From cow hides to sinking boats the election groupies are scavenging for bits of information and to be the first to press and to of course get a particular point of view across much reality is being lost or shelved until after the election.
One big debate point, and something the Coalition government is pushing is immigration; they cry we are going to stop the boats - well, they didn't before they just sent them to an island - made the books look better. The Labor government want to do a deal with East Timor which sounds smarter but looks a difficult proposition but at least it isn't the same as the Howard government did before only called something else. The funny thing about immigration at the moment is that it is on the decline because of steps taken already by the Labor government but the Coalition seem to be taking credit, or trying to take credit for it - the data is there and yet Mr Abbott is barely questioned on this p; why is his government promising something the Labor government already has done? Very confusing if you ask all the black ducks waddling about on the grass of political fat cat ville.
So, it is stated the Coalition government looks pretty good but to date, and this is again the weirdness of political reporting, they haven't actually promised to do anything for the people of Australia other than to increase a tax and push up the general cost of living. A palm slap to the forehead brings a mind to wonder, if that is the best they can offer just how are they seen to be as good as what we had in government?
To date every single policy delivered by the Coalition and Mr Tony Abbott has big business written all over it - even the childcare rebate is only effective if you are a wealthy household - the shallow promise. Goodness me, how big was that fish?
It would be easy to take shots at Julia Gillard, with the grating voice but there does need to be some credit given - she is delivering a positive, yet difficult message - she knows things are a tough sell but she isn't beefing up lots of nothing to deliver as a something promise.
Another week begins and the emptiness only grows greater, it is just at this time the emptiness of nothing on offer from the Coaltion is less than the nothing by Labor. The only reason the budget will return to surplus in 3 years is because we didn't sink into a recession - again expensive but smart thinking save our collective backsides. Now the economy is healing itself it appears the Coalition want to take credit for it - remember they tried to block the salvation of the economy. Again, more nothing promised from nothing --
Fair Dinkum was the word of the moment and I must say Tony Abbott said this so often I knew he was pulling a leg or two and true to his claimed form, you really couldn't believe what was coming from his mouth. Fair Dinkum indeed - more like dunkin donuts for pensioners.
As the climate continues to change and global warming has already reached the point of no return - oops, didn't you know that - scientists told us this in the early 90s but politicians said it was a lie - well the problem came, escalated and has now reached proportions we cannot even begin to alter. The Tony Abbotts of th8is world guaranteed we were to be doomed. While there will be 12 months to discuss our plan under Labor, which was why people said not to the ETS remember (no discussion) the Coalition has strengthened its stand on the do nothing side, or the deny global warming exists - the 1990s revisited, only the world is worse shape now.
Still, polls put Mr Abbott up the top and the hermits in their caves decide to stay where they are in the grand hope the idiot get flattened by a flock of penguins in search of ice...
What to do and what to think is up to you but at the moment the Coalition are offering us nothing at all dressed up a possible promise only if they seem the benefit after the election when Tony Abbott will declare - sorry, I forgot to mention workchoices was change to Working Australia... thanks for all the fish.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
In a Quick Debate
Over the days across media boards and in papers and web services discussion has raged about what substance either party has put forward - the idiotic calls of 'I want it and I want it now' enumerate with the great pontifications and rantings of crowds; the senselessness squabbling of gnats filling space best left for pizza adds and dermox scrubs.
The state of play, and reasonable it is, is no different than when it all began - small local visits, hand shakes and smiles, the typical days for the early part of a political race. The South Australians are up in arms because no one is paying attention to them; not something confined to elections it must be said and the locals posts on their local paper's website are simple vitriolic meanderings determined to highlight the backward nature of hicks with their boring, never ending diatribal and uneducated dribble. Perhaps there is a reason heads of parties leave the land of poor manners and sweaty arm pits to last; getting crap of your shoes takes time and the smell can be most distracting.
It is quiet on the front, except for boos of disapproval for Mr Abbott on a TV show that deserves a few boos itself - nothing to concern one self with and the even more obsessiveness with the ALP's slogan goes beyond ibicilic - if that is the worst anyone can pick on then the election will be dull, dull, dull. The concerns to come at the voters next week will be health while the miners spend millions on telling the general public they are poor - so stupifiable is this that the general public even believe the position - the idea of the wealthy paying tax at all is something to be avoided. Naturally the wealthy will distract the news, derail the policies and steer the voters away from issues faced by the country. Health. Yes repeated so as to remind of its importance in this election.
Gillard by a red hair going by the latest mental calculations and it could get closer if Mr Abbott manages not to stick his foot in his or anyone else mouth - which might be quite a feat (feet) for the man dubbed The Mad Monk.
Keep an eye out for anything interesting and far removed from rumour and innuendo and search for yourself what will best serve Australia. The Greens are quiet today as well, but then given the choices at the moment they need do little to get support.
The state of play, and reasonable it is, is no different than when it all began - small local visits, hand shakes and smiles, the typical days for the early part of a political race. The South Australians are up in arms because no one is paying attention to them; not something confined to elections it must be said and the locals posts on their local paper's website are simple vitriolic meanderings determined to highlight the backward nature of hicks with their boring, never ending diatribal and uneducated dribble. Perhaps there is a reason heads of parties leave the land of poor manners and sweaty arm pits to last; getting crap of your shoes takes time and the smell can be most distracting.
It is quiet on the front, except for boos of disapproval for Mr Abbott on a TV show that deserves a few boos itself - nothing to concern one self with and the even more obsessiveness with the ALP's slogan goes beyond ibicilic - if that is the worst anyone can pick on then the election will be dull, dull, dull. The concerns to come at the voters next week will be health while the miners spend millions on telling the general public they are poor - so stupifiable is this that the general public even believe the position - the idea of the wealthy paying tax at all is something to be avoided. Naturally the wealthy will distract the news, derail the policies and steer the voters away from issues faced by the country. Health. Yes repeated so as to remind of its importance in this election.
Gillard by a red hair going by the latest mental calculations and it could get closer if Mr Abbott manages not to stick his foot in his or anyone else mouth - which might be quite a feat (feet) for the man dubbed The Mad Monk.
Keep an eye out for anything interesting and far removed from rumour and innuendo and search for yourself what will best serve Australia. The Greens are quiet today as well, but then given the choices at the moment they need do little to get support.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
The Pettiness
While it is clear the real electioneering won't start for at least another week it is difficult to draw any real conclusions from what has happened thus far. The media networks yesterday were so obsessed with a man in red speedos they went all negative at the Prime Minister because someone did a Tony Abbott... Considering what the country needs to do this type of reporting has become typical of Australian political reporting of late. Today's media is running with Mr Abbott's call for the sacking of a candidate for comments he made about Mr Abbott's draconian views of the modern society. Mr Abbott is anti-gays and I dare say he finds them repugnant. Truthful and accurate - still my opinion and one Mr Abbott will dodge.
The media is deliberately skirting the political issues themselves while running a self interested campaign - perhaps it would be good to pass a law to have media networks declare openly who they are supporting in an election like the do in the UK, it would then allow the voter to understand why some stories are run and some aren't.
While the focus is thrown to Ms Gillard about a candidate and his views, which in the main stream of things means nothing, as the comment was made in a safe, unloseable Liberal seat, the people of Australia are missing some real political coverage.
Why is Mr Abbott's comments on giving more money to 'PRIVATE' schools, which will in the end be stripped away from Public Schools when he withdraws the schools programs in place now, being down played? The very policy Liberal Party has against public schools has not changed since John Howard gave more money to private schools than public. Mr Abbott is Catholic and the bulk of the schools that will receive this new windfall will be Catholic schools. As voters this has to be an issue to examine; not all parents can send their children to private schools and not all Australian's are Catholic, but does that mean they have to go to underfunded public schools because of a policy that sees their funds go the the wealthier schools? It is a concern and it is another backward looking policy.
This also needs to be noted. Ms Gillard will have to start winding back the spending that has been in place for the last 3 years, so why it is clear the Liberal government wants to cut spending many of its projected savings will come from the natural wind back of completed life cycles or programs anyway. They will be saving money that isn't there in the first place. Like some of the billions that will be saved from money spent from a tax reform they won't support or put through if they win. This, is simple terms is, we will save billions by not getting the billions to spend in the first place. A nothing from nothing promise - easy one to keep as there is nothing in place as it is.
To follow the media at the moment it would appear Julia Gillard is doing nothing and Tony Abbott is trying very hard to be the savior of Australia - not too hard he isn't really doing that well. If Tony Abbott wanted to win this election he would have accepted the new mining tax and established a better formatted ETS. At the moment the Liberal Party is saying Miners pay too much tax and that there is no such thing as global warming. Critical issues - extremely critical issues. This is why the Greens have sided with Labor, at least Labor, with its obvious faults recognizes these two very important concerns for the country.
The view of the election thus far has only shown pettiness and spite with the media only too willing to play the whip up the crowd role...
By reading this blog you are hopefully getting away from much of the media crowd frenzy attitudes - if you monitored the media during the South Australian State Election you would have seen first hand the despicable nature of the media during an election. This blog still has a Gillard slant, as in keeping with the slight slant of the Australian population - things may shift by the media, but the media does not control this blog, nor does it influence the opinions of the blogger.
In a quick close out the Greens leader Mr Brown does seem set to hold the balance of power and going by what the Greens want to achieve in regards to Global Warming and the Environment it stands to reason they would side with a party with similar goals in this area.
Some would have seen reports 'The Greens will Close Roxby' which is again the media creating a type of fear in the population that doesn't need to be there. In order for the Greens to close a mine like this it would have to hold at least 51% of the seats in the parliament and the senate. So why such a report? The Liberal Party fears the preference assignment, so if the Liberal Party fears this, so too will the media networks. So, take aim at the Greens and try and belittle them before the vote so that no one will vote Green.
Anyone remember who the Liberals did this too once before? - How the media went on a full character assassination because the Liberals feared losing seats to the party? In this instance Labor was not innocent either, but it did not have media control.
It would be wise to ignore much of the scurrilous media accounts you are about to see as most of it is a misrepresentation of possible truths.
The media is deliberately skirting the political issues themselves while running a self interested campaign - perhaps it would be good to pass a law to have media networks declare openly who they are supporting in an election like the do in the UK, it would then allow the voter to understand why some stories are run and some aren't.
While the focus is thrown to Ms Gillard about a candidate and his views, which in the main stream of things means nothing, as the comment was made in a safe, unloseable Liberal seat, the people of Australia are missing some real political coverage.
Why is Mr Abbott's comments on giving more money to 'PRIVATE' schools, which will in the end be stripped away from Public Schools when he withdraws the schools programs in place now, being down played? The very policy Liberal Party has against public schools has not changed since John Howard gave more money to private schools than public. Mr Abbott is Catholic and the bulk of the schools that will receive this new windfall will be Catholic schools. As voters this has to be an issue to examine; not all parents can send their children to private schools and not all Australian's are Catholic, but does that mean they have to go to underfunded public schools because of a policy that sees their funds go the the wealthier schools? It is a concern and it is another backward looking policy.
This also needs to be noted. Ms Gillard will have to start winding back the spending that has been in place for the last 3 years, so why it is clear the Liberal government wants to cut spending many of its projected savings will come from the natural wind back of completed life cycles or programs anyway. They will be saving money that isn't there in the first place. Like some of the billions that will be saved from money spent from a tax reform they won't support or put through if they win. This, is simple terms is, we will save billions by not getting the billions to spend in the first place. A nothing from nothing promise - easy one to keep as there is nothing in place as it is.
To follow the media at the moment it would appear Julia Gillard is doing nothing and Tony Abbott is trying very hard to be the savior of Australia - not too hard he isn't really doing that well. If Tony Abbott wanted to win this election he would have accepted the new mining tax and established a better formatted ETS. At the moment the Liberal Party is saying Miners pay too much tax and that there is no such thing as global warming. Critical issues - extremely critical issues. This is why the Greens have sided with Labor, at least Labor, with its obvious faults recognizes these two very important concerns for the country.
The view of the election thus far has only shown pettiness and spite with the media only too willing to play the whip up the crowd role...
By reading this blog you are hopefully getting away from much of the media crowd frenzy attitudes - if you monitored the media during the South Australian State Election you would have seen first hand the despicable nature of the media during an election. This blog still has a Gillard slant, as in keeping with the slight slant of the Australian population - things may shift by the media, but the media does not control this blog, nor does it influence the opinions of the blogger.
In a quick close out the Greens leader Mr Brown does seem set to hold the balance of power and going by what the Greens want to achieve in regards to Global Warming and the Environment it stands to reason they would side with a party with similar goals in this area.
Some would have seen reports 'The Greens will Close Roxby' which is again the media creating a type of fear in the population that doesn't need to be there. In order for the Greens to close a mine like this it would have to hold at least 51% of the seats in the parliament and the senate. So why such a report? The Liberal Party fears the preference assignment, so if the Liberal Party fears this, so too will the media networks. So, take aim at the Greens and try and belittle them before the vote so that no one will vote Green.
Anyone remember who the Liberals did this too once before? - How the media went on a full character assassination because the Liberals feared losing seats to the party? In this instance Labor was not innocent either, but it did not have media control.
It would be wise to ignore much of the scurrilous media accounts you are about to see as most of it is a misrepresentation of possible truths.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Is it Dirty?
In any election one side's dirty trick or stunt is another side's cleverness; so how do you decide which is which? You don't. It is simply important to know an election brings out the despicable in people and even with rational and logical thinking many people's behaviour will be reprehensible.
The main concern of any voter is to look at the policies on offer, which ones address the issues of climate change, the environment, the increase in health care and other vital services, the addressing of civil rights alongside border protection - they are not separate entities.
It is wise to understand that less than 1% of all illegal immigrants coming to Australia come via boat - the greatest threat is via airports and illegal passport manufacturing, document forging and visa exploitation. Understand that a debate on a minor issue distorts the truth about the major issue facing Australia - just be aware of this.
What about the name calling?
The truth of the matter is that some people cannot distance themselves emotionally from the political process - reporters and commentators (even here) have a bias view and sometimes that view represents not so much a persons actual view but more the view of their employer. This can be highlighted in some cases in South Australia during the Kevin 07 campaign where private schools sent letter home to parents saying if they did not vote Liberal school fees would increase. This does happen and it cannot be stopped. Just be aware the voter will be faced with anything and everything to make them vote a particular way. Again be drawn to the policies and how they affect Australia (how they affect you is good but not all policies work on that personal level).
Negative TV Advertising -
It is a modern way of getting into the homes of every day working families and is now a fact of life in this country. All advertising is based on a piece of truth, exploited truth - note politicians are not allowed to create untruths in media advertising. The difficulty comes into finding the actual truth within the ad.
This is where it might have been wise to actually listen into ABC radios parliament times so you could understand the meaning behind those ads. This commentary is based on years of following those broadcasts and getting to know the people to vote for, or against.
90% of Australians do no know who most of the parliamentarians are or what they do, so the vote is usually based on family tradition, the lazy just tick the box and be done with it, and the 'What did you do for me?' self interest protest vote. Which will you be? Or do you make up one of the 10% that does as suggested and view policy over hyperbole?
Today, in their own ways both leaders have announced the move to budget deficits, and in the stable economy we have this is simple, logical and practical news. The differences will come down to where the money will be saved from. There is your consideration at work.
The main concern of any voter is to look at the policies on offer, which ones address the issues of climate change, the environment, the increase in health care and other vital services, the addressing of civil rights alongside border protection - they are not separate entities.
It is wise to understand that less than 1% of all illegal immigrants coming to Australia come via boat - the greatest threat is via airports and illegal passport manufacturing, document forging and visa exploitation. Understand that a debate on a minor issue distorts the truth about the major issue facing Australia - just be aware of this.
What about the name calling?
The truth of the matter is that some people cannot distance themselves emotionally from the political process - reporters and commentators (even here) have a bias view and sometimes that view represents not so much a persons actual view but more the view of their employer. This can be highlighted in some cases in South Australia during the Kevin 07 campaign where private schools sent letter home to parents saying if they did not vote Liberal school fees would increase. This does happen and it cannot be stopped. Just be aware the voter will be faced with anything and everything to make them vote a particular way. Again be drawn to the policies and how they affect Australia (how they affect you is good but not all policies work on that personal level).
Negative TV Advertising -
It is a modern way of getting into the homes of every day working families and is now a fact of life in this country. All advertising is based on a piece of truth, exploited truth - note politicians are not allowed to create untruths in media advertising. The difficulty comes into finding the actual truth within the ad.
This is where it might have been wise to actually listen into ABC radios parliament times so you could understand the meaning behind those ads. This commentary is based on years of following those broadcasts and getting to know the people to vote for, or against.
90% of Australians do no know who most of the parliamentarians are or what they do, so the vote is usually based on family tradition, the lazy just tick the box and be done with it, and the 'What did you do for me?' self interest protest vote. Which will you be? Or do you make up one of the 10% that does as suggested and view policy over hyperbole?
Today, in their own ways both leaders have announced the move to budget deficits, and in the stable economy we have this is simple, logical and practical news. The differences will come down to where the money will be saved from. There is your consideration at work.
Election Day Commeth 2010
The coming election in 32 days time will decide the future of some initiatives for the future and some of these are fundamental areas that require much considered thinking. It is clear the Australian Labor party, led by Ms Julia Gillard, are seeking to expand infrastructure support programs as well as create affordable housing through community support programs. There is a mix of big projects and small local based projects across the country, and especially in mining areas. Certainly on the surface this is quite admirable and something well worth supporting but it will come at a cost, and this has been estimated at 6 billion. It does seem that keeping Australians employed and keeping their way of life secure will come at a high price. The Labor party has put forward a new mining tax system that creates, what has been reported, a fairer return to the Australian people from it valuable, but not limitless resources, it will be from this new tax reform initiative the infra structure and other community projects can be funded.
The Australia Liberal Party (or Coalition) has so far stated they will cut capital spending but as yet are not entirely clear on what projects will be cut from the budget. Under the leadership of Mr Tony Abbott the current position of capital growth will be stopped; whether this is a good thing or bad thing is where the debate begins, and would this reduction in spending put Australia in the same position it held in the mid 00s where infra structure and services were failing and the health system wasn't delivering suitable state health care. (Health care is another issue and as yet isn't on the table)
There is no doubting the recovery of Australia's economy because of timely government spending and it is true some of this spending will begin to be wound down, if not withdrawn as in some cases. It could be wise, at this time, to say either party will reduce capital costs in this serving period, so it stands to reason this area may not be as critical an issue that it is being reported as. If Labor and the Coalition both have capital savings plans then the debate on who is best is possibly pointless.
To date a clear environmental plan, something that is very contentious in Australia, is where some battle lines will be drawn. The Australian Labor Party will need to again establish and effective mechanism to present to the people about its Emissions Trading Scheme while, at this point in time, the Coalition still hold a position based on the non belief in climate change and global warming - the Australian people themselves are divided on the issue but a real debate on the future of our planet does need to come to the table.
In the past the Coalition has argued that any attempt to establish an ETS will cost jobs and ruin the economy. Actually from statements from this party it does appear anything that will impact of big business is to be avoided - perhaps a concerning point that could be explained later.
What will be the Liberal party's (Coalition) position be on climate change? Considering it blocked all efforts for Australia to act in a positive manner it would be difficult to see them change their position easily. They might, politics is a surprising things when you see it in action.
The big issue facing the voter isn't one that deal directly with the policies of those who are up for election but with the hard world reality that media networks and bosses pick who they want to win the election and advertise the fact through questionable polls and even more questionable reporting.
In this election these facts need to be known by voters, and some have been openly disclosed, so not so.
The ALP is strongly supported by Unions across the nation - this is not secret, but the unions no longer have political power like the use to have in the 1970s, so some commentary pundits saying Union bullies appear to be still living in the 70s.
It is well known the Coalition - The Nationals are supported by the farmers, naturally and expected.
The Liberal party is supported by Big Business - again well known. But the often played down point in this election needs to be this. The Liberal Party oppose the new mining tax - The Mining Industry funds the Liberal Party. Note also most of the media owners in Australia also contribute and fun the Liberal Party (Something John Howard helped happen in 2006)
There exists in this election, like there existed in the last election, a skewing of what can be accepted as good for the people and what serves political supporters interests. It can be argued Unions support workers, and on the whole this is true but they also block work at the same time. Big business also creates jobs, hundreds of thousands of jobs and they contribute to our way of life, but do we freely allow them to influence political decisions as they have? The mining industry doesn't want to pay any tax or royalties at all and would argue for this and were prepared to spend 100 million dollars to argue for this; so why would we, as Australians, support this industry and easily allow all out resources to be stripped and shipped overseas with little gain? It concerns many Australians at how much political power the mining industry has, far too much to allow for unbiased decision making.
At this point the Labor Party under Julia Gillard has a narrow lead, based mainly on her ability to reassure the public we are not going to fall into a black hole. At the moment Mr Abbott has come out and promised a black hole. Not a good start.
May the silliness continue
The Australia Liberal Party (or Coalition) has so far stated they will cut capital spending but as yet are not entirely clear on what projects will be cut from the budget. Under the leadership of Mr Tony Abbott the current position of capital growth will be stopped; whether this is a good thing or bad thing is where the debate begins, and would this reduction in spending put Australia in the same position it held in the mid 00s where infra structure and services were failing and the health system wasn't delivering suitable state health care. (Health care is another issue and as yet isn't on the table)
There is no doubting the recovery of Australia's economy because of timely government spending and it is true some of this spending will begin to be wound down, if not withdrawn as in some cases. It could be wise, at this time, to say either party will reduce capital costs in this serving period, so it stands to reason this area may not be as critical an issue that it is being reported as. If Labor and the Coalition both have capital savings plans then the debate on who is best is possibly pointless.
To date a clear environmental plan, something that is very contentious in Australia, is where some battle lines will be drawn. The Australian Labor Party will need to again establish and effective mechanism to present to the people about its Emissions Trading Scheme while, at this point in time, the Coalition still hold a position based on the non belief in climate change and global warming - the Australian people themselves are divided on the issue but a real debate on the future of our planet does need to come to the table.
In the past the Coalition has argued that any attempt to establish an ETS will cost jobs and ruin the economy. Actually from statements from this party it does appear anything that will impact of big business is to be avoided - perhaps a concerning point that could be explained later.
What will be the Liberal party's (Coalition) position be on climate change? Considering it blocked all efforts for Australia to act in a positive manner it would be difficult to see them change their position easily. They might, politics is a surprising things when you see it in action.
The big issue facing the voter isn't one that deal directly with the policies of those who are up for election but with the hard world reality that media networks and bosses pick who they want to win the election and advertise the fact through questionable polls and even more questionable reporting.
In this election these facts need to be known by voters, and some have been openly disclosed, so not so.
The ALP is strongly supported by Unions across the nation - this is not secret, but the unions no longer have political power like the use to have in the 1970s, so some commentary pundits saying Union bullies appear to be still living in the 70s.
It is well known the Coalition - The Nationals are supported by the farmers, naturally and expected.
The Liberal party is supported by Big Business - again well known. But the often played down point in this election needs to be this. The Liberal Party oppose the new mining tax - The Mining Industry funds the Liberal Party. Note also most of the media owners in Australia also contribute and fun the Liberal Party (Something John Howard helped happen in 2006)
There exists in this election, like there existed in the last election, a skewing of what can be accepted as good for the people and what serves political supporters interests. It can be argued Unions support workers, and on the whole this is true but they also block work at the same time. Big business also creates jobs, hundreds of thousands of jobs and they contribute to our way of life, but do we freely allow them to influence political decisions as they have? The mining industry doesn't want to pay any tax or royalties at all and would argue for this and were prepared to spend 100 million dollars to argue for this; so why would we, as Australians, support this industry and easily allow all out resources to be stripped and shipped overseas with little gain? It concerns many Australians at how much political power the mining industry has, far too much to allow for unbiased decision making.
At this point the Labor Party under Julia Gillard has a narrow lead, based mainly on her ability to reassure the public we are not going to fall into a black hole. At the moment Mr Abbott has come out and promised a black hole. Not a good start.
May the silliness continue
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)