|
>> Actually, Peter Garret stated quite clearly that he had voted in the last
>> election. He also said that he had voted in "most" of the previous federal
>> elections. He also stated that it was his belief that he was on the electoral
>> role. During his press conference, he was quite clear on all these things. >> Media reporting on Garrett's comments were confused. But that's only to be
>> expected; it always is. Garrett was always perfectly clear and
>> consistent. Clear and consistent - yes, a bit like John Howard's clarity in
definitely
not being able to remember any conversation with Allan Jones about David
Flint? He couldn't say which elections he had (and hadn't) voted in? >> Yesterday he came up with documentary proof of him voting in New
>> York in the last election. >> So what's the story? It's a bureaucratic screw up. Garrett thought he was
>> enrolled, went for years thinking he was enrolled, and yet he
>> wasn't. And your evidence that it's the bureaucracy's fault is ...? Just because
Garrett didn't know he wasn't enrolled doesn't make the gummit' responsible **. >> Mysterious, a libertarian who I assume has no love for bureaucracy now
>> feels entitled to castigate Garrett for a mistake for wasn't his, and for being
>> clear, consistent, and truthful. And your evidence that the error was not Garrett's? Not showing any bias
here are we? >> Do I detect a note of partisan bias in your
>> comments? I do indeed. I invite you to read through the archive of my postings if you think that
my criticisms are reserved solely for the ALP. If you think you detect an
overall bias I don't care. Unlike the ABC - no-one is forced to pay for
this site, and no-one is forced to watch it. If you need to restore the
balance, feel free to visit kindymedia. ----------- ** Actually some it was probably happenstance. My understanding is that
if the electoral office receives a postal vote from someone who is
unregistered, they are supposed to follow it up. In this case they may have
seen the name 'Peter Garrett', and assumed it was a joke. Though if it came
from a secure site like the Australian consulate in NY (presumably where
Garrett voted), then you might think they would take it more seriously. Either way, Garrett had a legal (no - not moral) responsibility to register
himself. Either they lost his registration or he didn't register. On balance of
probability I chose the latter. If he didn't he should come clean - admit he
did the wrong thing or declare that he objects to compulsory enrollment.
| 
