 |
|
|
|
| More!? More!? |
|
 |
| I'll grin .. you bear it. | |
There may be no innocent parties in a divorce, but there
are usually winners from scandal. The winner from the
Kernot-Evans scandal is .. Simon Crean! Studying the scores in the Kernot-Evans fiasco:
- Cheryl (still-not-my-fault) Kernot has been been totally discredited
as a politician, human being, woman's advocate and a memoir writer.
- Gareth (thank-god-i'm-not-head-of-the-UN) Evans has been shown to
be an adulterer (entirely his and his wife's business), and a liar (the business of every
Australian during his reign as Attorney General)
- Kim (fat-boy) Beazley has broken even - his refusal to let Cheryl into the
inner leadership circle has been vindicated, but his claim to Cheryl that 'you
just handed me the Prime Ministership' makes him look like a roasted turkey.
- Natasha (everyone-on-the-welfare-tit) Stott Despoja has been forced to wiggle and squirm like school-girl, and say
"no-one's business but theirs". Apparently she feels that lying to parliament
is justified if a woman's virtue is at stake (at least she has priorities, just
no principles).
- John (hiding-his-smirk) Howard has just said 'I have nothing to say on this matter
whatsoever' because he doesn't have to. He looks like the true statesman, but doesn't really want the
issue of 'truth before elections' studied too carefully.
- Mark (mad-dog) Latham and Peter (smirky) Costello haven't been able to work
out how to make mileage out of it at all.
- The Liberal
Party are enjoying themselves, but they didn't know
this was coming, and hence were unable to
use the scandal to cover up a slightly smaller scandal of their own (Like Mrs
Costello's thick ankles).
- The ALP look like a bunch of dishonest scheming school children,
but looking at the polls, this won't make any difference.
Which basically leaves our favorite little rottweiler, Simon
(I'll-grin-and-you-bear-it) Crean. Simon has taken the view that "ye shall
answer to your sins", and that the fundamental principle is to not mislead
parliament. As a result he looks squeaky clean! Even more so than
no-longer-quite-so-honest-John! He still looks ineffectual as a leader, and by taking this position he is the
only politician to have legitimized the media feeding frenzy over the whole
affair, but he has come out of this as a man of principle. I don't know whether the average Australian would leave their teenage daughter
in his care over the weekend, but he has raised his status from the man you
couldn't possibly vote for to the man who you might have to vote for in a
emergency. Now he just has to wait for that emergency. But judging from the
smirking government front-bench, they aren't expecting one anytime soon. Good luck Simon. This is the only correct decision you have made since you
became leader.
|
|
 |
| Not My Fault | |
Rumors have hit the trashy commercial TV news that Cheryl
(that's-a-terrible-thing-to-say-to-me) Kernot was doing the 'wild thing' with
Gareth (I'm-going-to-head-the-UN) Evans, and that this was a key factor in her
defection to the ALP in 1997. It hurts to have to defend Cheryl, but this is sticking the knife it too
far! Crass commercialism hurts people and Gareth (like Richo) is entitled to
do whatever it takes to woo people away from 'the dark side' of extremist
socialism to the enlightened side of socialist moderation. I mean really, is it
anyone's business but Cheryl's and Gareth's? Well normally not, but lets
think this through. This would have been around the time that Gareth was seeing his dream of UN
leadership collapse. His plans to set up a Stalinist-style left-wing world
government under the aegis of the United Nations were collapsing, and he
just wanted to take his $AU4.3M in tax-payer's superannuation and get out. Perhaps Cheryl offered to be his 'comfort woman' during the collapse of his
un-imperial empire? Or perhaps it was actually the supreme sacrifice of a true
believer, and he had a few too many schooners to accomplish the task? Maybe
that's why he got arrested for driving drunk in Melbourne? More bizarre
conspiracies have been suggested on this site. It also would explain the black condom that Cheryl has admitted receiving
shortly after her defection, and her lack of popularity within the ALP. Cheryl,
Cheryl, sleeping your way to the top is not making yourself a good role model for
women wanting 'equality in the
workplace', and sleeping with someone else's husband doesn't say much for
female solidarity. I guess after sleeping with her ex-student, she wanted to
experience the full gamit of power-plays in relationships. Of course Gareth (shorry-mista-offisher-shir) Evans is remaining as tight
lipped as a Woomera detainee protester about this one (which makes it hard kiss
and tell). And Cheryl (it-never-happened) Kernot may no longer be a politician, but
after a decade of being one, maybe the habit of telling half-truths is a little
hard to break. If Cheryl had been more honest and called the book 'Doing it to Myself Again',
then the whole rumor could be dismissed as a media beat-off, but that might
stretch the French
envelope of good taste, or at least the site-editor's tolerance. Let's stop there.
|
|
|
| Almost Equal | |
On the ABC's 7:30 report, in between protesting her unfair treatment
by the media, by the ALP and by the tooth fairy, her excuse for her
anti-ALP 1998 election outburst: 'I was very menopausal'.
Apparently she wanted to be treated equally to men - but given that extra bit
of special understanding because she was menopausal. Just as well we have
a policy of affirmative action isn't it? She also laments that she has had no job offers. What a victim! She has
the superannuation from ten years as a federal MP, but this is not enough to
satisfy her monetary greed. She wants to do something useful, but is incapable
of finding something else to do herself - either forming a lobby group or
perhaps going into business. She expects someone else to ring her and and offer
to give her money. She also broke up with her husband. That could explain the ad I saw in the
paper:
SINGLE WHITE FEMALE. Unemployed, but financially secure
(ex-federal-MP). High maintenance (expects affirmative action). Can usually
control her temper between menopausal outbursts. Strong political beliefs, but
willing to change alliances depending on partner's leanings. Flabby arms, lacks
exercise. Seeks Sensitive New Age Guy who likes long conversations, watching
the ABC and wearing feather boas.
|
|
|
| Whining From Oblivion | |
Cheryl (you-owe-me-a-favor) Kernot, in a last ditch attempt to
capitalize on her farcical political career, is about to publish a
book on her rise and folly. In a far-from-tantalizing sneak preview, excepts were published in
Saturday's The Australian newspaper. Common sense might suggest that the
juiciest and most incriminating mudslinging against the democrats and ALP would
go into the sneak preview to boost sales, but common sense is something that
may not apply to Cheryl Kernot. Cheryl has standards - she won't let money get
in the way of her self-pity. Perhaps her parliamentary superannuation is
sufficient to keep her in feather boas without proceeds from the book. Cheryl is a confused and bitter woman. On the one hand she bemoans the fact
that she wasn't treated by her male colleagues, then goes on to describe how
she was tricked into posing in a red dress and feather boa
('bordello-madam-style'). I can't imagine any man (Bob (it's-turned-)Brown
notwithstanding) in parliament trying to sell himself as a brothel manager and then
calling himself a media victim. Cheryl Kernot tried to treat the media like a tap. To turn it on when it suited
her, and turn it off when it didn't. Cheryl, Cheryl,
- Screeching about right to privacy when you have splashed your
(trying-to-be-sexy) photo around Australia makes you look silly.
- Telling people you were naive and 'tricked' into posing for photos
when you have been the long-term leader of a political party raises serious
questions about your competence.
- The media has every right to report your relationship with a
former (high-school) student when you are attempting to affect laws about
people's morality.
- Using such a whining tone in your complaints simply reinforces the
stereotype of women as continually expecting special treatment and being
unwilling to compete on an equal footing as men.
- If you can't stand the heat, get back in the kitchen. Oh, that's right -
you did. Sorry.
Of course now the dilemma faces potential readers. Do they really want to
help the whining Cheryl Kernots of the world by buying her upcoming book? Or
do they want to encourage more politicians to resign and dump on the Democrats
and ALP? Normally it would be a tough call, but the whining preview favors
former. This (p)reviewer will be waiting until it's remaindered.
|
|
 |
| 'We Call it Democracy | |
Phil (Amnesty-wants-to-kick-me-out) Ruddock has failed in his attempt to have
all of Australia's northern islands excised from the migration zone.
The 'Tampa' legislation passed by the ALP in a panic just before the last
election allowed for changes to the zone to be made by regulation (without
parliament), but for either house of parliament to overturn any such changes.
This afternoon the Senate overturned it. However (I-haven't-had-my) Phil is planning to introduce the same excisions in
legislation, even though they face certain defeat in the Liberal-hostile and
asylum-seeker-friendly Senate. Why? Why do something that is bound to fail? Why fight a battle you cannot win?
Because Liberal has their eyes on the bigger picture. The legislation must
fail. It can only pass by a change of heart by the ALP, which would then look
even more divided and uncertain on this issue than they already do. But the failed legislation will be also a useful double-dissolution
trigger. They already a double dissolution trigger (with the pharmaceutical
benefits scheme), but that doesn't have enough public support to route the ALP.
The failed excision legislation (if it fails repeatedly) can sit there and can
be used to call a snap election. Picture the following scenario:
The new excision legislation fails three times, and just sits there.
A large boat-load, designed to make it all the way to Australia makes it to
one of the non-excised islands.
Australia has a Tampa-like situation all over again. Australia is gripped
by nationalism and fear of the tip-of-the-iceberg invasion.
Anger at the ALP for not passing the legislation is a fever pitch. The ALP
is seen to have created the problem.
The Liberals suddenly discover the lost piece of legislation and say 'we
need a decision' and call a snap election of both houses of parliament.
The voter backlash against the ALP is brutal and decisive
With the ALP routed, Liberal gains control of both houses of parliament.
Unlike Malcolm (born-again-humanitarian) Fraser, who did nothing with this
power, Liberal use it.
Industrial relations in this country will never look the same. Simon (Cream-of-the-) Crean should have seen this one coming, but he can't think more than one
move ahead with the Liberal party controlling the agenda. The Liberal party
leadership are masters at the dissolution maneuver - right back to 1975. This is getting to be a bit like world-championship wrestling. Lost of
posturing, but the results are not decided in the ring.
|
|
 |
| Take a good look | |
There are three kinds of political parties
- Those in power
- Those who hope to gain power at a future election
- Those who know they will never be in power
And they follow different strategies. Those in power pursue a policy tightrope between what the electorate will
tolerate and what their bankrollers have paid for. Those in opposition run a negative campaign, split between
criticizing every move of the government, blaming them for every bad outcome from
climbing divorce rates to droughts, and presenting a policy tightrope between what the
electorate will tolerate, and what their bankrollers are paying for. Those who know they will never be in power play fairy god-mother and can say
whatever they like provided it is sufficiently feel-good. People vote for them
because of disgust at the major parties, and the only issue for the protest
voters is what ratbag feel-good policies they feel good about at the time. Until recently these three strategies matched the Liberal, ALP and Democrat
parties pretty closely. The Liberals were busy getting on with the job, handing
out corporate welfare to their business sponsors, while determined to
subsidize only
abject poverty. The
ALP were catering to the union
bankrollers, while trying to find policies to capture the
votes of the multicultural
feminist academics. The Democrats were promising to subsidize
everything except free beer, knowing that they would never
actually have to actually live in the world which their policies would create. But there has been a subtle change in Australian politics. The Liberal
party team are very experienced at running the agenda, but they got off to a
pretty shaky start to their term.
- Peter ('I need a holiday') Hollingworth's failure to handle child abuse in the
church.
They just waited that one out.
- A certain maritime incident. Which demonstrated that a child was thrown into the
water (just not on that day), and released video footage which scared many Australians into
hardening their stance on mandatory detention.
- Michael (Dr Smoothy) Wooldridge spending a few million on his future
employer so they
could give much of it back to him as 'consultancy fees'(but they just took it back before
he got it).
They are now back to their controlling the agenda tricks, and the ALP
has been running around like a barking dog in a cage trying to find something they
can sink their teeth into. The Liberal government is just quietly introducing their
reforms bit by bit. Not doing anything too fast or too radical, and playing
Kim (fat-boy) Beasley's small-target game. The subtle change has come over the last few days.
It looked at first like the ALP just felt the need to resist something (anything)
the government was doing so that it could look like a strong opposition. They
choose two things which seem like bad choices: reductions in
pharmaceutical benefits subsidies, and the excision of Australia's northern
islands for immigration purposes. The excision issue is one which is likely to popular with the electorate -
particularly if the public natural nationalistic instincts are raised by
another boat-load of asylum seekers. The ALP will be the party that didn't
stop it, and that will spell electoral disaster for them. Interestingly too, the pharmaceutical benefits subsidies are a budgetary issue,
and may provide the trigger for a double dissolution. That means a snap
election, and the leader of the opposition is not ready for that. The ALP has provided no alternative to excision apart from 'greater cooperation
with Indonesia', which is a wish, not a policy. But still they have chosen to
prevent the excision which was enabled by legislation which they supported shortly before the
last election. Why would they do this? One reason - they are no longer a party which expects to
win government any time soon, and are taking the steps to prevent the
decimation of their party. They are getting nibbled away from the left (by the
Democrats), and nibbled away from the right (many redneck workers are now
voting Liberal), and there isn't much middle ground. The pursuit of political
correctness and affirmative action which served them so well in the 1980s has
lost its zeal, and there aren't really that many redneck feminist academics
who will approve of the squishy incoherent set of policies they have come to
represent. But why resist for the sake of it, knowing that having no alternative makes them
look ineffectual? Why not agree with sensible and popular strategy and prove they
are responsible enough to take government? Because, in short, they know they are in for a long opposition, and they are
hunkering down to weather the storm. Peter (dig-my-smirk) Costello on the ABC's
Lateline said that they had adopted a permanent opposition mind-set. They are
not trying to look like a competent government - the best they can do is to
look like a competent opposition, so people will send their protest votes that
way. They simply have to critize everything the government does, and not be
seen to agree with them on anything. The ALP has just given up the middle
ground to the Liberal Party. Of course, the resistance policy also serves Simon (I-am-the-man) Crean's agenda
to look like a strong leader. He had to take a stand on something. Simon,
unable to control the agenda nationally, can at least control the agenda within his
own party. Simply agreeing with the Government's policies didn't satisfy his
own party that he was the man. He's not. But neither is his party. Simon is not trying for a promotion to PM - he's just trying to keep his current
job. And the ALP is hunkering down for a long, lean opposition. It may be even
longer than they expected if they are routed in a double dissolution. Simon, Simon, resistance is futile!
|
|
 |
| It just got smaller | |
Last night, Phil (I-belong-to-Amnesty) Ruddock announced
that all Australian islands
north of the Tropic of Capricorn were to be
excised from the migration zone of Australia. Asylum seekers on those islands
will have no rights to apply to Australia for refugee status, and will be
denied the right to legal appeal under Australian Law. Unless they make it to the Australian mainland, they
are still in the cold. Phil's decision can be overturned by the Senate, and the
Liberals do not control the senate. The Democrats and Greens have cried out against this, and the ALP has
had a bit of a squeal, but doesn't actually know which way to jump. The Democrats and Greens are safe - they can say whatever they like.
Their policies will never be tested because they will never win government. However the ALP would actually like to win government. They can only do
this by criticizing Liberal's policies, but they can't take a stand
against policies which are popular with the electorate. When the Tampa sailed into Australian waters, the weak ALP leadership buckled
within two hours of Johnny (I-can-send-in-the-SAS) Howard making a decision because they knew that
that any other course would mean electoral disaster. Now they are sitting on
the fence and the spikes are hurting. This will only get tested if asylum seekers land on one of the islands in
question. If no-one does, the ALP will be accused of weakening Australia's
strong border stance indefinitely. If asylum seekers do land, then we will have
a Tampa situation all over again. The Australian people will feel the rush of
nationalism, and scream for absolute sovereignty. Simon (smile-for-me) Crean will either agree and look weak and foolish, or
take a pro-asylum-seeker stance and infuriate the voting public. Either way
he is unlikely to keep his job. The Liberal party knows this, and has introduced this regulation largely to
make the ALP squirm. It's working. They plan to route the ALP and show the
Australian electorate just how divided and unreliable they are on this issue.
Then Johnny raced off to the US to try to get an audience
with George W while Simon thrashes about screaming 'nobody tells me anything'.
He is demanding a briefing from the Prime Minister and refuses to get the
briefing from a lowly minister like Phil. Get a life Simon. Meantime the 2000-odd refugee-wannabes in Indonesia are eyeing events
closely and calculating whether the money they spend in getting here is worth
the risk of ending up in Nauru. Presumably they are praying to Allah for a Labor government. If the
Liberal strategy works, this could take a while. They might be better off
waiting for the second coming.
|
|
|
| That Smile .. | |
ABC-2002-05-25 reports
The ALP's biggest state branch has demanded the party overturn its mandatory
detention policy for asylum seekers at its party conference in Sydney. The New South Wales branch has overwhelmingly endorsed the motion
calling for an end to the compulsory detention of asylum seekers, a policy
begun and currently endorsed by federal Labor and by New South Wales
Premier Bob Carr.
The federal Liberal
Party must be breaking open the champagne bottles over
this news. With the vast majority of swinging voters with both left and right
leanings supporting tighter border control and mandatory detention. It also must have the swinging voters breathing a sigh of relief at having
made the right decision at the last election. Many people didn't really believe
Big Kim's line that the strong border protection, and the mandatory
detention would continue. The smart money knew that the Labor Party was just closing ranks for long
enough to last out the election. They knew that the compassionate bleeding
hearts would come out from under their rocks, and stick their knives into a few
backs (regardless of who won), and try to pry open the borders. The Australian Labor Party, party of the workers and party with the high
moral ground has been caught out in its dishonesty once again. Gotta hand it to the ALP. Most parties have to actually win government
to have that level of electoral dishonesty revealed. While Little Johhny clearly had is hearing aid turned off whenever
mentioned 'kiddies overboard', and may have not bothered to look at those image
attachments on his email (someone must have told him about the virus risk), at
least he was talking the talk. He said what he was going to do, and he did
it. Little Johnny's got balls. The ALP will be saved in NSW state elections because Carr will just ignore
the demands. But the federal branch may have just lost the next federal
election - even if it's still two and half years away. Simon, you got all that
dental work done for nothing!
|
|
 |
| On top of corruption! | |
Andrew Theopanous, long time Labour serving Minister and obsessed
pro-immigration activist went down for 3.5 years jail. Not only was he taking bribes in the form of money, he was attempting to take
payment in the form of sexual favors from an Asian woman ('if she was good
looking enough'). This is the same man who continually rallied for the rights of immigrants, and
who took the moral high ground on any issue to do with immigration. He wanted
more immigration - presumably no amount of immigration would have been enough.
Understandable when more immigrants means more opportunity to take bribes from
them, and to use them for sex. This is the man who painted the immigrants as poor desperate and needing
'special treatment'. Clearly he thought they were desperate. Desperate enough to
agree to give sex in return for visas. He was also instrumental in the controversial decision to bring some 20,000
'Bob Hawke Specials' into the country after the Tienanmen Square massacre in
1989. It is time to seriously question Australia's immigration policies. While
the fact that Theopanous is just a common criminal is not in itself enough to
dismiss the views he held, it is enough to look very seriously at those
views, and question our policy frameworks. Much of our immigration policy
framework, including much of our refugee program was set up under the control
of this criminal. It would be criminal to merely accept the current levels as
appropriate without further questioning. Meantime Theopanous may be doing a little questioning of his own in his
prison cell. His wife might be questioning why she is still with him too, and
planning her own escape.
|
|
 |
| Stage Dive! | |
The BBC 2002-05-20 Reports that Amnesty International claims religious
tensions between detainees in Australian detention
centers are leading to persecution and physical assault. Not content to leave their old wars at home, the Christians, Mandeans,
Tamils, Hindus and Islamists are sniping at each other. Christian converts in
particular are facing threats and violence from Islamists, being labeled
'infidels'. Of course this is all part of the game-plan of the Howard government.
Putting all these groups together is a clear demonstration of their
unwillingness to integrate or even to tolerate other cultures or religions. As more and more Australians see the violence
these people initiate against others, the less and less inclined they are to
let them stay. The thought of having this kind of violence perpetrated in one's
town or suburb makes the average Australian nervy. The thought of having the
violence perpetrated against them or their families is a deciding factor. While the ALP waffle on about finding a middle
ground between compassion and pragmatics, the Liberal Party are pursuing their policy of
border control. The average Australian, having gotten over the excitment of seeing the SAS
actually used for something when they boarded the Tampa, is now just settling
back in their lounge-chairs and waiting for the political machine to run its course.
|
|
|
>> Please Sir, I want some more
|
|
| Feedback/Forum |
|
- ANON -- Anonymous Coward 2011-12-02
|
|
