Remove this Banner Ad

A thread on politics- have some balls and post

  • Thread starter Thread starter acuguy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Cold Sober said:
Pauline should be our next top dog,if not give it back to our indigenous brothers and they can pay me to sit under a tree and drink,abuse the odd bit of trash that walks by for not giving me a smoke,no I can't do that, that would make me a racist
Click to expand...
Nah, I think the fact that you're a racist is what makes you a racist.
 
A large majority of my lefty trump hating Facebook ranting mates are all somehow lapping up Pauline. She's getting quite a following.

Not sure how or why - even my hardcore greeny friends all think positively of her. It's really really bizarre.
 
Leemas said:
A large majority of my lefty trump hating Facebook ranting mates are all somehow lapping up Pauline. She's getting quite a following.

Not sure how or why - even my hardcore greeny friends all think positively of her. It's really really bizarre.
Click to expand...

She's pro medicinal marijuana. There may be other reasons.
 
You can be left and green without necessarily being progressive. Her conservative, protectionist, populism has a fairly broad appeal to people who aren't critical thinkers.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Caiphus said:
You can be left and green without necessarily being progressive. Her conservative, protectionist, populism has a fairly broad appeal to people who aren't critical thinkers.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I'd describe myself as the opposite. Right and progressive.
 
jackess said:
Fair enough. I'd describe myself as the opposite. Right and progressive.
Click to expand...

Isn't that basically "classical liberal" or potentially even libertarian?

The "government creates more problems than they solve - get out the way" type.
 
James North said:
How about that press secretary ... my favourite character from the Gulf War episodes was the Iraqi Foreign Minister... reckon this guy would give him a run.
Click to expand...
He's no Joseph Goebells, that's for sure... Not yet anyway- Although in a big plus for feminism, Kelly-Anne Conway just might be.
 
Caiphus said:
He's no Joseph Goebells, that's for sure... Not yet anyway- Although in a big plus for feminism, Kelly-Anne Conway just might be.
Click to expand...

Her interview on Face the Press yesterday was a new low, even for her.

"Alternative facts". Orwellian Doublespeak, pure and simple.
 
Since the Internet came along nothing and everything is true. I blame those people who forwarded those urban myths by email who started the rot.
 
ZoBlitz said:
Since the Internet came along nothing and everything is true. I blame those people who forwarded those urban myths by email who started the rot.
Click to expand...

But there was someone hiding in the car!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

TheBrownDog said:
Her interview on Face the Press yesterday was a new low, even for her.

"Alternative facts". Orwellian Doublespeak, pure and simple.
Click to expand...
Alt facts, fake news, invisible intelligence, imaginary friends, politics has it all.

What I get annoyed with is all the actual phoney stuff like the MLK bust being removed, Trump plagiarising the Avatar and Bees movies. The more fake stuff out there, the less people will believe real accusations, evidenced or not.
I get similarly annoyed when shit the government does here is met with an extreme view. The recent (current) travel rorts saga. Now the rules may allow way too much, but a lot of it is within the rules. A lot of people don't know where the line should be drawn either. Family holidays, as far as I'm aware do have an allowance, so it's a bit hyper-critical to jump on every pollie who takes their kids to Cairns, if it was within guidelines. The problem then is the abuse of those allowances. A lot of jobs have perks. When one of our suppliers is in town, they take me out, and we get on the sauce. In the interest of networking, my employer gets my bill for accommodation. Should a federal minister be charging the taxpayer for flying to Melbourne to go to the footy? Not sure he should, when he is paid so well, but I don't have an issue with them calling it work related and in the scheme of things, a commercial flight shouldn't be what is being chased.
Private jets being used, and a health Minister claiming 22 trips to the Gold Coast is criminal. Bishop getting an empty plane to fly all the way across the country to pick her up is criminal, but if we blast every politician for every dollar they spend on what could be perceived as a "perk", none of them will call the others out.
Long winded way to make my point, which is that whenever there is cause to criticise or question, the barrage of extremism from the opposite end risks harming their cause and the arguments start to look silly. Some balance is needed.
 
Skoob said:
Alt facts, fake news, invisible intelligence, imaginary friends, politics has it all.

What I get annoyed with is all the actual phoney stuff like the MLK bust being removed, Trump plagiarising the Avatar and Bees movies. The more fake stuff out there, the less people will believe real accusations, evidenced or not.
I get similarly annoyed when shit the government does here is met with an extreme view. The recent (current) travel rorts saga. Now the rules may allow way too much, but a lot of it is within the rules. A lot of people don't know where the line should be drawn either. Family holidays, as far as I'm aware do have an allowance, so it's a bit hyper-critical to jump on every pollie who takes their kids to Cairns, if it was within guidelines. The problem then is the abuse of those allowances. A lot of jobs have perks. When one of our suppliers is in town, they take me out, and we get on the sauce. In the interest of networking, my employer gets my bill for accommodation. Should a federal minister be charging the taxpayer for flying to Melbourne to go to the footy? Not sure he should, when he is paid so well, but I don't have an issue with them calling it work related and in the scheme of things, a commercial flight shouldn't be what is being chased.
Private jets being used, and a health Minister claiming 22 trips to the Gold Coast is criminal. Bishop getting an empty plane to fly all the way across the country to pick her up is criminal, but if we blast every politician for every dollar they spend on what could be perceived as a "perk", none of them will call the others out.
Long winded way to make my point, which is that whenever there is cause to criticise or question, the barrage of extremism from the opposite end risks harming their cause and the arguments start to look silly. Some balance is needed.
Click to expand...

On the travel stuff, the rules are written to allow politicians a fair amount of discretion specifically because they are publicly accountable in the way Sussan Ley was, so for mine whether or not it's within the rules isn't the issue.

But you're spot on about the phoney news. And I know I've fallen victim to it. There was some rumour swirling around a while back that years ago he'd said if he ever ran for president, it'd be for the Republicans because they're idiots who'd vote for anybody, or words to that effect. And I believed it for quite a while, even though obviously it was pretty unlikely.

We all apply different standard to news or other information we want to believe than that which we don't want to believe. Every single one of us. Fake news is really dangerous.
 
Ironmonger said:
On the travel stuff, the rules are written to allow politicians a fair amount of discretion specifically because they are publicly accountable in the way Sussan Ley was, so for mine whether or not it's within the rules isn't the issue.

But you're spot on about the phoney news. And I know I've fallen victim to it. There was some rumour swirling around a while back that years ago he'd said if he ever ran for president, it'd be for the Republicans because they're idiots who'd vote for anybody, or words to that effect. And I believed it for quite a while, even though obviously it was pretty unlikely.

We all apply different standard to news or other information we want to believe than that which we don't want to believe. Every single one of us. Fake news is really dangerous.
Click to expand...
I think with travel it matters whether it's within the rules or not. I think it makes some cases more clear cut. That's not to say those within the rules can't be scrutinised and put to public account. I don't believe Ley's claims were all within the rules, nor either Bishop or Joyce's. It'll be interesting to see what Hanson claims for her Qld & WA jaunts. These are clearly party campaigns, and not within her job description as a Senator. (I use these as the most public examples, and I'm sure my preferred end of politics has some "entitlement" skeletons as well). There does seem to be a different weight of guilt applied by the Rupert controlled media though, with Slipper the obvious example, stealing a few grand in cabcharge compared to tens of thousands in private jets and helicopters. I'm all the more suspicious because of the lack of noise from the Labor opposition over it all.

But you're spot on about the phoney news. And I know I've fallen victim to it. There was some rumour swirling around a while back that years ago he'd said if he ever ran for president, it'd be for the Republicans because they're idiots who'd vote for anybody, or words to that effect. And I believed it for quite a while, even though obviously it was pretty unlikely.
Click to expand...
Has it been disproved? See, I think that is completely likely from Trump.
 
Ok - confused here...

In https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pres...ntial-memorandum-regarding-mexico-city-policy (Presidential Memorandum Regarding the Mexico City Policy) it was getting widely reported as Trump defunding Planned Parenthood.

The text of those affected is "I further direct the Secretary of State to take all necessary actions, to the extent permitted by law, to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars do not fund organizations or programs that support or participate in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization."

Was PP involved in coercive abortions or involuntary sterilisations? If not - why was this connected or was it something else entirely they were talking about?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

No they weren't. It's what is known in the business as a lie.

Edit: I also think the memorandum is only related to funding for international planned parenthood.
 
ZoBlitz said:
No they weren't. It's what is known in the business as a lie.

Edit: I also think the memorandum is only related to funding for international planned parenthood.
Click to expand...

So where are they getting the 'Trump defunds PP" thing from if they are not a party to this one?
 
Viceregal said:
So where are they getting the 'Trump defunds PP" thing from if they are not a party to this one?
Click to expand...

I fail to see where this was "widely reported" as you stated?

This executive order specifically reinstated the global gag rule. A revolting bit of policy pandering to the religious right while the people who will suffer are conveniently hidden away in the dark corners of the Earth.

One of the biggest boosts you can give to the economic and social development of women in the third world is to free them from being slaves to their reproductive systems. Trump just reattached the ball and chain so that he could gain some easy domestic political capital. Repugnant.
 
Viceregal said:
So where are they getting the 'Trump defunds PP" thing from if they are not a party to this one?
Click to expand...

Ok, who's "they" and where was it "widely reported"?

I follow the news and have seen zero about Trump actually removing any funds from Planned Parenthood.

BTW the link you provided - most of the meaningful stuff is actually in a different executive order, as Trump is reinstating a previously revoked one:

"I hereby ... reinstate the Presidential Memorandum of January 22, 2001, for the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development (Restoration of the Mexico City Policy)."

The rest is just addenda to the previous executive order.
 
I wish someone had neutered Trump about 60 years ago
 
The thing that strikes me about Trump's proposed tariff on Mexico is that it doesn't do what he said he would do, which is make Mexico pay for the wall.

Sure, Mexico will suffer for it. Quite badly, I'd imagine. But the money it will generate will be from American businesses and consumers who buy Mexican products.

In any case, I suspect the upshot will be a dramatic increase in the number of products imported from Belize, Guatemala and the rest of Central America, that bear a striking resemblance to those products that used to be imported from Mexico.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

WheildonTheAxe
Brisbane Lions Craft Beer Appreciation Society
2 3 4
Replies
93
Views
6K
WheildonTheAxe
WheildonTheAxe

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom