Play Nice Scott Morrison 2.0 - How Long? Part 8 - Lose Unit. Game Over, Bulldozer. Cont in Part 9

[QuietB]

Part 5 is here:

Scott Morrison - How Long? Part 5 - The stroll out.

Continued in Part 6. https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-6-the-coal-man.1290651/

www.bigfooty.com

Part 6 is here:

Play Nice - Scott Morrison - How Long? Part 6 - Prosperity Theology, The Coal Man + His Bootlickers

Part 5 is here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-5-the-stroll-out.1275975/

www.bigfooty.com

Part 7 is here:

Play Nice - Scott Morrison - How Long? Part 7 - Prosperity Theology, The Coal Man + His Bootlickers

Part 5 is here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-5-the-stroll-out.1275975/ Part 6 is here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-6-prosperity-theology-the-coal-man-his-bootlickers.1290651/

www.bigfooty.com

Part 9 is here:

Play Nice - Scott Morrison in the Multiverse of Ministries.

Part 5 is here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-5-the-stroll-out.1275975/ Part 6 is here: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/scott-morrison-how-long-part-6-prosperity-theology-the-coal-man-his-bootlickers.1290651/ Part 7 is here...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Anti progressives as in libertarian/ MAGA type movement/ "freedumb" protests. Or counter protests (Kyle Rittenhouse)

I’m not sure that the collective characterisation of the various protests in the way you have is particularly useful, although it does raise a broader discussion point, which should probably happen elsewhere, about the lack of cohesion in the “anti progressive” argument.

Rittenhouse wasn’t a counter protest.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

You're probably closer to a closet fascist than a Nazi, but whatever. I'm happy for you to label yourself like that.

Whatever. You never offer anything useful to the debate, and this morning is no exception.

 

[Saint]

But are we really seeing militance in “anti-progressives”? I ask this in a comparative sense.

It seems to me that the physicality of the various police forces both here and abroad is far greater against “freedom” protestors than it was against, say, BLM protestors in circumstances where the BLM protests have been significantly more violent and destructive.

This is just what you'd see on conservative media outlets. Where people (any people) have been destructive or violent, they've been arrested. THere were thousands of arrests in BLM protests, though if you watched conservative news, I could see why you think there's been none. What happened when armed anti-progressive militants shut down parliament carrying rifles in Michigan?

Armed protesters demonstrate against Covid-19 lockdown at Michigan capitol

Police and capitol staff held back protesters – some armed with rifles – attempting to enter floor of legislative chamber

www.theguardian.com

Progressives don't turn up with guns because they know police and people like Kyle Rittenhouse can shoot them with impunity if they do.

Have a look what happened in Canberra, Melbourne etc. THese buffoons were allowed to walk around maskless, shut down the CBD. It was only when they set fire to an historic building, cornerstone of our democracy that anything was done. They swanned around Canberra for days and days. All the police did was use sharks to fire 5G laser beams to give them sunburn and acoustic weapons which cave them COVID.

You must just watch Sky News all day to believe the things you believe.

 

[Crankyhawk]

I’m not sure that the collective characterisation of the various protests in the way you have is particularly useful, although it does raise a broader discussion point, which should probably happen elsewhere, about the lack of cohesion in the “anti progressive” argument.

Rittenhouse wasn’t a counter protest.

Did he not go there as a vigilante against the protest? Ie “counter” to protest (though understand how it could be read as a counter protest. Sloppy language by me)

 

[Gough]

OK, here's a question from a progressive - why the phcuck do conservatives call themselves "conservative", when they believe that their mere opinions on scientific matters such as climate change and COVID treatments are as important as the actual scientific facts?

That's not "conservative", that's radically anti-intellectual.

I'm going to bed so back on Ignore with you.

The curious thing about the modern conservative is their lack of desire to actually conserve things. The implied aim of conservatism is to maintain a status quo yet so many of it's modern adherents seem to want to tear down rather than maintain institutions.

 

[Gough]

Did he not go there as a vigilante against the protest? Ie “counter” to protest (though understand how it could be read as a counter protest. Sloppy language by me)

Kyle's got the begging bowl out I see. His feelings are very hurt and he'd like some money please.

 

[Saint]

OK, here's a question from a progressive - why the phcuck do conservatives call themselves "conservative", when they believe that their mere opinions on scientific matters such as climate change and COVID treatments are as important as the actual scientific facts?

That's not "conservative", that's radically anti-intellectual.

I'm going to bed so back on Ignore with you.

Conservatives believe science as long as it doesn't challenge the status quo.

If you look at everything through the lens of keeping the rich rich and the poor poor, everything Conservatives do makes perfect sense.

Pro-religion - keeps the poor happy as poor people
lower taxes - keeps rich people rich
climate denial - keeps rich rich
War-mongering - rich rich and poor poor

 

[BarryMorgan]

I did before. Not so much now. That said, I don’t see the online representation of progressives as necessarily representative of progressives as a whole. Those I know in real life are not so militant although, and this is the worrying bit, they don’t seem particularly troubled by the militance of their online comrades.

Conversely, if you’re a conservative, are you troubled by the opinions of some of your fellow conservative types online?

 

[Stevi_Tigers]

Do you reckon there are votes in a Scott n Jen sex tape?

campaigner I was eating breakfast

 

[QuietB]

In the past fortnight shirko has -


Been defied on the floor by members of his own party

Been chastised in full view of the nation by our top intelligence official

Made himself look a right donkey over the Sydney trains debacle


Why haven't they knifed him yet ?....

A completely useless and incompetent leader is not new for the Liberals.

Morrison is still their best chance. He is as useless as **** on a bull, but he can divert and lie and sell shit with the best of them.

The Liberals, as usual, are punting on the Australian electorate being complete morons.

And sadly they might be right.

 

[Gough]

Conversely, if you’re a conservative, are you troubled by the opinions of some of your fellow conservative types online?

They're just sensible centrists these days, just ask them, it's the calling card of all modern day political suck holes.

 

[Proper Gander]

Aaaaaaaand another thread is derailed entirely so Bruce can talk about BLM

 

[Ned_Flanders]

Aaaaaaaand another thread is derailed entirely so Bruce can talk about BLM

better than his other go to topic TBH

 

[kranky al]

They're just sensible centrists these days, just ask them, it's the calling card of all modern day political suck holes.

A centrist would be a rusted on labor voter these days if they had a clue about politics.

Amazing how many times ive got friends (including myself) to fill out the political compass test to find out that they arent actually a liberal supporter at all.

I genuinely do believe that most aussies are pretty centrist - they just dont realise that the coalition is a lot further right than they are and labor occupy the centre more and more.

The rich : heads we dont lose, tails we win, if it lands on its edge the poor win hyuk hyuk!!!!

 

[Gough]

A centrist would be a rusted on labor voter these days if they had a clue about politics.

Amazing how many times ive got friends (including myself) to fill out the political compass test to find out that they arent actually a liberal supporter at all.

I genuinely do believe that most aussies are pretty centrist - they just dont realise that the coalition is a lot further right than they are and labor occupy the centre more and more.

The rich : heads we dont lose, tails we win, if it lands on its edge the poor win hyuk hyuk!!!!

That political compass thing drives me round the bend. It's just a bunch of questions and then a program tells you how you feel. Ffs!

 

[kranky al]

That political compass thing drives me round the bend. It's just a bunch of questions and then a program tells you how you feel. Ffs!

Im not sure if this is weapons grade sarcasm or not

 

[carltonchelsea]

What’s anti-intellectual is characterising scientific theory as “facts”.

Lol

 

[Mick F]

Lol

Academics would struggle to vote for Abbott, Dutton, Morrison, Joyce and Cash.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Did he not go there as a vigilante against the protest? Ie “counter” to protest (though understand how it could be read as a counter protest. Sloppy language by me)

We'd probably better take this elsewhere as, despite Rogan having been raised well before I joined in, Proper Gander is holding me responsible for derailing the thread so best we keep this thread to repetition of how much of a campaigner Scomo is.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

The curious thing about the modern conservative is their lack of desire to actually conserve things. The implied aim of conservatism is to maintain a status quo yet so many of it's modern adherents seem to want to tear down rather than maintain institutions.

Conservatives believe science as long as it doesn't challenge the status quo.

If you look at everything through the lens of keeping the rich rich and the poor poor, everything Conservatives do makes perfect sense.

Pro-religion - keeps the poor happy as poor people
lower taxes - keeps rich people rich
climate denial - keeps rich rich
War-mongering - rich rich and poor poor

Great posts!

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

SMH letters page for the second day in a row, four letters against and not a single letter in support of Slippery's neanderthal barracking for the fuel of fossils.

Coalition’s renews slavish devotion to fossil fuels​

The PM misrepresents the truth, saying that power prices would go up if coal plants were closed too quickly (“Plan to hasten end of coal at AGL draws PM’s disapproval”, February 22). Quite the contrary is the case, as he should know. As the market becomes dominated by more renewables, electricity prices have and will consistently be reduced. His opposition to Mike Cannon-Brookes’ fine example of can-do capitalism can only be understood in the context of his government being largely controlled and owned by the fossil fuel industry. This is not a new suggestion: just ask Malcolm Turnbull. Josie McSkimming, Coogee

We have known for years that the switch from fossil fuels to renewables was inevitable not only for the sake of future generations but also because of economic viability (“Small communities need seat at the power table”, February 22). The proposed takeover of AGL are the direct results of advancements in technology and market forces yet our Prime Minister claims that without coal-fired power, prices of electricity will increase. A report by the Australian Energy Market Commission late last year predicted that electricity costs to consumers would fall over the current financial year and fall further by 2023-2024, thus making a nonsense of the Prime Minister’s claim. The tragedy is, as Shirley Jackson has pointed out, despite the success of the Latrobe Valley Authority in helping the local community smooth the transition away from coal, there is no national transition authority because our federal government refuses to recognise that coal is on the way out. Peter Nash, Fairlight

With the ever-growing presence of climate insecurity in our national conversation, perhaps the Prime Minister would not have been so disapproving of accelerated coal-powered electricity plant closures if his government was to have any real input into ending emissions. Had the wasted billions of taxpayer dollars in rorted or backward policies been better spent, we probably wouldn’t need to rely on the private sector to do the government’s duties. Zac Barlow, Jerilderie

The federal Coalition have been trying to paint themselves green with concern for koalas and the Great Barrier Reef. When it comes to the welcome prospect of a dirty polluting power station closing early, both Scott Morrison and Angus Taylor are disappointed. The green paint is coming off in strips, revealing their true stance. The Coalition has no plans to reduce pollution. They are supporters of burning fossil fuels with no regard for future consequences. Dennis O’Hara, Wanniassa (ACT)

 

[Gough]

We'd probably better take this elsewhere as, despite Rogan having been raised well before I joined in, Proper Gander is holding me responsible for derailing the thread so best we keep this thread to repetition of how much of a campaigner Scomo is.

Morrison is so concerned about the situation in Ukraine he looked it up in the atlas.

 

[Sun Ra]

Do you reckon there are votes in a Scott n Jen sex tape?

I don't think they are trying for any more kids so they are no longer having sex. It would be an old tape.

 

[Rotayjay]

The curious thing about the modern conservative is their lack of desire to actually conserve things. The implied aim of conservatism is to maintain a status quo yet so many of it's modern adherents seem to want to tear down rather than maintain institutions.

In my view, modern conservatives are selectively in favour of small government above all else. I say 'selectively' because they want to undermine and tear down government institutions like public health care, meanwhile increasing some government intervention in the form of religious freedom laws, handing over money to grant rorts and so on.

Shrink the size of government when it suits you and increase the size of government when it suits you. Handouts for the rich, and free market for the poor. Jesus, whom they claim to follow, would be so proud ...

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

In my view, modern conservatives are selectively in favour of small government above all else. I say 'selectively' because they want to undermine and tear down government institutions like public health care, meanwhile increasing some government intervention in the form of religious freedom laws, handing over money to grant rorts and so on.

Shrink the size of government when it suits you and increase the size of government when it suits you. Handouts for the rich, and free market for the poor. Jesus, whom they claim to follow, would be so proud ...

It's all about tearing down public institutions and repurposing government as a facilitator for corporate plunder. Most destructive mental illness ever to take collective hold of our society.