Auspol September: The Canberra Clown Car

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Auspol September: The Canberra Clown Car

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

IRC UP #auspol on synIRC and because some of you don�t know how to bookmark URLS here�s the IRC webclient link!

IMPORTANT MESSAGE ABOUT IRC :siren:

If you're thinking about joining us on #auspol, let me explain a few things so you aren't surprised:

We have a word filter for certain gendered insults and occasionally words that are overused for trolling. A synirc services bot will detect these words being used and kick you. We do not apologize for this and will not change it, so don't bother complaining. And just to clear this up, this is my (ewe2)'s policy and not some random event. If you don't like it, go away. The bot will also kick for repeating phrases and will ban you for flooding.
We STRONGLY SUGGEST that you register your nick with Nickserv so we can add you to the voiced list. To do so, just
code:
```
 /msg nickserv help register 
```
where you normally type text, and the nickserv bot will explain what to do. The simple way to do it is:
code:
```
 /msg nickserv register <password> [email] 
```
The email part is optional.
Once you've registered, message one of the ops so we can add you to the list. Once you're on the voiced list, if we need to moderate the channel to cut down on the chaos, you will be able to take part in conversations. We can't just voice everyone all the time, so this is YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. Once you're added, you must
code:
```
 /msg nickserv identify <password> 
```
when you join IRC to get voiced in our channel! It's a good idea to test all this out for yourself.
In some cases we may need to ban those intent on disrupting the channel. The reasons should be obvious, and follow the same basic guidelines as SA itself.

# ¿ Sep 1, 2014 09:26

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 16, 2024 12:06

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

webmeister posted:

Best news of the year: Mad as Hell is coming back!

Fkn yay! Of course it will be on a shoestring budget. On the other hand, multi-billion transnational entertainment corporation Disney has decided it wants to take the tax bonus from a delayed film and get it increased so it will film a Pirates of the Caribbean here. Our dear Feds didn't quite give them enough money so they'll be mooching off state governments.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/sep/01/pirates-of-the-caribbean-5-shoot-australia posted:

The next instalment of Disney's blockbuster Pirates of the Caribbean film series looks set to shoot in Australia after ministers approved tax incentives worth a reported $20.2m (�12.1m).

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales will be the fifth movie in the franchise, which has so far taken $3.7bn worldwide. According to the Hollywood Reporter, the new film will replace David Fincher's delayed 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea remake on the Australian film production slate. It is likely to shoot in Queensland and could receive further financial incentives from state-level bodies.

"The government is pleased to agree to Disney's request to enable earlier funding to be repurposed for the production of Pirates of the Caribbean 5," said a spokesman for the Australian arts minister, George Brandis.

And they wonder why we don't want to throw money at them.

ewe2 fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Sep 1, 2014

# ¿ Sep 1, 2014 20:02

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Meanwhile in darkest NSW...

Alex Mitchell, Crikey posted:

Shades of Rudd mark II in Dump Robbo campaign

A concerted attempt is being made to unseat New South Wales Labor Party leader John Robertson and replace him with upper house MP Luke Foley.

The plan is to install Foley before the NSW election on March 28 in order to boost Labor�s share of seats in the Legislative Assembly, making the party more viable for a return to office in 2019.

Labor currently holds a measly 21 seats in the 93-seat chamber following the 2011 election defeat, its worst in 100 years.

The putschists believe that �Robbo� can only succeed in increasing Labor�s numbers by 15, whereas a Foley-led campaign stands to deliver 20 extra seats or more (Crikey has also called for Robertson to go, but for different reasons).

This was the same reasoning behind the overthrow of prime minister Julia Gillard in June 2013 and her replacement by Kevin Rudd. His supporters continue to argue that his reincarnation turned the anti-Labor electoral tide in Queensland, Victoria and western Sydney.

Labor finished the Victorian election with 55 seats, which was 15 more than the party expected if Gillard had been in charge. According to polls, Labor was facing a worst-case scenario of a swing of up to 18% against it and a catastrophic primary vote of around 30%. (This analysis is expected to be challenged when Gillard�s long-anticipated memoir, My Story, is published by Random House on October 1).

Like the overthrow of Gillard, the move against Robertson is largely extra-parliamentary. It is supported by Labor�s �elder statesman� -- former prime ministers Bob Hawke and Paul Keating, ex-premier Bob Carr, and other ALP luminaries like Graham “Richo� Richardson, Michael Egan and Bruce Hawker.

With hand on heart they will claim to be acting �in the interests of the great party we love�. The anti-Gillard brigade adopted the same moral tone when they knifed her.

And once again there is no talk of policy differentiation or ideological and philosophical differences between the incumbent and the challenger. Party members and voters aren�t taken into account at all; they are pawns to be manipulated in a Game of Thrones. And in both instances, the coup plotters have the unwavering editorial support of Rupert Murdoch�s News Corp papers.

Last week a full-page article in The Daily Telegraph, describing Robertson as �unelectable�, rubbished the leader and called for a regime change. Creating mischief in Labor�s ranks with constant leadership speculation fills space, boosts circulation and turns politics into a cage-wrestling spectacle. It�s straight from the Murdoch playbook.

The major difference is that whereas Rudd was pathologically committed to destroying Gillard, Foley is a reluctant candidate to depose Robertson and shows no interest in moving to the lower house to mount a challenge.

Indeed, he told ABC host Quentin Dempster that the Tele report was �dead wrong�, adding: �John Robertson has the full and unqualified support of everyone in NSW Labor. He will go to the next election as our party�s candidate for premier with the support of everyone in NSW Labor.�

Monday�s Newspoll gave the NSW Coalition a commanding 54 to 46 lead over Labor in the two-party preferred rating. This is despite the political carnage inflicted on the Liberals by the Independent Commission Against Corruption, which has claimed 10 scalps, including ex-premier Barry O�Farrell, two senior ministers, Chris Hartcher and Mike Gallacher, and seven backbenchers.

But while Premier Mike Baird is the preferred premier with a 45% rating, Robertson polls only 21%, 12% below the party�s primary vote.

Those figures are enough to keep the �Dump Robbo� camp in destabilisation mode for another few months.

Welp. Staying in the provinces...

William Bowes, Crikey posted:

Poll Bludger: Labor's party reform a gift to Newman

With Labor's recently acquired enthusiasm for democratising its leadership elections, Australia has emerged as a late arrival to a trend that has been playing out in Western democracies over several decades.

Selection of parliamentary leaders and presidential election candidates has long been a matter for the top echelon of party hierarchies, which in different national contexts gave rise to metaphors invoking smoke-filled rooms and faceless men. That began to change from the 1970s, as parties throughout the Western world confronted electorates that were losing enthusiasm for engagement in party affairs through the traditional avenues of membership and activism during election campaigns.

The reform bug has usually struck when a party faced circumstances very much like those of the ALP at present, with poor electoral performance prompting a determination to signal a clear break from the past. In Britain, the Conservative Party's present method of choosing its leader, in which the parliamentary party whittles the field down to two and then leaves the matter in the hands of the membership, was the fruit of the Major government's devastating defeat in 1997. Labour similarly enhanced the power of party members after its demoralising fourth successive defeat in 1992. Now back in opposition, it has recently extended the favour from party members to registered supporters.

Elsewhere among the dominions, Canada's Conservative and Liberal parties opened up their leadership elections after their respective catastrophes of 1993 and 2011, while two heavy defeats inspired New Zealand's Labour Party to hold its first direct leadership election last year.

Novel though last year's contest between Bill Shorten and Anthony Albanese may have seemed from an Australian perspective, the real surprise is that nothing like it had happened sooner. The concerns of certain internal critics of the process having proved unfounded, a majority of state branches have since followed suit.

The Queensland branch, however, has decided to go about things a little differently. As elsewhere, parliamentarians and the party membership are to be given an equal say, but a third wheel has been attached in the shape of a direct vote for affiliated unions, so that each of the three components will contribute a third of the overall result. A resolution to junk the model in favour of the conventional 50-50 approach was voted down by a divided state conference last Saturday, with a newly ascendant Left winning the day over the main unions of the Right.

No doubt the advocates of the proposal do not imagine they are doing anything too radical, given that Britain's Labour Party reserved a specific share of the vote for the union movement until the reforms passed earlier this year, and the New Zealand party continues to do so.

However, the Queensland model is more conducive than either to the influence of union heavyweights. Whereas the British party grants equal voting rights to party members, registered supporters and union members who opt to pay a political levy as part of their dues, the Queensland model leaves the union movement's share of the vote in the hands of union delegates to state conference. In this it reflects the New Zealand model, except that the union component of the vote amounts to a full third, compared with the New Zealand party's 20%.

Given that much of the merit in reforming the process lies in signalling to voters that the faceless heavies who brought down Kevin Rudd have had their wings clipped, this may not have been the smartest move. Certainly it has handed a rhetorical weapon to the Newman government, and indeed to the scarcely less hostile Courier-Mail. State political reporter Steven Wardill wrote on Saturday that the system would ensure the demise of any leaders or aspirants other than "trade union toadies", while columnist Des Houghton rated the empowerment of a union movement burdened by corruption claims as "political poison".

Furthermore, the circumstances of the next election are such that the manner in which the leader is selected will have an unusually strong claim on the attention voters. While current Queensland Labor leader Annastacia Palaszczuk is performing respectably in opinion polls, the fact remains that she was rarely rated among the contenders to succeed Anna Bligh when defeat loomed at the March 2012 election. Those who were, notably Cameron Dick and Andrew Fraser, did not feature among the seven members who were able to retain their seats in the calamity that followed.

With the pendulum sure to swing forcefully back to Labor, and Cameron Dick in particular assuredly on his way back to Parliament, the infusion of new members leaves short odds on the leadership question being revisited not long afterwards. In this context, there is little doubt that the manner in which the party has chosen to handle the matter will play in the government's favour during the campaign, even if its impact doesn't reach the apocalyptic dimensions claimed for it by elements of the media.

Hmm, I like Poll Bludger but it is a long Bowe to assume the voting public are going to be interested in that line of attack when the Newman government has got a lot of explaining to do if it wants to come back not as a rump.

Finally I want to share this extraordinary email to Crikey, an all-out attack on Mike Carlton from a Sky News someone-or-other:

quote:

Mike Carlton�s malevolent agenda

Philip Dalidakis, commentator for Sky News and ABC News writes: Israel is a small and isolated western democracy surrounded by undemocratic states and terrorist-controlled territories. Israel is not beyond criticism, nor do I lightly accuse people of anti-Semitism. It is not anti-Semitic to criticise Israel, but it is if you don�t hold other regimes and conflicts to the same standard.

Mike Carlton's article on the Gaza ceasefire fails this test. It drips with hatred towards Israel, and towards those who support Israel -- which includes the overwhelming majority of Australian Jews, as well as both major political parties. It is also typically nasty. It was not Carlton's views that got him in to trouble with the Sydney Morning Herald, but his response to people who challenged him, including myself who he labelled an "abusive fuckwit" (he may be a sound judge of character but in this case the evidence did not support his claim).

More importantly, his article is full of false assertions and dishonest arguments. He says that Israel�s "stated aim" was to achieve "crushing military and economic dominance of the Palestinian people." Israel never stated any such aim. Israel�s stated aim was to stop Hamas firing rockets at Israel�s cities. That aim has now been achieved, and with Hamas stopping its rocket fire Israel has ceased responding.

Carlton cites the number of deaths in Gaza as evidence for the assertion (made openly in his July column) that Israel is waging a "war of terror on the entire Gaza population ... Call it genocide, call it ethnic cleansing: the aim is to kill Arabs." The facts refute this claim. Israel conducted well over 5000 air strikes against targets in Gaza. The official death toll is about 2000. Does anyone seriously suppose that if Israel's sole aim was to "kill Arabs", it would have been so incompetent at doing so? Israel could have bombed Gaza to rubble and killed tens of thousands of Arabs if that had been its aim.

But it wasn't. Israel�s aim was to destroy Hamas' rocket sites and tunnels. Israel attempted to minimise casualties, Hamas attempted to maximise them. It deliberately placed its launch sites in built-up areas, next to schools, hospitals and mosques, so that more people would be killed. As the Hamas Charter says: "death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of [our] wishes." Captured Hamas documents prove that this was a deliberate strategy, designed to persuade the gullible and the malevolent (Mike Carlton is both) that Hamas is somehow an injured innocent in this conflict.

This conflict was entirely of Hamas' making. Hamas seized power in Gaza in 2007, murdered its political opponents, imposed a fascistic regime on the people, then turned Gaza into a base for waging war on Israel. This year alone Hamas has fired more than 3000 missiles into Israel, every one of them intended to kill Israeli civilians.

It�s true that few Israelis were killed by Hamas' rockets. That�s because Israel, unlike Hamas, cares about the lives of its citizens and has spent fortunes on shelters, sirens and anti-missile systems. That does not in any way deny Israel the right to take action to stop these attacks.

Carlton draws an elaborate analogy between this conflict and the Vietnam War. The analogy is a false one. The US was not fighting a war of self-defence in Vietnam. North Vietnam was not firing rockets at American cities. The US could afford to abandon Vietnam to its fate when public support for the war collapsed. Israel has no such luxury, and the Israeli public knows that. Polls showed over 90% of Jewish Israelis supported the campaign against Gaza.

Carlton�s trump card is the letter to the New York Times condemning Israel and signed by 40 Holocaust survivors. He obviously doesn�t know much about Jewish demographics. There are about 120,000 Holocaust survivors still alive in the US, and probably twice that number in Israel. The vast majority of them support Israel�s right to exist and to defend itself. Even here in Melbourne, I could get more than 40 Holocaust survivors to sign a statement of support for Israel in a morning. They would tell Carlton, if he had the nerve to ask them, "Never again will Jews be denied the right to defend themselves."

It suits Mike Carlton's malevolent agenda to suggest that anyone who supports Israel�s actions belongs to a "powerful and sophisticated Likud lobby." This is nonsense. I am a Labor party member and a Labor candidate for the coming Victorian state election. If I was an Israeli, I would not vote for Likud. I would vote for the Israeli Labor Party -- a progressive party which fully supported the campaign in Gaza.

I support a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and I oppose the expansion of settlements in the West Bank as counter-productive. But I also oppose people hiding behind the cloak of "proportionality" to deny Israel the right to defend itself while giving a free pass to proscribed terrorist organisations such as Hamas.

That is anti-Semitism.

Yup, no self-interest in that little tirade, no sirree :smug:

Yet another crusader who doesn't understand what anti-semitism is.

# ¿ Sep 2, 2014 07:16

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Here's a cheerful list from Crikey today, which says don't worry about the terrorism, worry about loving gastro and falling out of loving bed.

# ¿ Sep 4, 2014 08:56

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

EvilElmo posted:

Terrorism is the only thing on that list that scares the swinging voter bogan.

Oh, you read the article too?

We have a rockn'roll party in Victoria now

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-04/gotye-leads-rock-n-roll-party-to-victorian-election/5720066 posted:

Gotye and his bandmates have formed a rock'n'roll-based political group to contest the upcoming Victorian election.

The Grammy winner and his fellow musicians from Melbourne group, The Basics, have started the Basics Rock'n'Roll Party.

They will run for an Upper House seat.

Bassist Kris Schroeder said the band had always been politically active and starting their own party was the next step.

"It was a bit of a spur of the moment thing, we're not politicians," he said.

"We've come to accept the way things are a lot of the time and I think we're demonstrating it doesn't have to be that way.

"We're putting our money where our mouth is and rather than just have whinge about things."

Schroeder said the party's focus would be on promoting changes in the areas of education, innovation and rock'n'roll.

Imagine if Midnight Oil had thought of that.

ewe2 fucked around with this message at 09:06 on Sep 4, 2014

# ¿ Sep 4, 2014 09:04

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Fruity Gordo posted:

Are you guys ignoring the irony and hypocrisy of an anti-immigration PM being technically ineligible for office based on his citizenship status? Is this some more 'no the personal is never political' poo poo like when a bunch of people tried to say that Abbott's consistent infidelity is irrelevant when he runs on 'family values'.

No, but we're not dumb enough to think anything will come of it either. Marching has no effect on the ruling class, why should something like the actual law make a difference?

# ¿ Sep 5, 2014 09:32

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Kial posted:

Surely a more focused attempt could be made.

If it doesn't drive business to the casino, it ain't happening.

# ¿ Sep 5, 2014 11:20

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Ler posted:

The Ashby poo poo: From Courier Mail

Gold. What a big surprise that Mal Brough had his dirty mitts all over this despite allll the denials. What an arsehat.

# ¿ Sep 6, 2014 16:38

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Crikey did something on student politics and fee deregulation.

quote:

Why aren't uni students jumping to the Left?

Education Minister Christopher Pyne has unveiled one of the most dramatic plans to reshape education in recent memory. Fee deregulation could mean today�s students could soon graduate with far more debt than they would have carried before the deregulation was announced.

Normally, student opposition to such measures would result in a leftward swing in student politics. But at both Melbourne University and the University of Adelaide, a confluence of factors have resulted in poorer-than-usual showings for the campus� Left factions.

For much of the past decade, the University of Adelaide�s student union has been reliably controlled by the Labor Left faction, ruling in alliance with a ticket of unaffiliated left-wing candidates. But this grouping has lost control of some of its most totemic positions to students affiliated with the Liberal Party. And at the University of Melbourne, control of the student presidency has passed for the first time in years to a candidate from the More Activities ticket, helped into the position by a popular candidate and preferences from the Labor Right and Socialist Alternative factions.

At the University of Adelaide Liberal Club, the mood is jubilant. �We see this as a big success,� a Liberal student pollie told Crikey. �Next year will see a big debate on education reform, and the students at Adelaide Uni are voting for Liberals.� As well as a spot on the union board, which controls the purse strings of the student union, the position of education officer also went to a Liberal student. The Liberals are also expected to win the position of women�s officer. Liberal ticket leader Robert Katsambis told Crikey the Left leadership of the union had failed to give students value for their memberships. His ticket campaigned on subsidised car parking, a doubling of the Student Representative Council's existing free breakfast program, and more parties for students.

Labor Left sources, however, were sceptical the Liberals' better showing had anything to do with their policies or with the failure of the current leadership, telling Crikey it was all about preference flows. The Libs, the Labor Right, and another ticket controlled by international students all fed preferences to each other, and they often didn�t even compete for the same positions. Meanwhile, the Labor Left ticket was hamstrung after Socialist Alternative candidates refused to send preferences its way. Crikey understands early attempts at negotiation with the Labor Right also broke down, leading Student Unity to endorse the Liberals instead. Labor Left student leaders are filthy at the Labor Right and Socialist Alternative tickets for refusing to deal (though both sides have different stories as to why negotiations fell apart), and are viewing the disastrous result as self-inflicted. The changes to education being mooted in Canberra didn�t lead to a higher-than-normal turnout -- but then, all tickets appeared to campaign predominantly on campus issues.

Meanwhile, at Melbourne, personality has played a bigger role than preference flows, with the student union presidency going to a non-Labor Left candidate for the first time in many years. While the political blocs at the university change their preference deals annually, this year a ticket calling itself �ignite� had candidates from both Labor Right, the clubs and activities faction and the Socialist Alternative, leaving Labor Left on its own. President-elect Rachel Withers, from the �ignite� ticket� told Crikey that most tickets weren�t focusing on federal politics in their campaigns but on how they would spend students� money collected through the student services and amenities fee. She says the lack of student engagement with the union is "depressing". Withers will need to work with mostly Left-aligned office bearers and a students' council (which controls spending) with a Labor Right majority next year . When asked about her own political leanings, Withers was coy, saying, �I really do find it irrelevant, I would never not want to run with someone because of their political beliefs."

�It's a student union, it's not federal politics -- I think it's important that everybody has student interests in mind, not their own. Your exact location on the Left-Rright spectrum doesn't matter that much.�

Withers is one of the current clubs and societies officers, after spending 2013 as president of the Melbourne Arts Students Society.

At Melbourne�s RMIT, where students are voting all this week, the university�s Liberal Club is running for the first time in recent memory, although Crikey is told the club is without a candidate for women�s officer. While the club had one woman willing to run, it couldn�t find another two women to nominate her so she could appear on the ballot. Candidate Anthony D�Angelo, who formed the university�s Liberal Club earlier this year, is also the Liberal candidate for the safe Labor seat of Northcote at the upcoming Victorian election.

At the Australian National University, which held its elections two weeks ago, turnout was significantly higher than in recent years. This could be because, as campus insiders told Crikey, student politicians at ANU were actively and visibly campaigning on the higher federal education changes. The number of candidates also increased -- last year one group scooped up many of the positions unopposed, but this year there were three tickets running. Crikey understands it was the most fiercely contested election since the student association began keeping records in 2002. However, ANU is a strange campus in that none of the tickets had any formal allegiances to any political party. Student rag Woroni reported that most voters didn�t appear to follow the tickets, instead voting for a mix of candidates of their own choosing. The final result was split three ways between the three tickets.

Most campuses are still waiting on their election results, or will be voting in coming weeks. But if early indicators are any guide, at a campus level, broader political issues rarely play out the way you�d expect them to.

The elephant in the room of course is over two decades of persistent chipping away at the value of student political power. UQ isn't mentioned in the article but I saw first hand how the Young Libs got themselves into power and systematically took down the Union back in the 80's. It's been downhill from there of course.

The background to all of this is the fear of a popular uprising by intelligent, committed non-politicians as was seen in the 70's with the Vietnam marches. The youth wings of both majors were enrolled to turn student unions and councils into safe, irrelevant play-pens for student politicians which is how they've essentially stayed since the 80's. The degree treadmill got rolling and fee deregulation is the final nail. No one will have time or money to ask questions or have opinions.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2014 14:53

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Ler posted:

They took away some 9000 bot votes.

An online poll obviously doesn't say much, most of the people who saw the poll got it from Twitter & I think Twitter is largely a progressive platform. But I guess what it does say, is that the pro-Liberals groups can't even allow an online poll to make them look bad.

Sure, but as long as they're obsessed with perception, that's a weakness. It's good that they're spending resources on this. Treating the electorate like a monolithic stupid blob will bite all of them in the end.

If you want to worry about something, worry that Twitter wants to further monetise their assets by changing their algorithm to be more "targeted". That level playing field goes away and it's just like Facebook.

# ¿ Sep 9, 2014 15:10

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

gay picnic defence posted:

Any ideas on how these changes could be wound back?

It's not impossible just very very difficult. You're trying to roll back a couple decades of right-wing cultural change across the whole of society, it's a hell of a thing to push against. It will probably take the same kind of incremental change back the other way. I wish I could give you a roadmap but that's the best I can do right now.

# ¿ Sep 10, 2014 05:52

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Hysterics from the Herald Sun in Victoria today, accusing "Dan" Andrews of evilness for refusing to back the East-West Link in a court-case which will certainly mean the end of the deal because evil lefty councils want to destroy jobs by challenging the tender process etc etc. Front page screams DON'T TRUST HIM under a picture of "Dan", editorial has "lost trust" in him, and apparently "Dan" has fallen for a "trap" that three actual journalists who wrote the slight column couldn't explain. Oh, and he's a backflipper too because tearing up a contract is the same as not signing one.

For non-Victorians, the East-West link has been tirelessly thrown at the electorate for months as the reason to vote Denis (or maybe it's "Den" now), and the shock to poor tabloids who might not have it to keep throwing is so great etc etc something terrorists. Besides, it will cost money in compensation claims, oh dear.

from the website i will not link to posted:

LABOR�S decision not to honour any East West Link contracts if elected in November has been slammed by the Napthine Government as reckless and costly.

It said the reckless move would cost Victoria $3 billion and 6200 jobs.

But Coalition MPs are quietly delighted that Opposition Leader Daniel Andrews has taken a high-risk gamble they believe will blow up in his face.

things to click on and be shocked morerer posted:
COMMENT: Andrews rolls dice and now it�s up to voters

POWER: Councils� call may kill Link

EDITORIAL: Andrews has lost our trust

And senior Labor sources said his decision to bypass shadow Cabinet in making the shock decision was alarming.

One said Mr Andrews was �turning into Victoria�s version of Kevin Rudd � making unilateral decisions on anything and everything�.

Some Labor MPs said East West Link was unpopular and welcomed the move.

But others feared the message it sent to suburban voters regarding thousands of potential jobs lost.

see, we're HELPFUL posted:
HELPFUL MAP HERE FOR IDIOTS

Premier Denis Napthine said East West Link would be good for families battling gridlock � a position echoed by Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

�Victorians now know that if they want better infrastructure and less time stuck in traffic jams, they should vote for the Coalition at November�s election,� Mr Abbott said.

Mr Andrews stared down critics of his backflip yesterday, saying he had a plan to provide transport jobs, including by building a West Gate bypass for trucks and by getting rid of 50 level crossings.

Labor said it had legal advice that a Supreme Court case due to be heard in December, when two councils will argue the East West Link lacked a proper planning process, meant contracts weren�t �safe�.

Describing any contract as having �no more value than a ream of Reflex paper�, Mr Andrews said that voters should get to decide on Dr Napthine�s pet project.

�If the Victorian community choose Denis Napthine, then he will have a mandate for this project and he can get on and build it,� he said.

Business groups were stunned by the move by Mr Andrews, who had repeatedly told them Labor would honour any East West Link contracts.

Property Council executive director Jennifer Cunich said it �will worry many local and international investors�.

Unions were also blindsided. Australian Workers� Union state secretary Ben Davis said he was focused on jobs for members and would talk to whichever party was elected about shovel-ready projects.

Mr Davis said that work was needed for thousands of construction workers who were unemployed.

�We are of course keen to see projects go ahead quickly.

�We will be talking to Labor before the election and we will be talking to them the day after,� Mr Davis said

Treasurer Michael O�Brien accused Labor of being more worried about inner Melbourne MPs battling the Greens than the 6200 jobs Stage One and Stage Two of the Link would deliver.

Greens leader Greg Barber attacked Mr Andrews for �flip-flopping� and said that he could not be trusted.

But Public Transport Users� Association president Tony Morton backed Labor, saying that contracts shouldn�t be signed �until after the Victorian people have spoken at the ballot box�.

# ¿ Sep 12, 2014 02:12

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Haters Objector posted:

This is a bad political move. Swinging voters (read: bogans) love the East/West Link. Would have preferred for them to just dodge the issue until the election and scrap it the day after.

E: https://www.facebook.com/hotbreakfast/posts/10152735574829396

On the other hand, too much concentration on this issue is a good thing because the Libs are on the nose everywhere else. Even in low-margin seats like here in Bendigo, that simply won't help them.

And the problem with the East-West link is that a great deal of those who'd benefit are from high-margin Liberal seats anyway. It might hurt us Greens though. Oh yes, I renewed today :toot:

# ¿ Sep 12, 2014 02:46

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

The terrorists will win if the poll numbers don't improve.

# ¿ Sep 12, 2014 11:00

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Mosque: super one day, wonderful the next.

# ¿ Sep 16, 2014 04:05

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

So they're thinking of removing David Johnson from Defence because he's obviously incompetent, but as Crikey says, its a problem to replace him:

Bernard Keane posted:

One of the inconveniences for the government in its rush to war in Iraq is that it will complicate the process of getting rid of one of the government's worst underperformers, Defence Minister David Johnston.

Johnston isn't exactly alone in underperforming. The list of disappointments runs from Treasurer Joe Hockey down, and arguably only Finance Minister Mathias Cormann, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Sussan Ley -- who is in the outer ministry -- have performed strongly. He may not even be the worst performer, given Attorney-General George Brandis' series of stumbles and the way Hockey has managed to relegate himself to the Last Chance Saloon after those "poor people don't drive cars" comments. But Johnston is the most expendable, and his demise has long been rumoured.

The reasons why were on display last night in a key interview in which he struggled to give a clear answer to Leigh Sales on a question the government has been struggling with -- whether we're at war, as the Americans claim, or merely engaged in a "humanitarian operation". That Johnston concluded that interview by first having to be corrected by Sales about al-Qaeda's pre-9/11 capacity to launch major strikes on the West, then appearing to claim Islamic State had a capacity to launch attacks on the West similar to 9/11 -- something explicitly rejected by US intelligence and security officials -- demonstrated yet again why he is a particularly weak link.

Problem is, whether we're at war or engaged in a humanitarian operation, removing the defence minister during the course of it won't be a good look, and is potentially disruptive. There could be a positive: instead of having to use Immigration Minister Scott Morrison -- who has handled Immigration effectively except for the fact asylum seekers tend to die in his custody -- as the government's articulate security tough guy, the minister supposedly in charge of such things could play that role. Indeed, Morrison's name has been one of those bandied about for Defence.

But complicating that switch is that Defence is a cursed portfolio, from which few ministers make it out alive. Johnston's immediate predecessor, Stephen Smith, left politics after Kevin Rudd returned. Smith's predecessor, John Faulkner, took it on as his last ministerial position before moving to the backbench. Faulkner's predecessor, Joel Fitzgibbon, crashed and burned over conflicts of interest, though he made a belated comeback in the Last Days of Rudd. Fitzgibbon's predecessor, Brendan Nelson, lived to become opposition leader for five minutes, although he got into trouble for admitting that the 2003 iteration of the Iraq War had been about oil. Robert Hill lasted four years but then quit politics; Peter "children overboard" Reith lasted less than a year before leaving politics; it was John Moore's and Ian McLachlan's final gigs as well. If you go to Defence HQ at Russell Hill, history says it's unlikely you'll ever go anywhere else except out of politics, whether you're good, bad or indifferent.

Dumping Johnston for Morrison or someone else (Hockey? It could work -- stop wasting Turnbull in Communications and move him to Treasury, where he could no longer pretend to be somehow aloof from an inept government ... I jest ...) on the other hand might also signal that the government is serious about its commitment to the conflict it has waded into, that it isn't merely a national security distraction but a challenge requiring the Coalition's best skills. To put our defence forces in harm's way, to place Australian citizens at great risk of terrorism because of it, to return to a region where we were part of one of modern history's greatest mistakes, demands the best of a government, not a bloke basically in cabinet to recognise Western Australia's outsized contribution to the Coalition's ranks.

Keane also made a bunch of words about Brandis and his "existential" crisis about terrorists but it's too drat depressing to even cut and paste.

# ¿ Sep 16, 2014 04:43

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

tithin posted:

This is what I was gonna say. Best practice my arse.

The scale of this is breathtaking, typical of the mentality that loving your employees over is an efficiency bonus.

edit:

CrazyTolradi posted:

In other QLD is poo poo news, QLD police are basically a political wing of the Newman government, keeping tabs on any groups that oppose policies.

Ah, Special Branch returns! It's like Joh never left and Lewis wasn't an evil corrupt bastard long may he rot.

ewe2 fucked around with this message at 10:18 on Sep 17, 2014

# ¿ Sep 17, 2014 10:16

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Given we'll never know the facts behind any victims of ASIO, why even bother with authorization for torture?

# ¿ Sep 21, 2014 08:53

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Community announcment! :siren:

I heard a couple of stories today about 08 number social engineering scams you may want to watch out for. They've been doing it for some time and being careful to target people on the do not call register, or in a specific suburb. This is anecdotal but I trust the source and there is something you can do if this happens to you.

The first scam is to try and get details about peoples computers. The spiel is "your computer has a fault give us details etc". They will repeatedly ring and get abusive. My source's parents were harassed for 5 weeks with calls a dozen times a day. They threatened to change providers from A Telco Which Will Not Be Named, and contacted the Telecommunications Ombudsman. But then they met other local couples who had also been targeted and discovered that the simple way to make it all stop is to demand to speak to their manager. So they did. Within half an hour a representative from ATWWNBN hastened to assure them that the Ombudsman had been in contact and the 08 number would be "blocked".

A number of things about this story smelt really bad to me. If asking for a manager really has that effect it sounds like someone from a telco is making cash on the side for Bad Guys: they didn't care that they weren't getting details, just enjoying the harassment, so someone else was paying them. And calling someone on the Do Not Call Register also points to someone having access, which no one outside telcos can have (in order to avoid calling them of course). Another detail was that the victims were actually told they were being called during "downtime" which sounds suspiciously like a call centre term. The source told me they had recently put themselves on the do not call register and were getting similar calls now, but they know what to do! Demand to get a manager, and they should go away.

Scam 2: Another 08 number is calling people either on the dole or getting benefits (they are asking leading questions to be sure) on Fridays and the weekend, and claiming they are in line for a one-off payment of $1500 and they need to get details before they can receive it. If the person called refuses, they are threatened with being cut off. My source tells me they know of at least 8 local people contacted this way in the last week. Now this is simple, ignore them. Centrelink are never going to ring people on the weekend, nor threaten to cut people off. Much easier to cut people off and wait for them to contact THEM. So if this happens to you, tell the caller to get hosed, and report it to Centrelink!

Hope neither happens to anyone, never give important details to someone who calls you without a good reason!

# ¿ Sep 22, 2014 12:46

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Anidav posted:

So I had a job interview at a Japanese Restaurant and one of the pre-requisites is to be able to speak Japanese. I lied, I don't speak Japanese.

~~:popcorn:~~ :munch:

this will end well.

Can't even get a schadenfreude emote right Mr Speaker.

ewe2 fucked around with this message at 14:48 on Sep 22, 2014

# ¿ Sep 22, 2014 14:11

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Pickled Tink posted:

Thus far my experiments have shown that they will hang up on me and not call me back that day if:

I mention the fact that they are criminals (Only failed once).
I pretend to not know who I am in response to them asking for me (with intense overacting).
I attempt to serenade them.
I engage in Grandpa Simpson inspired rambling.
I speak in a high pitched voice.
I refuse to talk about anything but kittencams.

These are all excellent ideas, I'll pass them on!

# ¿ Sep 22, 2014 16:06

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Cartoon posted:

Unwelcome calls.

1800 805 996 Is the direct Telstra number for dealing with this. Log the time and date of the call(s). They will trace the call and block the originator.

You missed the part where this didn't work. They made excuses like "it has to go on for three weeks", complete bullshit since I know for a fact that it's actually more than 3 calls in 2 days. Don't forget the little fact that they were illegally calling someone on the do not call register, that alone should have spurred immediate action. To reiterate: the calls didn't actually get blocked after contacting that number OR contacting the Ombudsman OR threatening to cancel their a/c. It only stopped after they demanded to speak to a manager. Within half an hour Telstra rang them and said "oh the Ombudsman contacted us we'll block that number".

Speaking of competition, the taxi industry's response to Uber is like buggy manufacturers demanding to be protected from trains.

ewe2 fucked around with this message at 02:01 on Sep 23, 2014

# ¿ Sep 23, 2014 01:59

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

i got banned posted:

~~Sneak peak for tomorrow~~ Today

Page after page of hysteria, including a whole page devoted to gloating over Fairfax's mistake.

And The Blot? He blames the ALP, ABC, Andrew Wilkie, Paul Barry, Richard Ackland, Q&A, The Greens, for INFLAMMATORY SLANDERS!!! We'd all be fine if it wasn't for those MEDDLING LEFTIES.

Oh and he then slags off people who claim Aboriginal children were stolen, because he doesn't believe the evidence. But SLANDERS :qq:

Such a misunderstood comedian.

# ¿ Sep 26, 2014 02:30

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

XMD 5a posted:

THE ETHNIC LOBBY is the funniest phrase I've seen since THE WELFARE LOBBY.

I'm a card-carrying member of the Gay Ethnic Peppa "Feminazi" Pig Welfare Union myself.

They're up against the coal lobby, the bank lobby, the christian lobby, the property lobby, the insurance lobby, the management lobby, the secret lobby, the death lobby and the control lobby. Well, maybe not the death lobby.

# ¿ Sep 28, 2014 00:36

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

T-1000 posted:

Fascism doesn't have a monopoly on authoritarianism, militarism, violence and nationalism, seeing any/all of these and yelling "fascism!!!!!" has been an issue since at least Orwell's time.

Orwell seems to have been physically revolted by journalese, he'd be horrified and vindicated by today's journalism. It has devolved well beyond merely aping the guff of politicians and now believes its own press.

Fascism, useful guff or a shorthand for increasingly bold and efficient authoritarianism? When I studied it in highschool the definition was restricted to 'a unification of corporate and executive power' (the Italian model). But then you could say that of European rule of the last 1000 years.

# ¿ Sep 28, 2014 13:29

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 16, 2024 12:06

ewe2: Jul 1, 2009

Choice quote #1 from Gillard's new book:

About Campbell Newman posted:

At his local kebab shop, he told everyone, he was appalled to hear how many regulations there were for the handling of the meat, including -- to his horror -- one about the temperature the meat needed to be at on the spit! He was going to abolish all this red tape. The studiously polite Katie Gallagher, the Chief Minister of the Australian Capital Territory, commented that that would all be fine until the first salmonella outbreak. Although she did not mean the remark unkindly, it produced guffaws all round, including from Liberal premiers.

And my other favourite #2:

quote:

The Canberra press gallery is an insular world and, given the foment of the media industry, a curiously unchanged one at the leadership level. Many of the key personalities who reported politics 20, 30, 40 years ago are still there, albeit more jaded, more cynical -- and more annoyed if their assumed mastery of political reporting is in any way challenged.

# ¿ Sep 29, 2014 06:06

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Auspol September: The Canberra Clown Car

code:

code:

code:

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/sep/01/pirates-of-the-caribbean-5-shoot-australia posted:

Alex Mitchell, Crikey posted:

William Bowes, Crikey posted:

quote:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-04/gotye-leads-rock-n-roll-party-to-victorian-election/5720066 posted:

quote:

from the website i will not link to posted:

things to click on and be shocked morerer posted:

see, we're HELPFUL posted:

Bernard Keane posted:

About Campbell Newman posted:

quote: