Stop, I want to get off

[Mofra]

Why won't you answer the questions? Because you can't? Is that why you've resorted to personal attacks? Islamaphobes, homophobes and crooks tend to get irational like that, when questioned directly.

You can tell alot about a man by the company he keeps.

What are you talking about?

I'm not making personal attacks - you however are equating me to "Islamaphobes, homophobes and crooks" - amazing hypocrisy making personal attacks like that. Why not take your own advice?

I fundamentally disagree with Lambie's outbursts and any form of bigotry (any cursory glance at my posting history would make that obvious, given the vitriol attracted by the hard right bigots who spew forth islamaphobia on the SRP board) but don't think that Xenophon, who pre-dates Lambie in the senate for many years, should be solely judged because he negotiates with cross-benchers (as all senators so at times) - but of course that would form part of a mature, rational discussion which you clearly seem hell-bent on avoiding.

 

[The Speaker]

I am still waiting to hear how Xenophon is an Islamaphobe.

 

[little graham]

What are you talking about?



I fundamentally disagree with Lambie's outbursts and any form of bigotry (any cursory glance at my posting history would make that obvious, given the vitriol attracted by the hard right bigots who spew forth islamaphobia on the SRP board)

I agree fully, as you know by posting there. His stunt in a Malaysian airport was a window to his soul. Why is he more concerned with their electoral process than ours? Right now it is never more evident with the donations to the libs and the unquestioned support of them from the media, that it is in trouble.

Good men only befriend other good men, not homophobes, not islmaphobes

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

People have addressed what you have said, and they have not attacked you as you claim.

If you write like this in your letters to Xenophon, I imagine he hasn't given you or your issues the time of day. Is that why you are so against him?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I agree fully, as you know by posting there. His stunt in a Malaysian airport was a window to his soul. Why is he more concerned with their electoral process than ours?

He was there as part of an 'election observer' delegation. From the Sydney Morning Herald (2013)

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...phon-detained-in-malaysia-20130216-2eji6.html

...Senator Xenophon said he had visited Malaysia previously at the invitation of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, participating in the elections observer group last year.

‘‘We found there are some serious systemic concerns about the Malaysian elections that are coming up. They are due to be called any day,’’ he said.

Senator Xenophon said he was participating in a delegation with other Australian MPs including Liberal Mal Washer, Nationals senator John Williams and ALP MP Steve Georganas. They were due to fly out on Monday...

 

[Mofra]

His stunt in a Malaysian airport was a window to his soul. Why is he more concerned with their electoral process than ours?

I don't think a senator leading one (out of presumably, many) joint senate committees necessarily means they care more about another nation's democratic process than ours (unless you have other evidence for that claim)?

Good men only befriend other good men, not homophobes, not islmaphobes

I don't think he's "befriended" Lambie - a working relationship out of necessity is something people do in their careers.
I often work quiet closely with a lawyer whose work I appreciate, however he is a rusted-on Lib voter so we are politically opposed. I am therefore a Lib under your hypothesis?

I disagree - a fundamental Dubya-esque "with us or against us" philosophy dumbs down issues far too much to remain accurate. Should no negotiation at all occur in the senate?

 

[little graham]

It was clearly obvious to a lot of people how democracy was being manipulated during the years leading up to Abbot's election. It was clear he was given a free run by Murdoch and Reinhardt. Any knowledgeable man would tell you that it was never going to end well. Any man who went to another country and criticized their democracy while this was happening, can not to be someone you can trust. Many have also noted who has been very quiet since abbot got elected.Quiet about all the lies and political stunts. Many are also very aware of the attacks on science and the environment by the Abbott gov. These attacks have far reaching implications to the river Murray. You would expect any politician who got elected on environmental policy would have something to say about this. Yet the man in question has been silent about this.

By the company he keeps, his actions and lack of action, he is a fraud and a hypocrite. They call it bigotry when you criticize another race or religion for doing the same things you do.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Xenophon has not been quiet. He recently worked with Labor and other Independents to reverse the financial planners regulations, much to the embarrassment of Abbott's govt.

But back on topic:

Have to say that for the first time in my life, if a federal election were held tomorrow I think I'd genuinely cast a donkey vote.

I just have zero interest in participating in this democratic "system".

We have two parties, neither has any polices, neither has any vision or leadership. They just make populist slogans, no matter how contradictory they are, and the other side just opposes because they're the opposition...

I would disagree that Labor represented the above when in govt. NDIS, the NBN, Gonski, a price on Carbon, etc were visionary policies. Just because Labor hasn't brought out a bunch of new visions in the 12 months Shorten has been Opposition Leader doesn't mean they won't do so. Abbott and his style of politics has been and still is the nadir of policy development in Australia. Labor is justified in 3 different ways when saying 'no'. (1) Abbott doesn't have a mandate for most of his policies as he didn't mention them pre-election (2) Abbott said 'no' to everything when in Opposition (3) his ill-thought out and contradictory policies (e.g. austerity a must, but $250M on Chaplains in schools???) deserve it.

Abbott will soon be gone, and maybe Turnbull will feel free enough of threats from the right to stop claiming his NBN-lite version is better. Certainly Murdoch won't whinge about his lefty tendencies this time around, since he can see the writing on the wall post-Queensland.

And to be fair, the Liberals do have a vision. It is just one which is borrowed from the right-wingers in America and the UK and most people in Australia don't like it. Trickle-down theories have been shown to be false on a national scale (on a global scale the giving of low tax to rich people or corporations has been very successful for a few small countries at the expense of others - especially large, developed nations like us) and so all the BS about giving the rich tax breaks and hand-outs because they're 'job-creators' hasn't worked.

 

[Admiral Byng]

And to be fair, the Liberals do have a vision. It is just one which is borrowed from the right-wingers in America and the UK and most people in Australia don't like it. Trickle-down theories have been shown to be false on a national scale (on a global scale the giving of low tax to rich people or corporations has been very successful for a few small countries at the expense of others - especially large, developed nations like us) and so all the BS about giving the rich tax breaks and hand-outs because they're 'job-creators' hasn't worked.

Put me down for 100 likes for this bit.

 

[MC Extra Dollop]

I think it's reasonable to actually give Shorten some time to show something, once Abbott is ousted. Not his fault that it would be unconscionably stupid for him to go into policy mode and risk a slip up, when he can just sit back and watch Abbott and Hockey implode for now. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

I may be a hopeless optimist, but considering how far out from the next election we'll be when the Libs have their inevitable spill, I'd like to think that Shorten is going to have to go out and earn the job, rather than having it handed to him on a platter by the other mob, as Abbott did.

 

[The Passenger]

Keep voting for minor parties and independents.

The more first votes they get, the more people will pay attention to them and stop treating them as surprises.

The only choice in the current environment is to put the major parties last and second last in your preferences.

But there needs to be some sort of groundswell of support to really make an impact. Most people just vote Liberal or Labor because it's all they know.

I'm not really sure how you would go about getting some sort of momentum behind that.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

The only choice in the current environment is to put the major parties last and second last in your preferences.

But there needs to be some sort of groundswell of support to really make an impact. Most people just vote Liberal or Labor because it's all they know.

I'm not really sure how you would go about getting some sort of momentum behind that.

Yeah, the typical aversion to change that is so much a part of the Australian mindset will be a tough nut to crack in my opinion. You've got the 'safety' of the two major parties versus the 'uncertainty' that surrounds the untested minor parties. I'll say it now though - neither the A.L.P nor the Coalition are worth believing in.

How to go about selling this fact to the wider population? Disillusionment with the red and the blue is definitely there in Australia's electorates, but currently it's a disillusionment that leads to apathy. I feel it myself, and I like me some politics. I'm finding it easier to not give a s**t as I get older. The interest is still there, but its tempered by a veneer of mental laziness these days.

We need a third candidate and a strong third party, a leader and a party with charisma AND some fire in the belly to ring in the changes. Something to f*cking BELIEVE in again. But more than that, we need a humanitarian - one who works for the good of ALL and not some select group of vested interests or cultural elite.

 

[The Passenger]

We need a third candidate and a strong third party, a leader and a party with charisma AND some fire in the belly to ring in the changes. Something to f*cking BELIEVE in again. But more than that, we need a humanitarian - one who works for the good of ALL and not some select group of vested interests or cultural elite.

In an ideal would that would be great, but unfortunately not very realistic at the moment one feels.

But if people just gave the majors a message and smashed the primary vote of labor and the coalition to less than 50% combined (even less would be better) it would start sending a message that people are sick to * of this s**t. Last election their primary vote was around 75-80% according to this page: http://www.abc.net.au/news/federal-election-2013/results/party-totals/

 

[The Speaker]

Yeah, the typical aversion to change that is so much a part of the Australian mindset will be a tough nut to crack in my opinion. You've got the 'safety' of the two major parties versus the 'uncertainty' that surrounds the untested minor parties. I'll say it now though - neither the A.L.P nor the Coalition are worth believing in.

How to go about selling this fact to the wider population? Disillusionment with the red and the blue is definitely there in Australia's electorates, but currently it's a disillusionment that leads to apathy. I feel it myself, and I like me some politics. I'm finding it easier to not give a s**t as I get older. The interest is still there, but its tempered by a veneer of mental laziness these days.

We need a third candidate and a strong third party, a leader and a party with charisma AND some fire in the belly to ring in the changes. Something to f*cking BELIEVE in again. But more than that, we need a humanitarian - one who works for the good of ALL and not some select group of vested interests or cultural elite.

I'd say it takes more than one person leading one party. It will take multiple leaders with multiple parties, all having the guts to work together to end the two-party dominance despite their political difference.

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

I'd say it takes more than one person leading one party. It will take multiple leaders with multiple parties, all having the guts to work together to end the two-party dominance despite their political difference.

True. Grassroots bi-partisan support from the lesser parties v an ALP/Liberal/Nats 'coalition of the swilling'? I'd like to see that!

 

[Mofra]

Yeah, the typical aversion to change that is so much a part of the Australian mindset will be a tough nut to crack in my opinion. You've got the 'safety' of the two major parties versus the 'uncertainty' that surrounds the untested minor parties. I'll say it now though - neither the A.L.P nor the Coalition are worth believing in.

In fairness, the two-party share of the vote in 1975 was 95% and has been falling steadily at every Federal election since. There is a slow and gradual decline of people assuming your vote is between two parties.
It is something that may not make a significant difference in the House of Reps, but it sure as hell has changed the way the senate operates (and is likely to continue to do so).

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

We need a third candidate and a strong third party, a leader and a party with charisma AND some fire in the belly to ring in the changes. Something to f*cking BELIEVE in again. But more than that, we need a humanitarian - one who works for the good of ALL and not some select group of vested interests or cultural elite.

"Cultural elite"? Do you believe that Murdoch BS? What has Labor done to benefit the 'cultural elite'? Not cut arts spending as much as you'd like? Or are you confusing the local council NIMBYism or lefty activisim with Labor?

Vested interests is more right - whether it is the religious, the Unions, big business, but I have never seen the justification for the "latte-sipping", "champagne elite" comments. It is News Corp rubbish.

It started with criticism of Keating caring about reconciliation and becoming a Republic (oh, how elitist to think Australia as a country might want to become independent! Or that maybe we f**ked over the Indigenous...) and then was just extended to a general accusation that the left are out-of-touch and an attempt to segue that into the general small govt argument that bureaucracy is bad (because Labor are in charge and they are douchey hipster/greeny lefties). The evidence for this in actual policy? I can't see it.

The whole 'both parties are the same' argument comes from people who want more extreme action but can't get it (real lefties, racists, flat-taxers, etc) because people don't agree with them. The Liberals started talking about boat people after One Nation's success. i.e. The centrist parties shift to capture the votes they would otherwise lose. In that case, the anti-immigration people were a bit daft and didn't realise that complaints about a few thousand boat people were used to cloak the fact Howard was bringing in more immigrants than ever before. That's why it was a 'dog whistle'. Howard wasn't actually doing anything significant, he was just acting like he might.

 

[flashmanvc]

Albo for pm. He has a genuinely good sense of humour, which I feel reflects an ability to relate to people.

And this is a problem with politicians these days: how can you expect people to follow your ideas if you have no idea about what it's like in the real world.

 

[Pie eyed]

Anyone who contends that voting informal is anything but lazy is an idiot.
Nothing can be achieved by doing nothing.
Those so "strong" in their convictions they cannot bring themselves to vote for anyone should, if they actually have any convictions, be candidates or simply shut the * up and keep out of the adults conversations.
If you don't vote you have no place even expressing an opinion on who get elected.

 

[Impunity!]

Anyone who contends that voting informal is anything but lazy is an idiot.
Nothing can be achieved by doing nothing.
Those so "strong" in their convictions they cannot bring themselves to vote for anyone should, if they actually have any convictions, be candidates or simply shut the **** up and keep out of the adults conversations.
If you don't vote you have no place even expressing an opinion on who get elected.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!

 

[Gough]

It's amazing, nobody voted for Abbott and the Libs and yet they hold government. It's like those who voted for them are almost embarrassed into admitting they were conned so badly.

 

[The Speaker]

It's amazing, nobody voted for Abbott and the Libs and yet they hold government. It's like those who voted for them are almost embarrassed into admitting they were conned so badly.

Or they're not on this forum.

 

[Gough]

Plenty of people spruiking the Libs prior to Abbott turning out to be as effective as a chocolate teapot. Don't see too many now.

 

[Docker Clint]

I am still waiting to hear how Xenophon is an Islamaphobe.

Islamaphon is a xenophobe perhaps?

 

[Geelong_Sicko]

"Cultural elite"? Do you believe that Murdoch BS? What has Labor done to benefit the 'cultural elite'? Not cut arts spending as much as you'd like? Or are you confusing the local council NIMBYism or lefty activisim with Labor?

Vested interests is more right - whether it is the religious, the Unions, big business, but I have never seen the justification for the "latte-sipping", "champagne elite" comments. It is News Corp rubbish.

Woah. When I wrote 'cultural elite' I meant those in society that believe they are above everyone else. The born-to-rule types. Perhaps I didn't explain myself clearly enough - reading your post I can understand your contempt but you got me pegged wrong.

The whole 'both parties are the same' argument comes from people who want more extreme action but can't get it (real lefties, racists, flat-taxers, etc) because people don't agree with them.

Extreme action? Maybe for others, but I don't want extreme action on my own behalf. I only want for Australia to be honest in its dealings, transparent with its national security policies, earnest in its attempts to not feed terrorism by embracing detrimental foreign policy decisions, determined in its efforts to deliver universal health care and a solid educational foundation for each new generation of taxpayer, and so on. If you want to paint that as 'extreme' I can't stop you, but I'll respectfully disagree.

I'm extremely cynical about the Big Two these days. Maybe I'm being a bit hard on Labor in this, though. No doubt you think I am. I just think they don't really represent my values any more.

The Liberals started talking about boat people after One Nation's success. i.e. The centrist parties shift to capture the votes they would otherwise lose. In that case, the anti-immigration people were a bit daft and didn't realise that complaints about a few thousand boat people were used to cloak the fact Howard was bringing in more immigrants than ever before. That's why it was a 'dog whistle'. Howard wasn't actually doing anything significant, he was just acting like he might.

The boat-people issue, and Labour's re-activation of Howard's Pacific Solution, was one of the last straws for me. Here was an A.L.P that suffered an appalling lack of vision, in my opinion. Vote-chasing they may have been, but these were real people with real lives that were being affected.

As for One Nation, accuse me of wearing a tin foil hat if you want, but I think the party was created purely as a Coalition 'vanguard' unit to gauge, then stir public opinion on the issue.