Vic Vic Libs for Godly Good

[carltonchelsea]

The document is merely a ready reckoner for anyone looking to get ahead in the party. It accurately details the rules and processes of the Victorian division. The only controversial part is the heading, which indicates who it is from and for what purpose.

The Junkee article is from the last election.

The affirmation stuff is the usual anti-LNP stuff from Kos. I am Christian, don't believe the Lord's Prayer should be said before parliamentary sittings (because an MP's duty is to the constituents and not to the Almighty) but if someone says the Lord's Prayer in front of me, I'm going to join in. Of all the stuff that is going on in the name of God, that prayer is the least of anyone's worries.

The rest is probably fair comment. The reactionary religious forces are well-organised. Their opponents are not because they tend to be what has always existed in the Liberal Party - small flexible groupings that coalesce around certain people or certain discrete common beliefs or policy focuses. Common sense, thoughtful moderate centrism doesn't tend to get bums in seats. The interesting thing will be, considering what is clearly a more moderate policy platform than four years ago, what will be the reaction internally to the anticipated result?

That’s the most hilarious thing I’ve ever read on BigFooty, so much so I’m using it as my sig to remind people of the absolute absurd idiocy of christians.
Are ya havin’ a punt today Punter?

 

[Evolved1]

I got this beauty in the mail over the past week. Only took it out of the mailbox to share here. It seems more appropriate as a church flyer than political advertising. What hope do the LNP have of winning in Victoria with this niche stuff?

 

[cartwright]

I got this beauty in the mail over the past week. Only took it out of the mailbox to share here. It seems more appropriate as a church flyer than political advertising. What hope do the LNP have of winning in Victoria with this niche stuff?

View attachment 1547155


View attachment 1547156

Lol at “scan to get the facts”

 

[carltonchelsea]

“Scam to get the facts”

 

[mighty tiges]

View attachment 1545720

I've had the theory for a while now that the remnants of the old DLP have targeted the Liberal party since the 80s to eat it up from within and take it over. This "infiltrate, impact, impel" is just more clear evidence of this IMO. Abbott mentioned a decade ago that in his youth he was a disciple of B.A. Santamaria and he only joined the Liberals because he thought the Libs over time could morph closer to his social/religious views as opposed to Labor (who were moving in the opposite direction towards becoming more secular). Abbott also has mentioned he sees politics becoming one of a battle of "values" (i.e. social views) and away from the traditional economic dividing line Australian politics was built on. This all fits with DLP dogma as well as being an adoption of loopy American-style religious conservative politics.

 

[cartwright]

The document is merely a ready reckoner for anyone looking to get ahead in the party. It accurately details the rules and processes of the Victorian division. The only controversial part is the heading, which indicates who it is from and for what purpose.

The Junkee article is from the last election.

The affirmation stuff is the usual anti-LNP stuff from Kos. I am Christian, don't believe the Lord's Prayer should be said before parliamentary sittings (because an MP's duty is to the constituents and not to the Almighty) but if someone says the Lord's Prayer in front of me, I'm going to join in. Of all the stuff that is going on in the name of God, that prayer is the least of anyone's worries.

The rest is probably fair comment. The reactionary religious forces are well-organised. Their opponents are not because they tend to be what has always existed in the Liberal Party - small flexible groupings that coalesce around certain people or certain discrete common beliefs or policy focuses. Common sense, thoughtful moderate centrism doesn't tend to get bums in seats. The interesting thing will be, considering what is clearly a more moderate policy platform than four years ago, what will be the reaction internally to the anticipated result?

So you’d be cool with another religion having a plan such as this to infiltrate the liberal party?

 

[Hank Scorpion]

I got this beauty in the mail over the past week. Only took it out of the mailbox to share here. It seems more appropriate as a church flyer than political advertising. What hope do the LNP have of winning in Victoria with this niche stuff?

View attachment 1547155


View attachment 1547156

This is some weird church group putting these out rather than the Libs themselves.

But it's still hurting them to have this noise that they've endorsed doing active campaign work - sweet karma. Undermines their attempted branding to the centre on key swing issues when people get this s**t in their letterbox meanwhile Labor mail is spruiking power/health/transport

 

[Baltimore Jack]

The document is merely a ready reckoner for anyone looking to get ahead in the party. It accurately details the rules and processes of the Victorian division. The only controversial part is the heading, which indicates who it is from and for what purpose.

The Junkee article is from the last election.

The affirmation stuff is the usual anti-LNP stuff from Kos. I am Christian, don't believe the Lord's Prayer should be said before parliamentary sittings (because an MP's duty is to the constituents and not to the Almighty) but if someone says the Lord's Prayer in front of me, I'm going to join in. Of all the stuff that is going on in the name of God, that prayer is the least of anyone's worries.

The rest is probably fair comment. The reactionary religious forces are well-organised. Their opponents are not because they tend to be what has always existed in the Liberal Party - small flexible groupings that coalesce around certain people or certain discrete common beliefs or policy focuses. Common sense, thoughtful moderate centrism doesn't tend to get bums in seats. The interesting thing will be, considering what is clearly a more moderate policy platform than four years ago, what will be the reaction internally to the anticipated result?

I get it Brother:
Whenever someone sings The Internationale in front of me I join in

 

[Pie eyed]

you peeps critiquing the reactionaries for becoming god botherers. you'll be sorry when the 'rapture' arrives.

Scott Morrison's concept

 

[The Punter]

So you’d be cool with another religion having a plan such as this to infiltrate the liberal party?

I don't know how one infers I'm cool with the current plan to "infiltrate the liberal party". I believe in secular political parties, but I also recognise the reality of people's differing motivations and value structures. I mean, I come to this thread in good faith and get stuff thrown at me from the peanut gallery. The echo chamber may be more comforting for some.

 

[cartwright]

I don't know how one infers I'm cool with the current plan to "infiltrate the liberal party". I believe in secular political parties, but I also recognise the reality of people's differing motivations and value structures. I mean, I come to this thread in good faith and get stuff thrown at me from the peanut gallery. The echo chamber may be more comforting for some.

Well, you dismissed it as though nothing to see here. Except the document explicitly states "<2years pre select godly good candidates in your electorates"

Sorry if that inference was misinterpreted. You also mentioned that "common sense doesn't get bums on seats", except we saw at a federal level at least many people turn away from the liberal party to independents because .... they have far more balanced policies and not focused on the wackjob religious angle the the liberal party is well down the path on.

 

[The Punter]

Well, you dismissed it as though nothing to see here. Except the document explicitly states "<2years pre select godly good candidates in your electorates"

Sorry if that inference was misinterpreted. You also mentioned that "common sense doesn't get bums on seats", except we saw at a federal level at least many people turn away from the liberal party to independents because .... they have far more balanced policies and not focused on the wackjob religious angle the the liberal party is well down the path on.

On the common sense point, I was reflecting on the Liberal Party at the moment. It will be interesting to see how the teals maintain a group of people working voluntarily for them through the terms, especially against a Labor Government instead of the conditions created by the Morrison Government. Everyone has to vote, not everyone has to work for a political candidate.

I also believe I said something along the lines as "except for the bit at the top", so the godly stuff. The rest of the diagram is merely an accurate representation of the internal processes of the party, which is not noteworthy at all. We're not cutting open lizards to decide who the next candidate is. Any group looking to further their cause inside an organisation would be doing well to create such a document.

 

[Saint]

On the common sense point, I was reflecting on the Liberal Party at the moment. It will be interesting to see how the teals maintain a group of people working voluntarily for them through the terms, especially against a Labor Government instead of the conditions created by the Morrison Government. Everyone has to vote, not everyone has to work for a political candidate.

I also believe I said something along the lines as "except for the bit at the top", so the godly stuff. The rest of the diagram is merely an accurate representation of the internal processes of the party, which is not noteworthy at all. We're not cutting open lizards to decide who the next candidate is. Any group looking to further their cause inside an organisation would be doing well to create such a document.

I don't think the Independents will be a factor in Vic election at all. There'll be a lot of seats won on preferences, as there always are. But I can't think of any examples where it might change the makeup of parliament. Hawthorn might go back to LNP, but the demographic changes will probably have more impact than the makeup of the parties.

This document is just the stuff that Kroger and Bastiaan and friends have been known to have been up to for a decade now. Building a fundie power base in the LNP to take over the party. I imagine this isn't news to anyone who's looked at the LNP at all over the past 10 years.

Enough of the electorate is still wise to the fact that the LNP candidates are whacko fundies who don't share values, let alone political ideology with many people in the electorate. The only thing they're doing better this election than last is that they're not running with that as their number 1-5 campaign slogans like they did last time. I'm still laughing that they tried to win an election on hating on gangs with dog-whistle racism, plus trying to make parents scared of the gays converting their children to satanism or whatever Okotel was banging on about.

They're hiding it, but deep down, those who this message is aimed at know what it means: (Taken from the Lib candidate's online page)

I am grateful to have grown up in the area, and I want to ensure that our community has the best infrastructure, education, and health services; promote freedom, family values and hard work. And to represent everyone: the forgotten people; the battlers; the quiet Australians. I want to guarantee that our community has great opportunity and prosperity.

 

[The Punter]

I don't think the Independents will be a factor in Vic election at all. There'll be a lot of seats won on preferences, as there always are. But I can't think of any examples where it might change the makeup of parliament. Hawthorn might go back to LNP, but the demographic changes will probably have more impact than the makeup of the parties.

This document is just the stuff that Kroger and Bastiaan and friends have been known to have been up to for a decade now. Building a fundie power base in the LNP to take over the party. I imagine this isn't news to anyone who's looked at the LNP at all over the past 10 years.

Enough of the electorate is still wise to the fact that the LNP candidates are whacko fundies who don't share values, let alone political ideology with many people in the electorate. The only thing they're doing better this election than last is that they're not running with that as their number 1-5 campaign slogans like they did last time. I'm still laughing that they tried to win an election on hating on gangs with dog-whistle racism, plus trying to make parents scared of the gays converting their children to satanism or whatever Okotel was banging on about.

They're hiding it, but deep down, those who this message is aimed at know what it means: (Taken from the Lib candidate's online page)

I am grateful to have grown up in the area, and I want to ensure that our community has the best infrastructure, education, and health services; promote freedom, family values and hard work. And to represent everyone: the forgotten people; the battlers; the quiet Australians. I want to guarantee that our community has great opportunity and prosperity.

For the record, that's from the Narre Warren North candidates' page, and freedom is the closest any of that comes to a dog whistle. Forgotten people is a key Menzian phrase. I think you're reading a little too much into that.

 

[Saint]

For the record, that's from the Narre Warren North candidates' page, and freedom is the closest any of that comes to a dog whistle. Forgotten people is a key Menzian phrase. I think you're reading a little too much into that.

"Quiet Australians" is the phrase you hear oft-repeated on Sky News convincing fundies that even though they're losing votes, there are definitely people out there to vote for you, if you're just fundie enough.

 

[QuietB]

"Quiet Australians" is the phrase you hear oft-repeated on Sky News convincing fundies that even though they're losing votes, there are definitely people out there to vote for you, if you're just fundie enough.

"Quiet Australian's" is a very loaded term, the unspoken bit is once they get your vote you are expected to stay "quiet".

 

[Crankyhawk]

I got this beauty in the mail over the past week. Only took it out of the mailbox to share here. It seems more appropriate as a church flyer than political advertising. What hope do the LNP have of winning in Victoria with this niche stuff?

View attachment 1547155


View attachment 1547156

Yes, because schools can actually do irreversible things for gender transition

This is just putting the choice up to the student as to how they want to dress at school. Theres no "transitioning" in the medical sense of the word.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I don't know how one infers I'm cool with the current plan to "infiltrate the liberal party". I believe in secular political parties, but I also recognise the reality of people's differing motivations and value structures. I mean, I come to this thread in good faith and get stuff thrown at me from the peanut gallery. The echo chamber may be more comforting for some.

It seems to be a difficult spot you are in, and I certainly do appreciate what you bring from inside the LNP tent. There are going to be those who see you as the easiest LNP representative they can access - hence the peanut actions.

 

[Gethelred]

... an MP's duty is to the constituents...

I seem to recall you criticizing me for saying precisely that a while ago.

 

[The Punter]

I seem to recall you criticizing me for saying precisely that a while ago.

I criticised you for suggesting a member of the opposition should see their service to their constituents as supporting the government, which is both fantastical and naive. If I am an MP in opposition, and I think I can do a better job than the government, I'm not going to coach the government on how to improve behind the scenes, I'm going to hold them to account publicly and advocate as to why I would do a better job.

BTW, in Victoria, it'd be a whole lot easier for opposition MPs to help their constituents if every request didn't have to go through a Minister's office, which usually results in a letter in reply which reads a lot like a press release. The feds manage it quite easily - all federal MPs can make direct contact to Immigration, Centrelink and the NDIS without having to go through the responsible Ministers to get action for their constituents.

 

[Gethelred]

I criticised you for suggesting a member of the opposition should see their service to their constituents as supporting the government, which is both fantastical and naive. If I am an MP in opposition, and I think I can do a better job than the government, I'm not going to coach the government on how to improve behind the scenes, I'm going to hold them to account publicly and advocate as to why I would do a better job.

BTW, in Victoria, it'd be a whole lot easier for opposition MPs to help their constituents if every request didn't have to go through a Minister's office, which usually results in a letter in reply which reads a lot like a press release. The feds manage it quite easily - all federal MPs can make direct contact to Immigration, Centrelink and the NDIS without having to go through the responsible Ministers to get action for their constituents.

I said, I prioritize serving the constituents over any other need once elected, including the need to get reelected or to win more power, and that includes improving a sitting government's own proposals.

You were perfectly okay to throw the public under the bus for a time to win, which is why it's a good thing you didn't and you won't.

 

[The Punter]

I said, I prioritize serving the constituents over any other need once elected, including the need to get reelected or to win more power, and that includes improving a sitting government's own proposals.

You were perfectly okay to throw the public under the bus for a time to win, which is why it's a good thing you didn't and you won't.

Most in politics, Daniel Andrews most of all, believe they need to be elected and re-elected to keep helping. No wonder you are unhappy with the body politic - your expectations of it are unrealistic at best.

The final assertion I reject completely.

 

[Gethelred]

Most in politics, Daniel Andrews most of all, believe they need to be elected and re-elected to keep helping. No wonder you are unhappy with the body politic - your expectations of it are unrealistic at best.

Is this the stuff you weren't saying last time?

I reject your notion that my expectations of government are unrealistic. You are - in essence - saying that government in service of the people is unrealistic; it mightn't be what we're getting, but it's absolutely possible and it's desirable.

I get that it's neoliberal doctrine, but government can absolutely function as a social and economic good.

The final assertion I reject completely.

Well, that's what you're saying: if political survival means you do what's necessary to stay in or obtain power - up to and including doing what is not in your constituent's best interests - you'll absolutely do that in an election year. You will refuse to be bipartisan in order to avoid handing your opponents a win, regardless of what's in the community's best interest.

You're welcome to reject what you think that says about you, but beyond a certain point it's what you're advocating.

 

[Gethelred]

Also, bit of a laugh that we're in this thread, discussing this.

 

[The Punter]

We see things differently, we reject each others assertions, I say we move on.