Bartlett's Blog

Andrew Bartlett has been active in politics for over 20 years, including as a Queensland Senator from 1997-2008. This blog started in 2004 and reflects his own views, independent of any political party or organisation.

Lies, Damn Lies and really really Big Lies

With the carbon pricing legislation passing the House of Representatives, the complaints have got ever louder about Julia Gillard’s ‘lie’ on that matter just before the last election. Coming from the party whose former leader coined the phrase “non-core promise”, this might seem a bit rich. But as I was reminded tonight when I found a brief clip on YouTube, for a really world-class example of a monstrous lie forcefully repeated for political gain just before an election, it’s hard to go past this.

YouTube Preview Image

Peter Reith – “it’s as clear as day ….” “they’ve also got film … someone has looked at it, and it is an absolute fact – children were thrown into the water.”

Philip Ruddock – “more disturbingly a number of children have been thrown overboard”…. “clearly planned and pre-meditated”

John Howard – “There is something to me incompatible between somebody who claims to be a refugee and somebody who would throw their own child into the sea.  It offends the natural instinct of protection and  delivering security and safety to your children.”

I will refrain from detailing the record of Mr Howard’s government (or the current government) when it comes to how well they have acted on this “natural instinct of protection and delivering security and safety to children”.

Mr Howard also said “I don’t want people like that in Australia.” As it turned out, the vast majority of the refugees on the boat in question (known as SIEV 4) did settle in Australia (while Mr Howard was still Prime Minister). Not one of them has ever received an apology by any of the above people for being so publicly, repeatedly and grievously slurred by our nation’s leaders.

I know who I would rather be sharing my country with.

Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I have a view that if you say something publicly to or about a person that they have good reason to find offensive, you apologise – particularly if the basis of your comment turns out to be false.

There are so many words one could use to describe this continuing absence of apology – the very faintest criticism one could use would be describe it as ‘bad manners’. But even suggesting a simple apology is in order would probably still be attacked as ‘political correctness’ or an assault on ‘free speech’.

Advertisement

86 Comments, Comment or Ping

  1. Well said. The hypocrisy reeks.

  2. P. Oliver

    Thanks for the memories of that shameful time Andrew.

    As to the other ‘lie” which is mentioned at every opportunity that the Prime Minister said “there will be no carbon tax under a government
    I lead”, that comment arose from a conversation about the difference between a carbon price followed by an CPRS/ETS.
    the Prime Minister made a speech about Climate change before the last election and said she wanted to put a price on carbon followed by an ETS.
    http://www.alp.org.au/federal-government/news/speech–julia-gillard,–moving-forward-together-on/

    This was even reported by The Australian…

    That was then…

    Julia Gillard’s carbon price promise
    by: Paul Kelly and Dennis Shanahan From: The Australian August 20, 2010 12:00AM

    JULIA Gillard says she is prepared to legislate a carbon price in the next term.

    This is now…

    Win right for Julia Gillard, but anger growing
    by: Dennis Shanahan, Political editor From: The Australian October 13, 2011 12:00AM

    But Labor’s defiant declaration that the tax could not be repealed may prove as toxic as Gillard’s initial decision to break the promise there would be no carbon tax under a government she led.

  3. Well, there’s cheek for you certainly, “about Julia Gillard’s ‘lie’” – we all know that the ALP was not really very keen to have a carbon price before the election, but they are in power with support from the Greens with conditions. Some of the conditions are being met, hence, at long last, a carbon price (not nearly enough to change planet trashing behaviour, but a start).

    As for those other lies on the Liberal side, just plain pernicious and caused actual harm to a number of human beings. Those lies must never be forgotten.

  4. NIFTY NUT

    Those lies re “children overboard” will never be forgotten, or forgiven. Nor will the lies about the existence of “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq. Nor will the treatment of whistleblowers, in both cases, be forgotten or forgiven.

    Howard apologise? What a joke! There should have been enquiries into both of the above mentioned incidents.

    I wonder if the people on the Siev 4 are entitled to some monetary compensation for being so slanderously maligned? Would be good to see them jointly sue Howard and his cronies.

    Felt the old rage and disgust as I watched the video!

  5. Barry

    They may well not have been thrown overboard but were they lowered
    on a hoist ? Anyway it seems that the boat was scuttled underneath them.
    Tell me the difference ?

  6. rexw

    “Maybe I’m old fashioned, but I have a view that if you say something publicly to or about a person that they have good reason to find offensive, you apologise”

    The three you mentioned were part of the plot to grab some public headlines, which they did. The fact that it backfired was indeed unfortunate for them but they personally lost nothing as a result. They have no credibility but they didn’t need it to survive. Embarrassment, perhaps, but who really cares about that.

    We should be pleased that in this country at least, chickens do come home to roost, more often than not, as opposed to the US where we have the absurd theatre in play at the moment of trying to sheet home a planned assassination on a Saudi Ambassador to Iran.

    There is no doubt of how dumbed down are the US public in 2011. Fox News, take a bow.
    Firstly 9/11, then crutch bombers, Bin Laden’s death, and now, here we go again. Mostly all aimed at the next Israeli / US planned dalliance in Iran. The only way to water down such activities is for Iran and China to form a military alliance. .Now there’s an idea.

    Be thankful we have some time left before such scenarios are accepted here as the norm as they have become in America. Don’t ever scoff at the lack of power given to an Australian PM as compared to the almighty authority of a US President, almost accountable to no one, but the bankers, that is.

    Finally,the’ lies, damn lies and really, really big lies’. out here with Siev 4 could not survive scrutiny if it happened now, in my opinion.

    Nor should it.

  7. I appreciate your optimism RexW – I hope you are right. I guess an example to prove your point is that the federal Senate was able to hold a very thorough inquiry into this incident (and others) and got voluminous evidence from a range of Defence personnel who clearly were prepared to be fully factual rather than fudge answers in a way which might protect the government. None the less, the fact that many people still believe furphies such as the one mentioned by Barry in his comment shows that the government and their ideological defenders were still fairly successful in pumping out propaganda and smokescreens to make people believe this was really somehow OK.

    To answer Barry’s query, no the boat was not “scuttled beneath them” and the method by which all the refugees ended up in the sea is because their boat began to break up and sink.

    Evidence provided to the Senate inquiry informed us that after SIEV 4 had been intercepted at sea by HMAS Adelaide, there was a failed attempt to send it back to Indonesia despite its broken compass and steering gear.

    There then followed an order from Canberra – from the People Smuggling Taskforce controlled and directed by the Prime Minister and his government – to the Commander of HMAS Adelaide to keep all the passengers on board the almost foundering SIEV 4 under Adelaide’s circular tow for 22 hours, up until the very moment when it sank. The instruction then was that people had to jump in the water before they could be rescued.

    Which is why I still find myself being shocked by John Howard’s gall in raising the concept of “the natural instinct of protection and delivering security and safety to children” to attack the alleged inhumanity of the refugees, when Mr Howard would have known of the order that those refugees, including the children, were not to be rescued from an unsafe vessel or towed towards safety.

  8. red crab

    howard stated there will be no gst and then went to an election saying he would bring in a gst
    gillard did not go to the people and she was not elected by the people !!
    that’s the difference
    it dose not mater what’s dragged up to make it look better the facts are the facts .
    you cant compare statements made in the heat of a situation know-mater the agenda

    with a cold lie .

  9. Bilko

    Red Crab Julia Gillard went to the people in Aug 2010 and was dually elected and now is Prime Minister, get over it.

  10. Lorikeet

    I would like Liberals to come good with the footage. If they don’t have any, their claims are neither proven nor disproven.

    I know that if my children’s father knew the boat he was on was about to sink, he would have had no hesitation in tossing them straight into the water, and then finding something for them to cling to. Tossing kids into the sea is safer than jumping into water with a child in your arms, because injuries are more likely to result from the latter.

    Since I wasn’t there, I don’t know what really happened. I think Defence personnel are likely to say whatever the government orders on the day. If they don’t do what they’re told, they’re likely to finish up without a job.

    I think there is no doubt that Julia Gillard lied about NOT bringing in a Carbon Tax. If she had been truthful, Labor would now be sitting in Opposition, possibly with fewer Greens in the Senate to help pass Carbon Tax legislation.

  11. Tony Zegenhagen

    Red Crab Says : howard stated there will be no gst and then went to an election saying he would bring in a gst
    gillard did not go to the people and she was not elected by the people !!
    that’s the difference

    Lorikeet saysI think there is no doubt that Julia Gillard lied about NOT bringing in a Carbon Tax. If she had been truthful, Labor would now be sitting in Opposition, possibly with fewer Greens in the Senate to help pass Carbon Tax legislation.

    Yes Red there is a big difference. The day it passed will always be known as the day of infamy. A punishment tax introduced against the wishes of over 75% of the Nation and is the worse and most damaging economic legislation I have witnessed in my lifetime and certainly makes the GST look like a minnow. Lets hope we can dismantle in over the coming years. It will no doubt cost this country dearly either way and a lot of pain will be felt dismantling it but it is something we must work towards doing.

    Yes Lorikeet it will no doubt be the end of the ALP Centre and Centre -right faction and on the collapse we can only hope it doesn’t strengthen the extreme green left.

  12. red crab

    bilko
    and just what did julia say before the election
    and tell me just how she got into power and who put her there

    not the people !
    she was not dually elected my friend she was place there by minority’s with there own agendas.
    if the labor had won with out help then we would not be in the mess we are now manly thanks the greens and independents

    as far as the children over board go,s i hope one day the truth comes out because if what i was told by someone who claimed to be there at the time is the truth neither side will be happy.

  13. Lorikeet

    Oh well, it looks as if Julia Gillard will now pass the ball (or very hot potato) to Stephen Smith, but only if he is crazy enough to take it.

  14. NIFTY NUT

    Tony Zegenhagen,

    I have heard your name somewhere. Are you by any chance involved with the DLP? That is, are you very right of the right wing elements in this country?

  15. Yes that’s him Nifty – out on the same extreme right fringes as people like Andrew Bolt, and with about the same interest in facts as well, as his comment shows.

    Red Crab, the truth about the Children Overboard lies came out long ago. There have been a number of very comprehensive inquiries, much of it in public. There is plenty of evidence on the public record from people who were there, as well as from people who received the various pieces of information along the line of command and the communication trial through to Canberra.

    The reason why it is such a bigger lie is that it was repeatedly by a number of different people, all of who knew it wasn’t true. It was a case where they promised something and then did something different after the election (although John ‘non-core promises’ Howard did plenty of that too).

    Laurie Oakes provided this wonderful quote on the weekend from a politician who broke a promise they said during the election campaign was a ‘cast-iron’ one, justifying why they broke that promise:

    “Obviously, when circumstances change, governments do change their opinions, and that is actually the responsible course of action.”

    That of course was Tony Abbott, after the 2004 federal election justify the failure to keep what he said was “a rock-solid iron-clad commitment” to maintain the same Medicare safety net.

  16. Lorikeet

    Nifty Nut:

    I am a member of the DLP, which is a Centrist party. That’s the centre of politics. It primarily supports workers, small business people and farmers. It doesn’t support large corporations running everything, or the ongoing delegation of our national sovereignty to international interests. That seems to be the role of the Labor/Liberal duopoly.

    You probably saw last night’s television news story on the sometimes violent rallies against Corporate Greed that were held in European capitals, and also here in Australia at the weekend.

    We cannot restore democracy to this nation, or try to hold onto a reasonable lifestyle for every Australian, unless we get rid of Kevin-and-the-Lemons.

    The Liberal Party is farthest to the right of the political spectrum. The Christian Democrats, Nationals, Family First, One Nation and probably some plenty of other parties are further to the right than the Democratic Labor Party (DLP). The DLP is to the left of Katter’s Party as well, although he has picked up some members of the ALP who want a fair go for all Australians.

  17. Lorikeet

    I don’t think Andrew Bolt is such a bad guy. I agree with him on some things, but perhaps not others.

  18. ken

    Andrew – I’m rather surprised that now you aren’t in the Senate that the approach to this is the typical tit for tatism of politics. Almost as childish as the toilet humour of whose got the biggest whopper. I suppose old habits die hard.

    I would prefer to debate the merits or otherwise of the tax, the rationale, the application and the expected result, and of course the collaterlal damage, the lack of understadning by those preaching that everyone will be compensated of the way people, particualrly on fixed incomes, manage their cash flow, and even moe importantly the ignornace of treasury modellers who assume poeple behave klike a spreadsheet as opposed to how real people who run a small business and manage their pricing.

    In the main I have no objection to market based mechansims as means to change behaviour, increasing sales tax on alcohol and cigarettes are classic examples and are universally applied to enable consumers choice. Unfortuantely i can’t see this tax as anything like that, it is actively encouraging consumers to not change behaviour, by telling them they will be compensated for not doing so, but they will end up paying more.

    it really is just anotehr way to raise revenue. Lost oppoutnity in my view.

  19. red crab

    Red Crab, the truth about the Children Overboard lies came out long ago. There have been a number of very comprehensive inquiries, much of it in public. There is plenty of evidence on the public record from people who were there, as well as from people who received the various pieces of information along the line of command and the communication trial through to Canberra

    in your own experience would you say that any inquiry ever gets to the real truth .

    what i was told indicated to me that it was! the truth.

    and as we know things can get distorted in any inquiry the answer given depends on how the questions are asked .

    and the same as some people in the media pen stories for a certain reaction .
    any inquire could be manipulated with the correct questions and answers.the same as happens in courts around the world every day.“Obviously, when circumstances change,

    governments do change their opinions, and that is actually the responsible course of action.”

    one would have to agree with that

    what the polititions don’t get yet is now the people who are the sovereign owners of this land expect there representatives to keep there promises s as best they can
    but it would appear that some polititions just don’t get it

  20. NIFTY NUT

    Andrew,

    I didn’t know about the order from Canberra to the Commander of the HMAS Adelaide (your comment Oct 14) which John Howard would have known about. How disgustingly IMMORAL!!!

    Lorikeet,

    You said that your children’s father would have no hesitation to toss your kids into the water rather than jump in holding them. What would YOU do? If I was holding a baby or toddler/young child, I wouldn’t be tossing them into the water and then jumping in after them in the hope of finding them in the ocean somewhere.

    Interesting that you and Red Crab are so up in arms about Julia Gillard’s so called “lie” yet have no response to the immorality of the Siev 4 situation, that Andrew spoke of.

  21. Lorikeet

    Nifty Nut:

    I was not there to see what happened to the Siev 4. Tony Zegenhagen spent about 10 years in the navy in his youth. He doesn’t believe any Australian navy personnel would leave anyone to drown. He should know better than we do.

    In case you weren’t aware, I sponsored children in Latin America through World Vision for 18 years. I knitted for kids living in the freezing back blocks of China and Europe until the GFC hit, and WV could no longer afford to ship the knitted garments. Since then I have knitted for bushfire, cyclone and flood victims in Australia, and earthquake victims in Christchurch, NZ.

    I also do some knitting for the Royal Children’s Hospital. I am still hoping we can get rid of Anna Bligh before she turns it into little more than a “bandaids and crutches” operation.

    Getting back to tossing kids into the water, they would bob to the surface very quickly. A team of adults working together could ensure their safety if a ship was sinking. My ex-husband and I have both been leaders with The Scout Association.

  22. red crab

    well nifty
    all i can say is don’t believe every thing you read or see in the media
    if what i was told about the siev4 is true then you wouldn’t like it because it dose not put the asylum seekers in a good light .
    but saying that if i was in there situation and as desperate i would probably do the same .

    as far as gillards lies go maybe we are just an example of what most people are saying maybe this is the end of the people excepting the lies of poititions the scarryest and the most powerful thing anyone can encounter is the truth.

  23. Lorikeet

    Ken:

    There is no guarantee that compensation will be paid on an ongoing basis. This could be the sweetener used to fool the voting public, since most of them are very sour regarding the undemocratic imposition of a Tax on Air.

  24. TerjeP

    In evaluating a lie there are many approaches that can be taken. One is to evaluate the lie and it’s consequences from a moral standpoint which is what Andrew has done. His approach is more from a virtue perspective (a judgement about character) than a utilitarian consequentialist perspective but none the less it is a moral judgment.

    Evaluating the Gillard lie from a moral perspective will have widely varying results depending on your view about a carbon tax. If you think the carbon tax will save the planet and it’s naive inhabitants then obviously the lie was small and perhaps hugely necessary. If you view the tax as monstrously destructive and useless then the lie is monumental. Comparing the motive behind the Gillard lie and the Howard lie suggests they are both the same. Both individuals thought the lie would help them retain power. Although I suspect that in both cases they meant or believed what they were saying at some point in the process even if not during the follow through.

    Aside from the moral perspective there is the political perspective. A political evaluation of a lie will look at things like the risk of being caught out, the cost of being caught out, what you lie about and who you lie for. On the last point the real issue is whether you lie for your core voter constituency or if you lie to your core voter constituency. In political terms the Howard lie is mostly benign. He was never completely caught because there is room for people to have doubts. He was lieing to advance and agenda his core voter constituency generally supported. Gillard on the other hand got caught red handed. Like Howard she was lieing to advance a cause many of her core voters supported, however many are also positively hostile. In political terms hers was the greater lie. She will pay dearly for it.

  25. NIFTY NUT

    In the last federal election 12% of the people voted for the Greens. I would suggest that these are people who wanted action taken on climate change and who care about the moral issues in our society. A percentage of the 12% were traditional Labor voters, like me. They voted Green because they wanted action on the moral issues (ETS, better treatment of refugees, marriage rights and full equality for homosexuals). If the Greens had not existed, Labor may have won the election outright, in spite of Julia Gillard saying she would not introduce a carbon tax. People who care about the moral issues in our society have not forgotten John Howard’s treatment of refugees and the many tactics he employed to divide our nation and stir prejudice. People who care about moral issues are unlikely to vote LNP.

    It is possible that those who oppose a carbon pricing scheme are making their voices heard louder (with the help of shock jocks) than those who want action on climate change at the moment. The hype about “the lie” is just part of the screaming.

    Terjep, regarding your last paragraph – where would you place John Howard’s lie about weapons of mass destruction existing in Iraq? I would say that his core voter constituency did not support going to war in Iraq. Also, I would argue against your point that Gillard “was lieing to advance a cause many of her core voters supported”. Don’t forget the 12%. Labor might actually benefit by moving more to the left.

  26. red crab

    so nifty
    with your 12% of the vote what gives the greens the right to dictate to the other 88%
    just what except complain about the treatment of ( asylum seekers ) would you as a greens supporter change .
    marriage rights for homosexuals is garbage what’s wrong with some sort of binding legal agreement none gays do it all the time .
    before you say some thing you will regret we have very close gay friends they are married of which i don’t have a problem the reason is because of problems in the future regarding property and belongings in the event of a sudden death of one of them that’s all.!!
    now you tell me of any more rites in this country other than marriage that i have over a homosexual person NONE so what’s the problem
    if you want to go run naked in a gay rights march that’s your business
    i don’t see the point

    nifty
    advice.
    never think for a second the an education gives you more knowlage than the school of life it only gives you the means to make an educated perception of a given situation .
    it dose not give you the abillaty to see a given situation with the wisdom of age and experience .

  27. NIFTY NUT

    Red Crab,

    You are very “crabby” today.

    Your advice is a dump of presumption as to what I think and who I am. It is categorically rejected by me as weird!

    Marriage rights will bestow full equality to homosexual unions. It will engender greater acceptance and recognition that homosexual love is no different to heterosexual love. I could go on but I won’t.

    So much of what you say is scrambled by contradiction. I feel thus disinclined to go into argument with your arguments which are hard to follow.

  28. TerjeP

    Nifty – I don’t think Howard lied about WMD in Iraq. I believe he was duped. He was simply too trusting of advice.

  29. Nifty Nut Says: Marriage rights will bestow full equality to homosexual unions. It will engender greater acceptance and recognition that homosexual love is no different to heterosexual love. I could go on but I won’t.

    Plent of people love their dog or cat. It doesnt mean that the too should be able to marry.
    The Homosexual marriage debate has nothing whatsoever to do with anyones rights

  30. As I have stated in the comments policy for this blog, comments which engage in deliberate vilification or hate-speech, such as the one above by Tony Z above would normally be deleted.

    On this occasion I decided to leave it up, as it provides a simple example of the extremist and destructive approach which the modern-day version of the DLP adopts. Equating the love between a same sex couple with the love people have for cats or dogs is a typical technique of such hate-mongers (usually along the way to putting same sex relationships on the same page as beastiality or pedophilia).

    Obviously the reality that a loving relationship between a same sex couple is on a par with a loving relationship between a couple of other opposite sex is something some people find too confronting for them to be able to comprehend this reality. If people do find that too psychologically threatening to deal with, that’s a matter for them. But I don’t believe it is acceptable for people to deal with that by attacking others or denigrating their relationships – particularly not on this blog.

  31. red crab

    your advice is a dump of presumption as to what I think and who I am. It is categorically rejected by me as weird!

    well nifty its not that hard to
    sort of profile you
    by the name you chose
    by the causes you champion and by the political party you strongly support
    and by the comment ( rejected by me as weird! ).

    you haven’t convinced me that i have more rights than anyone who is homosexual as a mater of fact i think its the other way around
    just imagine if i wanted to have a march celebrating none gay people
    how do you think that would go down .

    marriage is no more than a piece of paper binding two people together in the eyes of the law.
    i don’t care who marries who i just don’t see what all the fuss is about

    here is a tip what happens when they get what they want ( they are no longer special then what ) this subject is stupid who cares maybe less than !% of the population.

    there are much more important things to rectify way before we get down to that debate

    would you say that
    gay marriage and asylum seekers should take priority over the way our own indigenous people have and are being treated .

  32. Lorikeet

    Andrew:

    To be fair, I think we are looking at an extreme position on your part as well. I think “hate speech” is too strong a term to use. I also think it is undemocratic to criticise someone who expresses a different opinion.

    There are excellent social, medical and financial reasons for rejecting the legalisation of Homosexual Marriage and Adoption.

    As we know, modern psychologists believe that a child’s personality and social adjustment are the product of:

    1. genetic inheritance
    2. social modelling

    It then follows that if the adults in a household model same-sex behaviour, then it is more likely to be learned by the children.

    Ever since the Family Planning Association has been teaching primary school children that homosexuality is normal, there has been an increase in experimentation among high school students. I have heard this first hand from students when travelling on buses and trains.

    The legalisation of Homosexual Marriage and Adoption will also create more difficult Family Court issues and greater costs for the community, because there are more than 2 parents with an emotional and/or biological stake in the children.

    Let us take the case of Penny Wong becoming a parent in December. Although she will be taking on the role of father, the biological father of the baby is a friend. If Penny splits from her partner or there is a falling out or disagreement among friends, or the ladies start demanding money that wasn’t within the original agreement, what is this going to cost in both social and financial terms to resolve?

    What will be the emotional effect on children of being pulled 3 ways in a nasty dispute over visitation or custody?

    What if all 3 people repartner?

    I think Tony Zegenhagen is correct and his comments refer to the damaging and complex effects of legalising aberrant behaviours which do not result in natural procreation.

    I think it is unwise for parental figures in our society to support this damaging type of Social Engineering.

  33. NIFTY NUT

    Andrew,

    Thank you for your comments and for allowing Tony Zegenhagen’s ignorance to be exposed rather than deleted. Exposure helps us gain insight into the homophobic views of DLP members, which of course would be reflected in DLP policy.

    Terjep,

    John Howard was not a naive, trusting man. He was a wily fox employing cunning tactics to dupe and divide the Australian people. I have no doubt he lied about the presence of WMDs in Iraq. I have no doubt he lied about the so called “inhumane behaviour” of the asylum seekers on the Siev 4 to further fire racial hatred in this country. Power (at any moral cost) was everything to Howard – he was a manipulator!

    Unfortunately Tony Abbott is as bad, if not worse. God help us if he ever realizes his dream to become PM!

  34. Lorikeet

    I don’t have a problem with people holding different opinions. For example, I disagree with your position and the analysis you have provided to explain it. What I do object to is when someone deliberately vilifies a person, particularly when that person is already the subject of discrimination.

  35. TerjeP

    Nifty – Howard was capable of lies and he was cunning it is just on the question of WMD that I disagree with you. I think the Iraq war was folly.

    All this talk of the DLP makes me want to point out that the DLP and the LDP are completely different parties. I’m a member of the LDP, formerly a candidate for the LDP and formerly on the federal executive of the LDP and I’d just like to make it clear that the LDP is a long sanding supporter of same sex marriage. Please don’t confuse the LDP with the DLP or the LNP or any other lesser parties. ;-)

  36. red crab

    question to nifty
    im trying to understand

    are you gay??

  37. ken

    I really don’t think that matters red

    however I do think there is a difference between homosexual love and heterosexula love, on the basis of the outcomes of that love, which of course is the bilogical basis for the perpetuation of the species. I don’t thinkl there is the same difference on the emotional aspects of that love.

    Whether marriage, as we know it is relevant or will achieve anything that can’t already be achieved is debateable, however like the “apology” to the stolen generations homosexual marriage has become a symbol of substance and a cause in and of its own right, irrespectvie of any practical benefit.

    As for lying on WMD, who knows, the advice was all given, they wanted to hear it I am sure, I think JWH was also very heavily emotioanlly involveld due to being in US at the time of 9/11, but to view it all as a pack of deliberate lies measn the conspiracy between many agenices etc was on a grand scale, very easy for people like nifty to throw retrospective stones. Often those types haevn’t ever had to make any more signficant decsion affecting others other than what side of the road upon which to drive.

  38. Lorikeet

    I don’t believe that homosexuals are being discriminated against. They have exactly the same rights as the rest of us, to marry someone of the opposite sex and have a family.

    For those who aren’t aware, there are already plenty of people around who engage in bestiality with their family pets.

    There are people around who are paraphilial, and some who are any-o-sexual.

    Nifty Nut:

    The term “homophobia” means that people are scared of homosexuals and is certainly being misused here.

  39. NIFTY NUT

    Red Crab,

    “well nifty its not that hard to
    sort of profile you
    by the name you chose
    by the causes you champion and by the political party you strongly support
    and by the comment (rejected by me as weird!).”

    I chose my name as a joke when I solved Ken’s puzzle in the “Changing Times” strand. It was amusing at the time but now I’m stuck with it and I don’t particularly like it. It’s understandable I guess that you might think it denotes self given superiority but I assure you it doesn’t. I try to avoid notions of superiority/inferiority (which are just 2 sides of the same coin) on any level. Such comparisons are not good for our self-esteem.

    As for the rest, I would say you are not “profiling” me, you are judging me. I am open about my profile. Your advice was based on your judgement of me and I still think it was rather weird.

    The Rudd government certainly did a lot toward achieving equal rights for homosexuals. I think Ken best describes the importance of marriage rights. The subject, which you say “is not really important”, was pounced upon and expanded by you in response to one short comment I previously made. You certainly seem interested in it! Why does it matter to you whether I am gay or not?

    In answer to your question asking whether I think “gay marriage and asylum seekers should take priority over the way our own indigenous people have and are being treated” :
    I don’t compare and categorize areas involving pain and injustice for others. They are all important!

  40. red crab

    nifty
    im not judging you or any one elce im just trying to understand the drivers behind your opinions .
    my comment that you called weird is no more criptic than that of kens
    anyone over 40 or 50 would have picked up what i was saying to you easily.

    as usual ken has been able to say with ease what i was trying to say thanks ken
    homosexual marriage has become a symbol of substance and a cause in and of its own right, irrespectvie of any practical benefit.

    that’s why i asked weather you are gay i am not trying to offend in any way i would just like to understand why.
    it really dos not mater to me if you are gay or not i do have friends who are and find there company and friendship no more or less important than others
    if you are then to me it make sense
    but if not i would like to be able to understand why
    that’s all no sinister reasons or agenda,s
    just understanding.

    I don’t compare and categorize areas involving pain and injustice for others. They are all important!

    well nifty i think you should because some things are in need off priority and action than others

    any govt in power likes things like the debate about gay rights sorry day ect it diverts focus away from the things like indigenous mistreatment carbon tax people starving around the world killer floods
    the fact tha queenslanders are living in tents while asylum seekers enjoy 5 star accommodation etc etc

    im just trying to understand why some people think that gay rights and other things of the same measure are more important that’s all.

  41. NIFTY NUT

    Lorikeet,

    1. Your comment
    “They (homosexuals) have exactly the same rights as the rest of us, to marry someone of the opposite sex and have a family”
    is devoid of emotional intelligence.

    2. What does bestiality have to do with anything?

    3. What does paraphilia or “any-o-sexual” (whatever that is) have to do with anything?

    4. Everyone knows what homophobia means. You are a prime example of a homophobic person!

  42. Lorikeet

    That’s really silly, Nifty Nut. You’ve never even met me but it doesn’t stop you from calling me names.

    I have read a book on Emotional Intelligence, have you?

    Are you a teenager or under 25?

  43. red crab

    nifty
    there are as far as i know other than species that can actually change its sex of which humans are not
    that can produce offspring with out a male and a female of the species humans included
    when two human males or two females can produce offspring naturally then i will agree with the you but until then i cant
    but thats not to say that i disapprove of same sex marriage or there love for each other is less stronger because they are gay .
    i strongly disapprove of artificial insemination or surrogates for gay people who are capable of doing the deed themselves .if some one is so desperate to have a baby then i think they would be capable of putting THEMSELVES out to attain there goal
    in that case i dont see a problem but the excuse i cant because im gay dose not wash with me .
    bestiality has nothing to do with it other than andrew jumping on it and as i see it using it knowing full well he was using it completely out of context but not being able to resist the temptation
    and if you nifty couldent have picked up on that to then i think you should go read my so called weird statement again

    4. Everyone knows what homophobia means. You are a prime example of a homophobic person!

    phobia means that a person is afraid of something
    i don’t think there are to many people afraid of homosexuals i think its used buy gay people because they cant find a better word just like they prefer to be called gay because it sounds better than homosexual which by the way is the correct word to use
    i just dont understand so what name do you have for me

  44. NIFTY NUT

    Interesting how enmeshed Red Crab and Lorikeet appear to be in their views and habit of answering for each other.

    I can’t really work out what Red Crab is going on about! For example:

    “when two human males or two females can produce offspring naturally then i will agree with you but until then i cant”

    Agree with me about what for goodness sake?

    It’s all too brain twisting for me!

  45. Lorikeet

    Nifty Nut:

    It is quite simple for anyone to understand. I have known Red Crab via this blog for quite some time, but any enmeshment is in your own imagination.

    Perhaps if you imagined things less, you might understand more.

  46. red crab

    nifty your doing the same as the media and some polititions do
    selective reporting and incompleat quotes
    to attaine a certain reaction
    you know what i mean so why try to be a smarty pants
    i would have thought better of someone like you mabe i was wrong .

    lorrikeet
    Your comment
    “They (homosexuals) have exactly the same rights as the rest of us, to marry someone of the opposite sex and have a family”
    is devoid of emotional intelligence.

    although that is lorrikeets quote
    it would seam by you rhetoric that its what you support
    so now read my comment again maybe this time you will understand if you haven’t already

    but as usual when the debate is not going your way rule one ! resort to name calling and nit picking .

    p.s you never answered my question are you gay

  47. appy

    Just as a matter of interest, I understand Penny Wong’s parents are heterosexual, and I know that my cousin of the generation above me and the one of the same generation as me came from families of 8 children each (Catholics) of which the parents were outwardly at any rate, heterosexual. Where, then, did Ms Wong and my 2 cousins get the idea that they were NOT heterosexual, if it is so important to stop children from growing up in a house with 2 homosexual parents?

    Fairly silly notion, when you think about it. When did my widowed grandmother sit down and teach the baby who had never seen his father how to be a heterosexual, if you need a male and a female role model? (My uncle grew up in a household of women – his mother was a housekeeper in a convent in his pre-university years. ) As far as I can tell, he seems to have fathered 4 chldren at least – possibly not gay either.

    This reminds me of the 1970s joke (sad that we are still fighting this same stupid battle) “Person 1: My mother made me a homosexual.” Person 2: “If I bought the wool, would she make me one, too?”

  48. NIFTY NUT

    Good joke Appy. Thank god for you. I was beginning to feel overwhelmed by “the duo”. Desertion was one step away!

  49. Lorikeet

    I guess you people need to argue your case with the experts on Nature/Nurture, instead of expecting bloggers to give opinions on Penny Wong or anyone else we have never actually met.

    Over the years, I have heard many different reasons for people involving themselves in homosexual relationships.

    Red Crab:

    I was quoting the spirit of the law as it stands, which is also in keeping with the natural order of a human society, uncomplicated by aberrant couplings, or multiple partnering of any kind.

  50. redcrab

    thanks appy
    i think your joke is closer to the actual way people thought back then ..
    its just a shame its not of like that still .
    nifty i have close friends that i have known from child hood they are gay and legally married for 20 pluss years also friends who owned the pub at dalby in queensland they to are gay but not married i think in all the 50 pluss years i have known them and 40yrs knowing them as gay not once have i ever herd them complain they have less rites than anyone elce in this country

    i think kens comment sums up the whole debate in a few words

    Whether marriage, as we know it is relevant or will achieve anything that can’t already be achieved is debateable, however like the “apology” to the stolen generations homosexual marriage has become a symbol of substance and a cause in and of its own right, irrespectvie of any practical benefit.

  51. NIFTY NUT

    Lorikeet,

    Although there are some good books on Emotional Intelligence, it is not learned from books. It stems from within and is called empathy. Deep understanding of others and their situations can only be obtained through empathy.

    Then there is intelligence based on good reasoning and facts, which Appy has just demonstrated.

    You are offering nothing of the first in any of your comments and very little of the second. Most of what you write is based on subjective opinion.

    Red Crab,

    Sorry, but I can’t understand what you are getting at. Most of your comment appears to be personal attack.

    I haven’t called anyone names. Can you point out where you think I have?

  52. appy

    Lorikeet: while it is true that I have never met Penny Wong, I can assure you that both Cousin J and Cousin S are well-known to me – and there was nothing much different in their upbringing than in mine. Could you please name your un-named experts on Nature/Nurture .. as far as I am aware, having typed up many, many papers for PhD students on this topic, the jury is still out, if you are looking for a ‘covers-all-cases’ answer. As with many things in biology, we have no real idea.

    The American Psychological Association said this: “studies comparing groups of children raised by homosexual and by heterosexual parents find no developmental differences between the two groups of children in their intelligence, psychological adjustment, social adjustment, popularity with friends, development of social sex role identity or development of sexual orientation” (APA, 2005).

    It’s possible that some other facts willc ome forward as there ae greater numbers of such children. I doubt it.

    Whether or not it is true taht some people deliberately decide whether to enter a homosexual relationship becuase of fear/distate for the hetersexual gender, I feel, has ntohign to do with the fact taht many people are simply born homosexual. If we know nothing else about humans, we know, surely, that they are not easily classificable into 2 groups, of identical characteristics.

    I am married and have no qualms about other people marryign, if they wish to. It does nto take away from my marriage whether yours is arrnaged or for love, for cynical, financial or other reasons, or whether you are gay and your partner is too. (Remember, there are many people who are guy, but who enter heterosexual marriages for reasons they often don’t confide in their partner.) There are many thigns to worry about in this world without worrying about the sex life of your neighbour.

  53. Lorikeet

    Those who know me well are aware that I have an IQ in the top 2% of the population, have a wide ranging life experience, and am a highly empathic person.

    Both Appy and Nifty Nut are very good at jumping to belittling conclusions about other people’s experience and knowledge base.

    I’m sure I could write at least a few chapters on all of the reasons that have been floated for people being gay.

    I trust you ladies will spend a couple more decades gaining some life experience before rudely unloading more of your inexperience and insults on other people.

  54. NIFTY NUT

    Red Crab,

    Your Oct 25 comment wasn’t up when I wrote. In my last comment I was referring to your Oct 24 commentary. What you have written most recently, I have no argument with – I do agree about the symbolic importance of marriage rights for homosexuals (Ken’s point) and said so earlier.

    Now can we move on?

    Lorikeet,

    There is no evidence that anything written in your first sentence (Oct 25) is true. There is much evidence to the contrary!

  55. Lorikeet

    I have both documentary evidence and a long history of supporting the starving and the destitute, in our own nation and abroad.

    I never worry about young whipper snappers of women who think they know everything, particularly when their zeal is not matched by their life experience.

  56. redcrab

    ok nifty lets move on
    i think we both agree on some points and will never agree on some others

    so how did we or who hijacked the subject of lies by polititions to the subject of gay marriage i for one didn’t see it happen.

    i think the the bill is being pushed by a certain greens leader and Labor environment minister who should have indicated there intentions before the last election and why .i suppose its not really lying its just not telling the whole story only the bits needed to gain an end result in the favour of the story teller .
    its like a lot of polititions they never lie just sometimes don’t tell the truth .

  57. Daniel

    Labor and Liberals reek of being hypocrites on many issues. Thats why the only party really is the Greens.

  58. Appy

    Lorikeet – what belittling assumptions do you refer to? I’m afraid your claims to have passed an IQ test with a score that plaaces you in the top 2% tells us (if it is true) only about your ability to pass IQ tests, and about your potential, if we accept that IQ tests mean a thing.

    What you do with that potential is another thing entirely, and if you adopt a tone of lofty superiority in all your human interactions I can only wonder at your other statement about empathy as well.

    Your ability to write chapters again tells us nothing about the accuracy of your statements. You seem to confuse having a lot to say with having a lot of worth to offer.

    Red Crab : were you unaware before the last election of the Greens’ position on gay marriage? You clearly didn’t read their information then.

    Not sure what you mean about the Environment Minister – do you mean Tony Burke? I don’t think he has declared a position on this issue.

    If you were referring to Penny Wong, I’m pretty sure she is Assistant Treasurer … previously minister for Water, I believe. I don’t know that she has sponsored any bill on gay marriage, but you may be able to point me to facts saying otherwise.

    I am not sure who you say has been not telling the truth – you need to put forward some facts.

  59. Lorikeet

    Appy:

    There are Greens supporters on other blogs who are just as obnoxious as you. First they cast aspersions on a person’s intelligence, and then when the person responds, they accuse them of being a smart aleck. Trust me, I know the drill.

    Sometimes they complain about someone being off topic. Then they nag the person to death about something that is not on topic. Then when they give in to their nagging, they accuse them of being off topic again!

  60. red crab

    opps

    got that a little wrong just as well you understand what i was trying to say. but thanks for correcting me
    i know that i do from time to time get confused
    but you know that i know you are far more intellegent than me
    but remember on thing
    its people like me that put govts in although democratic process was corrupted by the greens and independents last election there is no doubt that will be rectified in the next one no mater when it is .
    but i think i must represent in some way how the majority of Australians are thinking at the moment i think the govt and people like yourself know this and are hopeing it will all blow over before the next election just like the people punished the democrats for the gst the greens and independents will be disposed of the same way .

    THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING!!

    .I am not sure who you say has been not telling the truth – you need to put forward some facts

    let me think is julia gillard a good one mabe john howard to and i am Shaw that if i as well as you had a look back through australian political history we both would come up with a fairly substantial list without to much effort.
    .

  61. appy

    red crab – the current government was elected by the population. The fact that there have been different results from what sometimes happens (i.e. not a lanslide for one side or the other) is a result of how people voted. Therefore, it is not a corruption, because the system is still working. There have been times in the past when the government has depended on the votes of minor parties – cast your mind back to the DLP, if you are old enough, and the Country Party has been pivotal in keeping hte LIberals in, when it lived up to its name. Eventually it grew so far from the Country that it changed its name and that’s where people like Tony Windsor, Bob Katter for all I dislike him and Rob Oakshott came from.
    As for politicians changing their minds, it happens all the time, and why wouldn’t you change your mind if the circumstances change? I wuld not want a Prime Minister who refused to take into account new events, new facts or unforeseen consequences. Whether Gillard was unwise to say what is now being spun as a flat rejection of a carbon tax is up to the observer – I would no more call her a liar than Abbott, Howard, and all their predecessors.

    Please don’t waste electricity with that “you are more intelligent than I am ” bullshit – it is a silly old debating trick and makes you look dishonest. Lorikeet does the opposite, and it is also a waste of finger skin cells and the wear and tear on the keyboard.

  62. NIFTY NUT

    Go Appy. Well said!

  63. red crab

    well you are correct once again except the part about i should have sead educated rather than intelligence .
    i referred to corruption a bit to hastily to maybe
    i should have sead that the present govt was put there buy the greens and independents not the population because they thought and correctly so that there agendas had a better than average chance with gillard .
    what new facts or unforeseen consequences have come to light that would have made the govt change there mind on the carbon tax! other than the threat to take support away from the the govt nothing

  64. appy

    red crab – If you think that Gillard foresaw or desired the current minority government, you must the the only one who thinks so. When she made whatever statement about a carbon tax she did, she clearly had in mind a government that she was going to lead having the balance of power in its own right. The situation that now prevails is one where she has to negotiate with the pivotal minority people – who were also elected, like it or not. Abbott would have had to do the same thing, except that I gather he was incapable of persuading them that he would do what they wanted. That is political life. In the 90s, Howard managed to eventually negotiate with a Senator from Tasmania, whose name I forget, that our overseas aid would be directed by the rules imposed by the Vatican, despite this country being supposedly a secular one. This was done to get his support in close votes in the Senate. Were you cross about that at the time? You should have been, if you were not.

  65. red crab

    appy if i had known i would have been less than impressed
    i went and had a look at the greens policies nothing really stands out exept there obsession about gay rights .
    but what did catch my eye was what they did to the the Tasy govt i think the words used by the person involved was that he regretted ever having negotiated with bob brown to gain power and has lived to regret it .
    sounds familiar
    i think gillard will regret ever aligning with the greens .

    you think that im the only person who thinks that gillard knew what she was getting into
    give me some credit for a small amount of intelligence don’t you think that the advisers to the labor party didnt tell her who she was dealing with and the risk she was taking according to history
    but it would seem to me a case of power at any price and bugger the cost .
    , like it or not. Abbott would have had to do the same thing, except that I gather he was incapable of persuading them that he would do what they wanted.

    so negotiate with the weakest link the person or party that would do there bidding without question to stay in power .
    thats politics in 2010
    and it stinks

  66. There is a dispute between rival groups claiming to be the real DLP.
    In NSW the established branch of Michael O’Donohue enjoys the continued recognition of the NSW Electoral Commission. I support this branch.

    The opponents of Michael O’Donohue’s branch are colleagues of Tony Zegenhagen who is listed as the Federal Secretary through the AEC.

    JOhn Mulholland is challenging this and hopes to regain this position through his legal challenge at the Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal. Zegenhagen was as opposing party to that case. The case has been heard and we all await the decision.

    Zegenhagen had a listed policy of opposition to the rent resources tax.

    Meanwhile myself and Michael O’Donohue support a 40% tax on super profits. There are other policies and approaches from a Langite and McKellite NSW ALP tradition that we have for the DLP which is in stark contrast to the approach of Zegenhagen and his colleagues.

  67. red crab

    i wonder if western australia managed to secede from the commonwealth
    what would happen to Canberra,s money grab .
    i think it would be like pulling the plug out of the bath
    interesting how only 2.5 million people contribute 47% of the entire country’s wealth .

  68. Lorikeet

    Red Crab:

    If you have the mineral resources, plenty of money comes in. Who knows where the hell it goes from here in Queensland?!

    It certainly doesn’t go into infrastructure such as housing, hospitals and schools.

    Michael Webb:

    I’m not quite sure who you are, but I can tell you that Senator John Madigan, Tony Zegenhagen and the team are doing a mighty good job in Canberra and Ballarat.

  69. meanwhile myself and Michael O’Donohue support a 40% tax on super profits. There are other policies and approaches from a Langite and McKellite NSW ALP tradition that we have for the DLP which is in stark contrast to the approach of Zegenhagen and his colleagues.

    Mr Webb (The great admirer of the ALP) seems your own party doesn’t even support you. If your going to pretend to be someone your not then at least attempt to follow politics. The 40% was dumped by the ALP months ago. Renegotiations saved 5 billion in investment and saved thousands of jobs.
    Since you were expelled who are you with these days. CDP, ALP, its hard to keep up with Michael

  70. The best way and the fairest way to collect extra tax during a mining boom is at the Federal level. As Australians, it should not matter how much resources and minerals your individual State holds in the ground. The key focus should be upon all Australians, not just some- based on State boundaries, to benefit.

    The zero tax policy proposed by the DLP under Zegenhagen and colleagues would mean unfunded infrasturcurre, unfunded superannaution gaurantee levy for workers.

    Under Gilard the compromise of only 22.5% rent resources tax means only partial funding of the above.

    Under an O’Donohue/Webb DLP led leadership of the DLP a full 40% rent resources tax would mean a total ability to fund all of these goodies for national development and for workers’ retirement years.

  71. red crab

    Under an O’Donohue/Webb DLP led leadership of the DLP a full 40% rent resources tax would mean a total ability to fund all of these goodies for national development and for workers’ retirement years.

    don’t you mean goody s for the states that want more than there fare share considering the amount that they actually contribute .

    i read that n.s.w is trying to grab more gst than what they are due

    don’t think that most people in w.a are well off they are not only a few are
    therefore w.a. should get back the same percentage of revenue that they actually taken by the commonwealth .
    now there’s an interesting concept
    the reason for gillards 22% is because Barnett threatened to wipe it all out with a state royalty’s increase

  72. There are other ways to skin a State that is deemed to be going against the national interest.

  73. Lorikeet

    Red Crab is right. Queensland and WA both have a huge mineral wealth. Where does it go? Certainly not into hospitals, schools and public housing here in Queensland.

  74. red crab

    michael webb
    just where is this mining boom going on is it nsw no i don’t think s is it victoria no again maybe in canberra ops they only mine money there

    the only thing the fed govt dose for west australia and queensland is take
    and lie about the benefits they will give back to us but the truth is all they will ever do is take to prop up the other states .
    ops sorry we got to host chogam and pay for it as well
    as lorikeet suggests there are much more important things that we need first .

  75. appy

    Given how little of the actual investment capital in WA mining industry (the source of the current boom) actually originates in Perth, and therefore, as I understand the capitaist system, how little of the profits (about 20% I have read) would stay in WA if the western end secedes or not, what difference would it make? Oh, well, they’d have to fund their own defence, customs, collect their own income tax, run their own ports, regulate their own shipping, quarantine, trade negotiations, currency, etc etc.

    Fabulous idea. I see it as a net profit to the rest of the states, except that first we’d demand the money back for e.g. infrastructure and Grants Commission money sent over there since the last dummy spit in the 1930s.

    Would raise the Australian national IQ by a few points, too. ;-0

  76. appy

    Red Crab – you might want to check the constitution – WA cannot secede unless there is a referendum to change it – it is not possible now, and it wasn’t in the 1930s. What you actually want, if the mismanagement of money is the probelm, is to consider carving out a new state in the PIlbara, if it ever becomes possible to disintegrate the nation. That would ensure that the money stays where it is dug up, but there is the small matter again of where the capital comes from. Where are Twiggy’s shareholders, for example? And who will save you from China or Indonesia when things get tough?

  77. Ken

    On this one Appy and to a lesser extent Webb are on the money, as it were.

  78. paul walter

    Only a little while ago our host was mourning the demise of the blogosphere. Yet here we are, a thread with nearly eighty comments in only a few days.
    I think the business about broken promises as to a necessary carbon amelioration policy just appears complete bunkum.
    Labor got elected in 2007 on a platform that included long overdue promises as to environment, including Murray Basin reform and climate change action.
    Altho Rudd was forced to back off substantial policy change on this by the big mining trans nationals, the denialists and the discredited Murdoch press, the problem was too serious to be ignored: the Greens knew it, the Independents knew it and Labor itself knew that Tony Abbotts la-la land denialism was not an adequate response to the science. Hence the revisit after Gillard won her election.

  79. Terjep says: All this talk of the DLP makes me want to point out that the DLP and the LDP are completely different parties. I’m a member of the LDP
    Thats right the LDP is extreme right economically and is morally bankrupt. In the 2007 Election the LDP ran a no fault policy that excluded chargers of incest etc.
    Nifty Nuts says: Thank you for your comments and for allowing Tony Zegenhagen’s ignorance to be exposed rather than deleted. Exposure helps us gain insight into the homophobic views of DLP members, which of course would be reflected in DLP policy.
    Its a strange website that refers to the norm as extreme and the extreme left as the norm

  80. red crab

    thanks appy funny how those on the east coast get so defensive about any suggestion of w.a and its money leaving the commonwealth mabe you should find out what really happened when w.a had a referendum to leave the commonwealth they voted 63% for the yes vote the fed govt didn’t know what to do so it was put to a commit y made up of several insignificant British public servants to sort out .
    anyway it was just a question to get a reaction worked well wouldn’t you say.
    paul walter
    as always your comments are very good and correct
    the only thing i would say is that gillard knew that she was going to change her mind irrespective of any argument for or against because she had already made an agreement for the green vot and that was part of the deal same as gay marriage is now the people know this
    interesting how the relationship between the labor and greens is starting to show strain .
    i stand by my prediction that the greens as did the democrats are going to be left holding the bag in the next election .

    Where are Twiggy’s shareholders, for example? And who will save you from China or Indonesia when things get tough?

    appy thats not nice
    if there is any one to save us from any problems it wont be your mob they will do as they did in the second world war take the money and run .
    besides with all the money they get from here they cant even protect the borders here now . better to be building bigger processing centre s here
    Oh, well, they’d have to fund their own defence, customs, collect their own income tax, run their own ports, regulate their own shipping, quarantine, trade negotiations, currency, etc etc.
    with nearly half the nations wealth i dont think that would be a problem.

  81. Tony, there are no explusions,neither of myself or Michael O’Donohue.
    It is we who do not recognise you Tony.
    Our Branch is still recognised by the NSW Electoral Commission whereas your colleagues who have the other ‘branch’ do not enjoy recognition. This has been the way for one year now and despite all your letters and your friends’ letters to the NSW Electoral Commission it is my fellow branch member and Secretary in NSW Michael O’Donohue who continues on.

    Also the rank and file of the ALP want a 40% rent resoruces tax. They make up the ALP; not just officials who modified it to the 22.5% rate. But your policy is worse than everyone’s in that you rejected any rent resources tax. You are not ‘real Labor’ with a dud thoughtline like that, that you announced proudly on your old website.

  82. Lorikeet

    The Slave Labor Party (ALP) is real all right. A real pain in the butt!

  83. paul walter

    This Michael Webb sounds much more credible than the dreaded Tony, more interested in policy than fantasy.
    The thread topic was, I remember, more to do with carbon pricing than denialism.

  84. Michael Webb

    The publicised so-called DLP under the Rawson/Williams group in NSW appears to be a Slave Labor Party more so than the ALP because it has a policy on industrial relations that has a “neutral” stance towards trade unions; and says that workers and management can work towards wages and conditions being worked out by boss/worker committes with unions being kept out.

    Not even Senator Madigan would go along with them I suspect.

    They call themselves ‘pro worker’and ‘real Labor’ but really the ALP heritagey apply amateurish fantasies and misapplied Catholic social teaching through a narrow lens and its shows.
    Waht a real labor Party would have is supporters who are comfortable with fully functioning unions, not having poltical represeentatives with policies of ‘netral’ stances towards unions. This is not the pre 1955 ALP heritage; and this group are certainly not heirs to it.

  85. Lorikeet

    A few months ago, the Queensland Branch of the DLP fully ratified the union movement’s stated goals.

    As we know, the Labor government is very slow to listen to both unions and workers, and supports large corporate organisations in their quests to dud workers, service recipients and shareholders.

    Liberals are the same, but their policies are far more punitive of the poor.

    Unions were originally small groups of workers who did their own negotiations with bosses, withdrawing their labour to emphasise their needs, if an impasse was reached.

    To my knowledge, all political parties kick out people whom they consider unsuitable for membership.

Reply to “Lies, Damn Lies and really really Big Lies”

Mini Posts

  • Rhetoric vs reality

    I’ve had a break from writing for a variety of reasons, but the reckless approach the new Queensland government is taking to their spending decisions – and the straightout nonsensicality of some of their claims – roused me enough to pen a piece for New Matilda. Time will tell whether the Newman government will start trying to ensure their statements have some connection with reality – I suggest the way they respond next year to the findings of the inquiry into child safety which they’ve established will be a significant test.

    (2)
  • End of LP the end of a blogging era

    Back in October, I wrote here about the decline or re-defining of blogs, at least in the Australian political arena.  The relatively few posts I’ve done on this blog since then shows how much less useful I find it to do my own blog than I used to, and as I mentioned back then, a big reason why I don’t read many of the blogs I used to is because the valuable links to many interesting stories, ideas and pieces of information can be found more easily through Twitter or Facebook, sometimes with comment threads which are also at least as good. The recent announcement by the Larvatus Prodeo blog that they are ceasing to operate is quite a significant one.

    More... (7)
  • A final comment on Labor's leadership laments

    Fundamentally, I don’t greatly care about the outcome of Labor’s leadership travails. As my previous post indicates, the bigger issue is that the ALP is being fundamentally damaged by the toxicity of this brawl, and the fact that the brawl is happening in this way is a sign of some much greater problems within Labor. Whatever the immediate outcome, I think those problems are likely to continue.  The outcome of the leadership contest (including the size of what will surely be a Gillard victory) will shape how those problems play out, but they will still be there. Not surprisingly, I see this as presenting an opportunity for the Greens to build some support, but more importantly it presets extra responsibility and obligation for the Greens to be a stronger counter to what is a seriously reactionary Coalition. But seeing we’re all pundits now, and despite having little inside knowledge, my prediction is that there will be no ‘third candidate’ in tomorrow’s leadership ballot.  Julia Gillard will win comfortably. The instability will not disappear. It’s quite possible there will be another leadership ballot before the election but Kevin Rudd will not become leader then either. No matter how good Kevin Rudd looks in the polls, that polling lead would disappear very quickly if he was back in the PM’s job.

    (29)
  • A long time between hits

    In amongst all the politics and policy stuff, I try to make time to do some things that are completely disconnected from that*.  One thing I’ve found myself doing recently is doing a bit of practicing with a band, which has led to me doing a live performance for the first time in a long time.  Readers of this blog with a very long memory for minor matters may recall that I played keyboards in a couple of mini-performances with a band as part of promoting the Rock Against Howard compilation CD prior to the 2004 election.  However, drumming is what I’m better at – although I’m still a long way short of being able to say I’m good at it – which is what I am doing in the band I’m currently doing stuff with.  They’re doing their first full live Brisbane show tonight – which I think will be the first time since 1988 I’ve played drums in a live show.  It’s all nice and low-key, and for peoples’ enjoyment rather with an eye to making money out of it, so will make a nice change. *Actually, I don’t think anything is completely disconnected from politics. By coincidence, today also happens to be National SLAM Day – Save Live Australian Music.  As their website shows,

    More... (0)
  • The Ups & Downs of Ups & Downs - interview with Greg Atkinson

    I’ve mentioned before my liking for the 80s Brisbane band Ups and Downs. I got a chance to interview their lead singer Greg Atkinson on 4ZzZ FM a few weeks ago. They’ve released a compilation CD of 20 of their best tunes and played a gig in Brisbane earlier this month to promote and celebrate it. It was a fairly long interview, but I found it very interesting to hear the views of someone who has been active in the independent sphere of the music industry for so long about what has changed and what is the same. You can listen to the interview at this link.

    (0)
  • Speeches to refugee rally + SIEV-X exhibition

    A local activist helpfully recorded speeches given by myself and by Julian Burnside at a refugee rights rally held in Brisbane last Saturday.  You can listen to them here and here. The rally was held to mark the tenth anniversary of the sinking of the SIEV-X.  353 refugees drowned when that refugee boat sank on the way to Australia on 19 October 2001.  There is a beautiful exhibition at The Studio on the ground level at the State Library of Qld this week, commemorating that anniversary. It finishes this weekend – I strongly recommend you try to get along for a look if you have a chance. The Library also has a screening of the documentary Hope on Friday October 28 – this film tell the story of Amal Basry, one of the few survivors of that tragedy.

    (0)
  • Stuff from my 4ZZZ shift this week

    Every Monday morning I do a shift on radio 4ZzZ FM102.1 – Brisbane’s longest serving community radio station (36 years old this year). And almost every week I talk with social media expert and lawyer Peter Black about some current political and other issues. You can listen to our talk this week by clicking on this link (it goes for over 30 minutes and has the occasional sweary word, so probably best just for dedicated fans). You can see the songlist I played this week – as usual featuring a sizable number of local artists – at this link, which in most cases also contains further links to other videos, information or photos of the artists.

    (3)