didn't - and I'm talking about the Aboriginal Recognise issue - and shoves blackfellas to the back of the queue again! Australia needs a Shorten Labor Government.
|
|
|
Post by geopol on Nov 7, 2017 4:41:25 GMT 10
Given the feelings held by so many towards politicians I doubt there will be any changes to sec 44 for a long time, so we may as well get used to the law and the great nonsense that will continue to come down on politicians who do not comply and are found out.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 7, 2017 5:37:08 GMT 10
Absolutely spot on, Geopol. Given the bad odour most Australian voters hold politicians in I very much doubt that there's a lot of sympathy for the plight of politicians caught up in the briars and thickets of Section 44. Any move to foist a constitutional referendum on the Australian voters to alter, amend or abolish Section 44 will be given short shrift. In fact I'd say that with the double majority requirement such a referendum would be massively defeated in every state. A constitutional referendum with a compulsory vote would of necessity involve a campaign. So in addition to a YES campaign the dialectic of politics would generate its symbiotic opposite which is a NO campaign. And NO always has an easier job than YES because while YES has to prove its case, all NO has to do is sow enough confusion and doubt for enough voters to throw up their hands and vote NO. Works a treat every time. Why should the average Australian voter vote for a change that gets politicians off the hook?
You're right Geopol, we're stuck with Section 44 so the politicians had better learn to live with it.
The referendum this country should be preparing for is the one to recognise the place of this continent's First Peoples (plural intended) within this nation's founding document. Years go by and the Recognise referendum continually gets shoved to the back of the queue as the oxygen continually gets sucked out of it - most notably this year by the disgraceful, homophobic and entirely unnecessary same sex marriage postal survey. And now the Section 44 distraction. This is a racist country.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2017 6:25:06 GMT 10
The Queen should be an Australian citizen Don....then thats a different issue with being a republic.. Don't have the figures I would think that as Aussieland being a long standing nation of immigrants there wouldn't be much difference with Federal parliament MP's citizenship status prior to the current debacle going way back. It was decided long ago on that basis of immigration and dual nationality to be a Fed MP one has to sign figuratively a blood oath of loyalty given decisions made in parliament include matters of war....section 44 its not such a bad law in that regard. The law isn't the issue it was the slovenly nature of political parties failing to check who they want as MP's....Labor was on the ball with that one.
|
|
|
Post by geopol on Nov 11, 2017 16:43:04 GMT 10
Alexander's gone. Things get more exciting and sillier. labour is going to push its agenda and we could get one royal commission in a couple of weeks after parliament resumes and God only knows what will happen with SSM. Great times for politics but the best is that the Liberals are going to tear themselves apart and maybe disappear into oblivion where they belong.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 13, 2017 0:26:00 GMT 10
Alexander's gone. Things get more exciting and sillier. labour is going to push its agenda and we could get one royal commission in a couple of weeks after parliament resumes and God only knows what will happen with SSM. Great times for politics but the best is that the Liberals are going to tear themselves apart and maybe disappear into oblivion where they belong. Dunno about a royal commission. Into what? The fact that a number of MPs and senators are dual nationals in common with 50% or more of the rest of the population? Wow! You mean holding dual citizenship is a reprehensible thing now? The Constitution then? That's more the role of a constitutional convention and that takes up a lot of time and energy. Not a reason not to hold one, I agree. Personally I'd be all for Section 44 being looked at in detail by a constitutional convention - that is after we've dealt with the major constitutional elephant, make that mammoth - in the room which is the indigenous Recognise issue. I'm afraid we're stuck with Section 44 as it stands for quite some time. And let's face it. If the politicians can't fill out a form properly why do we let them hound gormless Centrelink clients who make a mistake in their paperwork? If you ask the Australian voter to vote YES to a change in the Constitution that would make it easier for politicians to fill out a form how do you think the Australian voter might respond? You're right about the question mark over SSM. Quite apart from the religious fruitcake end of the Coalition girding itself to move 100 "pastry cook" and "religious freedom" amendments, quite apart from the bizarre convolutions of logic that has Tony Abbott and his gaggle of gobbledegook-spouting gringos maintaining that a loss for the NO vote in the postal survey on SSM gives the NO people the entitlement to be the framers and drafters of the SSM legislation, the parlous constitutional state of the 45th parliament with members and senators dropping like ninepins because of Section 44 may well mean that any legislation, and that includes SSM, enacted by the 45th parliament could be the subject to a High Court challenge.
|
|
|
Post by geopol on Nov 13, 2017 7:24:20 GMT 10
Into the Banks....I think changes should be made to #44 but the people are hardly likely to vote to make things easier for aspiring politicians however desirable that my be given the madness that we have now. It seems the Libs now have the numbers to send ALP uncertainties to be sent to the Court, so let us now sit back and comment on the next, and I suspect the most vicious, art of this extraordinary campaign to destroy and eradicate and, best of all, take no prisoners.Such fun dressed up as stupidity and farce.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2017 9:12:44 GMT 10
Shorto is not that popular as he doesn't have the gift of selling a vision, hopefully he can turn that around when he becomes PM......sort of like Johnnie Howards. Shorto should get of the social liberal band wagon Labor is on that mo and declare himself a social democrat and the people will respond with approval.. And those that say leadership popularity doesn't count are the social liberal fuckwits.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2017 3:09:14 GMT 10
Now for the analysis from the pundits including Pimball's....when it boils down to it all Turnbull had to say if Alexander loses Bennelong then Shorto will be the PM and the was enough to dissuade the punters who were 50/50 at the time.
Needing a 9.3% swing Kristina Keneally gave it a fair shot and attained a 4.3% swing such as it goes if not for Shorto she may have achieved the 9.3+ swing needed to win...Conclusion Shorto is a liability for Labor.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2017 12:15:15 GMT 10
How's the homeless people levels going....??
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 3, 2018 7:47:58 GMT 10
Certainly Lucy Gichuhi is a boost for Turnbuckles and good for her at least she didn't fall to the Baryardi cult, the criticism is she is coming from Evangelical Conservative Christian Family First which despite the intelligence are people in climate change denial.
Climate Change is the singly most important issue facing the world today, yet because the fossil industry owns the coalition and Labor to a lesser degree at least the party is honest enough, not deny climate change is happening which has the conservatives lying about the issue just to maintain profits for their mates before the planet.
Not only is climate change denial morally and ethically wrong it is very much criminally wrong resulting in mass murder and destruction while the fossil industry sucks every last dollar they can while the planet gasps its last breath.
When Christians monotheist et al in the belief nothing in this life matters paradise awaits them while supporting this profiteering climate change denial they are indeed supporting an evil.
There is no ignorance or we didn't know better excuses about climate change and given the criminal culpability the fossil industry has with destroying the planet what would God say to those that aided and abetted those that destroyed his creation...being a smiting God...you will burn in hell or reside in purgatory....as no doubt these people will destroy heavenly paradise if there was a buck in it.
The Christian churches, Jewish temples and Islamic mosques deny climate change because they are seeking to profit from climate change as life on earth becomes difficult to say the least people will turn to religion and its promised paradise's in the after life as a solution, God will make it all better.
Reality is when you destroy your environment such as fouling the water you drink, you are destroying life itself.
Greed is not good its a sin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 6:03:53 GMT 10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2018 16:43:05 GMT 10
Lots of casual jobs fueled by immigration, no wage growth and speculative agri biz...forecast ...boom and bust as its all on borrowed money.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 7:06:06 GMT 10
Figures look good yet is it as is seems...youth unemployment remains high and one sees a lot of employment in infrastructure spending such as big irrigation pipelines out west, homes for immigrants etc can one be assured that these a long term jobs once the infrastructure is built.
|
|
|
Post by pim on May 13, 2018 23:59:01 GMT 10
Oh just vote Liberal Phil. Labor can do without your "fair weather friend" bandwagon hopping fake "progressivism" in any case. Vote for the Coalition Phil. You know you want to
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2018 7:17:48 GMT 10
Not much in it.....Essential polling....The approval ratings for the two leaders exhibited movement inside the poll’s margin of error, with 40% approving of the job Turnbull is doing (up 1% from last month) and 42% disapproving (steady), while 37% approved of Shorten’s performance (up 2%) and 41% disapproved (down 2%).
|
|