Archive for ‘election’

April 13, 2012

The Awful Truth About The Julian Assange Situation: it is not left or right, it is government against citizen

In this piece for the Fairfax press, Truth of Assange is stranger than fiction Elizabeth Farrelly 12 Apr 2012, writes about the strange twists in the Assange case.

The picture that Farrelly paints, it is like Julian Assange is the eye of a cyclone, with all the drama swirling around him, which seems to be even more bizarre than the original story of the man behind wikileaks.

I’m not given to conspiracy theories, incompetence being so much easier to imagine, but one thing gives credibility to Clive Palmer’s otherwise nutty CIA phantasm about US influence in Australia.
It is Julian Assange, a story that hinges on the uncomfortable relationship between truth and power.
We expect truth-telling from our four-year-olds but not from our politicians. In the case of Assange, truth is actively and repeatedly punished.
This implies that, as you move up through society’s power strata, there’s a point where morality flips.
A sort of moral inversion layer, beneath which the rules apply but above which they’re reversed.
The modern Labor Party seems to illustrate this as well as anyone.

Labor’s special amendments to the Extradition Act allow the same, proofless streamlining of extradition from Australia. Its so-called WikiLeaks Amendment allows ASIO to spy, at the Attorney-General’s discretion, on known supporters – despite the AFP’s view that no law has been breached. And its controversial Cybercrime Security Bill allows routine collection and surveillance of private emails, texts and other personal data.
As Gillard told Barack Obama last year, you can do anything today. Assange’s story will make a great film, in years to come; Jason Bourne with a dragon tattoo. But it’s not fiction. It’s real. We may yet be forced to recognise that Gillard’s anything may include totalitarianism by stealth. And this is Labor.
Read more….

Although Assange supporters keep denying that it is a left-right issue. It seems to be that accusation leveled against those defending or questioning Assange that is is a left-right issue comes from those on the right, attacking those on the left, as being on the right for daring to raise any questions about Julian Assange himself. The left have let Assange down! Yes, and the right have been quite happy to sit back and watch it all happen.

You ask too many questions and the spotlight turns on you, as the feminist Katha Pollitt found out being accused of waging a right-wing campaign against WikiLeaks co-founder Assange. Defend Assange unquestioningly or prepare for everything the leftwing media can throw at you.

Is it true that Assange despises the left? He has raised the idea of standing in Gillard’s seat, although with little chance of winning, wanting to unseat the Prime Minister and force regime is a tactic we would be more used to see in the Murdoch media. But in the end, does it matter? Should how someone votes be a deciding factor in whether or not they get their legal rights?

Despite a possible tilt at the Senate or taking a sitting Prime Minister’s seat, Assange is still an Australian citizen and deserves the full entitlements that come with having citizenship. He has every legal right to try and unseat a government. An American billionaire tries it every day in our national newspapers, and no one seems to worry about that.

And, while Assange supporters are attacking the incompetence, or perhaps wilful abandonment, of an Australian under threat of extradition to a legal blackhole of US Military prison, do people really expect that an Abbott government would have acted any different. Muhamed Haneef, Mandouh Habib, David Hicks, Scott Rush… perhaps not. Whatever has happened under the current government, it would be naive to think it would be better with Abbott in charge.

Extradition Without Proof, Spying Without Proof laws do not just apply to Assange. And if they weren’t the Wikileaks Laws, they might have been the Coal-Seam-Gas laws or Anti-Terror laws or Pirate-Copyright-Law.

All Australians will have to realise that each and everyone of us are now living under these laws, and things won’t be getting better any time soon.

text by @redglitterx
reference to any person in this post is in no way intended to imply that the person or people quoted would in any way endorse the contents of this post or blog

April 12, 2012

Western Australia to the LNP – It’s not us, it’s you, we’ll call, we promise

This post is reposted with permission from Ærchies Archive – Digital Detritus. Thank you

Incompetence Shines Through

Posted on April 11, 2012 by archiearchive FCD

With all the polls indicating a crushingly anti-ALP mood within the Australian Electorate, fed by a conniving media, there are still some things which cannot be papered over.

Like the incompetence of the Barnett Government in Western Australia. Like the apparent fraud of the Rorts Royalties for Regions imposed upon the State by National’s leader, Brendon Grylls when he hijacked 25% of all oils and mineral royalties for his blatant pork-barrelling use. Like a perverted chair-sniffing adulterer in charge of the State Bank Account. It all adds up and electors DO have a memory longer than a goldfish!

The numbers are becoming disturbing and, to keep the current LNP Govt in the apparent lead, shenanigans have to be played with the numbers. The uncommitted are excluded and the 2PP number is based on preferences, not in this poll but on the last election, some four years ago! ALP + Greens = 46% yet only 11% of Other is allocated to the ALP to give an alleged 47% 2PP.

Think about it, then think about some of the other polling tripe we are being fed nationally!

April 11, 2012

Fairfax to English translation of their article: Carbon tax is ‘unconstitutional’, says tax expert

Sydney Morning Herald: Carbon tax is ‘unconstitutional’, says tax expert
This was the headline of a story run yesterday. Now not everyone is used to speaking this strange new language known as FairFox which is English mixed with Rinehart, so I have translated this story (or the first paragraph, once you have read that, you don’t really need to read any more).

Despite the headline, or the url, the actual title of the page, reading the html source code, is Carbon tax|IPA|Bryan Pape… which translates as, despite what they tell their readers, they know what they are doing. Which is an old News Corpse trick, as long as the information in the story is correct, the headline can be the opposite, because many people don’t read past the headline.

How many people will only read the headline, and walk away believing two things – it is a tax and it is unconstitutional, without questioning who the tax expert is that saying these things. The tax expert, Fairfax points out, further into the story is The University of New England academic and practising barrister, Bryan Pape, has provided legal advice to conservative policy think tank, the Institute of Public Affairs, and here is his bio on the IPA website –

Now to the body of the story…

A PROMINENT Australian legal expert says he believes
This is how the story starts out, translation: ‘prominent‘ means IPA hired gun, ‘legal expert‘ means IPA hired gun and ‘says he believes‘ suggests he is going for a The Castle defence It’s just… the vibe… of the thing. This is the Fairfox variation on the ABC’s default for beginning news stories with the opposition says, we now have news stories starting with IPA says… is there much difference these days anyway?

the Gillard government’s carbon tax is unconstitutional
This is how the first line continues ‘the Gillard government’s carbon tax’ means come election time, they want everyone to remember the name of the government that gave us this supposed tax. I don’t recall the last time any media outlet in this country referred to the Howard government’s GST. ‘carbon tax‘ means let’s not call it by its correct name, of carbon pricing, instead they are trying to cram the word tax into this story as many times as possible (which was 29 times on that page, screen shot below). ‘unconstitutional’ usually refers to any tax the faceless billionaires don’t want to pay (hint: all of them).

and that the three largest states stand a chance
The first line continues with reference to ‘the three largest states’ referring New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia, this means someone will have to spend taxpayers money fighting this Federal Government policy, because it sure won’t be IPA, and it won’t be the Liberal Parties that led governments in those states, and it won’t be Nathan Tinkler (NSW), Clive Palmer (QLD) or Gina Rinehart and Twiggy Forrest (WA) – the cost will be borne by the taxpayers in those states, and the legal challenge loses, well there is plenty more money where that came from. ‘stand a chance’ means the IPA aren’t convinced that any court case would be winnable, but they only need to convince the voters and in 18 months we will have a new Abbott-government who will do what IPA tells him.

of successfully overturning the legislation in the event of a High Court challenge
‘in the event of a High Court challenge’ means the IPA is still trying to goad the Liberal premiers of NSW, QLD, WA into paying for a High Court challenge, and even if they don’t they have still muddied the waters in the eyes of the readers – voters. Just because there is a possible legal challenge to anything does not mean the case is winnable, mounting a challenge doesn’t make something unconstitutional, it just means something with money is prepared to spend it on a court case rather than paying that money in tax.

The rest of the article follows on pretty much in the same way, with the exception of the following piece reporting
‘federal Labor now trails the Coalition in every state and territory on both primary votes and on a two-party preferred basis’, when in fact Labor lead the 2PP (two party preferred) in South Australia and are 50-50 with the Coalition in Victoria. So apparently South Australia and Victoria have now been excluded from the Commonwealth, well that is okay, no faceless billionaire mining-magnates are based there.

text by @redglitterx

The word tax appeared 29 times on this page. As Vladimir Lenin said A lie told often enough becomes the truth. Also interesting about this page, the editors pick… Abbott PM, just so the voting public get used to seeing those words together.

April 2, 2012

Liberals seek US-style ‘fix’ for seat to block previous candidate’s selection

Despite critics attacking the Labor plan of community consultation, using US-style primaries to choose a candidate, it looks like the Liberals will jump first, in Western Sydney.

The western Sydney seat of Greenway, which is home to many different communities, no longer just the rednecks of stereotypes, previously working-class but now full of aspirationals was won by the Labor candidate by just over 700 votes. Tony Abbott blames these people for him not being Prime Minister.

Michelle Rowland narrowly beat the Liberal candidate, Jayme Diaz, a migration lawyer who arranges visas for clients, also of Filipino descent, for the seat, which is in an area where border security is a sensitive issue, but also home to a large Filipino community.

Diaz also has the backing of the Religious Right, which may prove important in an electorate which is host to the Hillsong pentacostal prosperity-doctrine based church. The member for neighbouring Macquarie, the Liberal Louise Markus, who it seems is on the board of only one organisation, that is Hillsong. So religion, apparently is a factor when choosing candidates for western Sydney seats.

Abbott has found the solution, to the 702 vote loss, and has told the state party that he wants a different candidate.

A Liberal source said: The entire motivation for the discussion in the party around primaries was how do you fix the seat of Greenway. Which shows how hypocritical the Liberals are for attacking Labor for factionalism, when they are engaged in the very same behaviour themselves.

So, why bring in a US-style voting process, the same kind that have been used to mock Labor with as being out of ideas?

a US-style primary in the western Sydney seat of Greenway, one of the electorates Tony Abbott blames for his failure to snatch victory from Labor at the last federal election… will be sold as an experiment in democracy by giving the community a say in the party’s candidate to contest the next federal election.

However, party insiders say it is a calculated bid to prevent the previous candidate, Jayme Diaz, a Blacktown migration lawyer, from running again.

Why would Abbott, personally, champion a selection process that could see Diaz miss out as candidate, especially when he came so close in the previous election – unless Abbott still sees Western Sydney as the badlands populated by migrant-hating rednecks, which would be an outdated stereotype of one of the most ethnically diverse parts of Australia.

Image of Diaz, used without permission from Sydney Morning Herald, because people ask, and because there were no images in the public domain that could be found even after an extensive crawl of the web, forgive me SMH

text by @redglitterx
additional information from Liberals look to US for seat ‘fix’


March 31, 2012

Zombie Work Choices – dead, buried, cremated – returns to life?

text of tweet: Spain – after decades of unionized laws – now turns to WorkChoices to save them


This recent tweet by Queensland MP Andrew Laming, shows that not all Liberal/Nationals have given up on a return of WorkChoices.

Despite Tony Abbott declaring that WorkChoices was dead, buried, cremated, like a zombie-policy – it seems like there will Ministers pushing for it to rise from the dead if there is ever an Abbott government.

If adherents of a Liberal National agenda believe that a country is saved by Work Choices, can it be long before they begin taking about saving Australia.

These people cannot be trusted when it comes to Industrial Relations policy.

text by @redglitterx
image of tweet is in no way intended to suggest that Laming in any way endorses the contents of this post or this blog

March 29, 2012

How One Greens Supporter Sees Labor’s Recent Performance

Guest post by @greenat15, a proud Greens member (who has recently changed his handle to @greenat16)

Pondscum, what’s with that?

When I was on a recent walk, in lovely Sydney, I came across a billabong, a little stretch of water that was filled with an algal bloom – do we want for a better word than Pondscum?

I see many similarities with that primitive form of life and a certain political party. I see them both attempt to cling onto life when they are facing immense pressure to throw in the towel and give it all up. I see them both being tiny specs on the landscape, and I see them both refusing to move, refusing to adapt, refusing to change.

The Australian people hold much anger towards the Labor party, why? Because they are the same old stagnant rot that refuses to change, that recycles bad policy, bad leaders and bad ideas.

I am a 15 year old student, what does he know about politics? who is he? he can’t even vote! Well I have been involved in politics for over half my life, I live and breathe politics, I am not in the Labor party, but I am in NSW, I have seen what NSW Labor has done to this state and it ain’t good.

It’s understandable that the people are upset with Labor. It’s understandable that the Labor brand is dying. It’s true that Australians hate political domination, towards the end of Howards reign there was total Labor domination in each state and territory

Then there was the Ruddslide. The inevitable win from federal Labor, a win that was theirs for the taking but with that win came the inevitable loss of the states – Western Australia, Victoria, New South Wales and finally Queensland… Gone.

Gone, because the labor governments in those states took the people for granted, they raped the land and absorbed money from the highest bidder. They had to go, and Gillard’s leadership tussle gave the people the ultimate excuse for Labor’s removal.

Gillard and the faceless factional cronies (I’m looking at you Shoppos) signed the death warrant for the Labor party across Australia, they came, they soared and they gored – relegated to facing a government of 72 seats.

State Labor has also done much to ensure that they won’t partake in a big win for a long time, let’s take NSW as an example: they had countless MPs referred to the Corruption Watchdog, they had sex scandals, they had Ministers who announced things that knew they could not deliver on; that’s where the rot comes from.

NSW is the home of the gangrenous Labor limbs, heck, we even had a name for it The NSW Disease.

The recent Queensland elections further demonstrated the publics hate for the Labor Party, they were like a sponge (well, maybe that’s not a good metaphor considering the floods they had recently), they filled the Parliament with MPs that loved asset sales and then when it came to the March 24th election they were squeezed into oblivion, their water soul was shattered into a volleyball team of MPs.

The public hate the Labor party, but it is the Labor Party itself that is to blame for the death of the Labor party…

Opinions are those of @greenat16, and do not, necessarily, reflect those of TurnLeft.

Thank You for your post

March 26, 2012

A piece of Murdoch merde – Rupert achieves Regime Change

Newspapers don’t make money. The only reason to own a newspaper publishing empire is to influence public opinion. There has been no secret that the Murdoch media empire in Australia has been trying to bring about Regime Change.

Media is not unbiased. It is not a neutral thing. It is run by editors that have political agendas, for good or bad, they are human.

And this, is Greens Senator Bob Brown’s reaction

images of tweets, used for illustrative purposes and is no way meant to suggest the tweeters in anyway endorse the contents of this post
text by @redglitterx

March 26, 2012

Tweets Of The Week – Queenslands New Democracy 26/03/2012

Two tweets of the week, both dealing with the Queensland election. The first is election victory, the second is the unbiased way the media in the rest of the country reacts to the change in government.

images of tweets, used for illustrative purposes and is no way meant to suggest the tweeters in anyway endorse the contents of this post
text by @redglitterx

March 25, 2012

QLD Election Blowback, this times it’s personal.

On March 24 2012 , the Word FUCK was heard around the world – QLD Election Blowback, this times it’s personal. by Delon de Circle en Rouge

One day you’re in power for 20 years dragging the state into the 21st Century and the next …Labor {is} falling short of official party status and relying on the incoming LNP government to grant it party offices, staff and resources* with only 6 seat won.

The blame lies with Anna Bligh and the Labor Party campaign. Anyone who had the sickening misfortune to watch the mawkish self-pity of Anna Bligh concede defeat before Saturday, can watch this and tell me would you vote, let alone volunteer to hand out How-To-Vote cards and campaign for our ALP cause, if you saw this video?

Campbell Newman didn’t win this election, nobody likes a smug millionaire with a chip on his shoulder. Although to be fair, a leader he is, much more so than Anna Bligh, and he managed to galvanise a talentless and listless bunch of LNP candidates from the reject shop. Whether they’ll be able to support his ‘vision’ remains to be seen.

ALP strategists should be immediately fired. They stuffed up our NSW campaign and completely fucked up our QLD one. Clearly a bold consistent message wasn’t in their planning. You can argue that Bligh broke plenty a promise; but you can argue that all politicians renege on promises when world reality collides with policy.

Time for a new strategy and strategists. Time for new leaders. Time for aggressive progressive policies. Time to Act. Time to bring in new and youthful ideas and enthusiasm. Time to destroy the left/right paradigm and deliver a more pertinent message one of which is the individual/community vs the Corporations as exemplified by the Occupy Movement. In this way the youth will come to think of ALP as a mainstream progressive political party that listens and not just a moderate Liberal Party that they’re fast becoming.

{edited to add: *source of this quote is behind a paywall – @redglitterx}

March 25, 2012

She’s got Style, She’s got flair… She’s Got A Taxpayer Subsidy: Abbotts Great Big New Nanny Giveaway

Coming to an upper class suburb – pardon me: enclave, gated community, village, never a suburb – near you.

Abbott is giving away Nannies.

Well, actually no, Ms Crabb, I may not know as much about politics as you, but I do know one thing:
Taxpayers foot the bill, not the Leader (for now) Of The Opposition

But, let’s backtrack and see what Ms Crabb is talking about.

Tony Abbott’s new I understand women policy, discussed here Now for Abbott’s nanny state, by Stephanie Peatling in the Sydney Morning Herald, 25 Mar 2012 and here Abbott’s change of heart (25 Mar 2012: The Age) opinion piece from Misha Schubert.

Firstly, hands up who believes there is a change of heart? No it’s not, it’s a continuation of Neo-Con policy of transferring the cost of lifestyle of the ultra rich onto the working poor. It is exactly what the tiny black hearts of Neo-Cons do, treating working people as useful only as ATMs for the rich.

Mischa Schubert calls this generosity of spirit. Generous? It is just a promise – I could promise to give every Australian a million dollars, but until I come through on that, it is meaningless. It is an empty promise. A non-core, never-ever type of promise.

Schubert proceeds her fan-girling love-letter to Abbott style prose, with for a man who is meant to have a problem with women, Tony Abbott sure acts like one when managing his calorie intake. In an example of blatant gender-stereotyping of male-behaviours Vrs female behaviours, more suited to the How to be a Good Housewife manuals of the 1950s than a newspaper in 2012.

Although, not being of the right-wing, I’m not quite sure I understand what Tony Abbott is going for here. It cannot possibly be socialism, could it. Government funding the private lifestyle choices of a select few. Government hand-outs? Surely not! It is a luxury, and one that no government has the business to be funding. Giving child care tax breaks to those who can already afford it, and afford it comfortably, is the same kind of socialism that the Neo-Cons of the right scoff at when it comes to providing subsistence-benefits payments to the unemployed or single teen mothers.

Why is Tiny Abbott doing this, as Schubert says He wants you to know he’s evolved.

This whole sit down interview feels more like Opposition spin, in an attempt to convince female voters to forget his Get-Back-To-The-Kitchen attitude, this is a new Tony, he promises. What? Another one? How many New Tony’s are there? and, how many more will we see before the next election?

Abbott claims that he now understands working mothers. Really? Empathy that has failed to move him for fifty-something years, and surprise-surprise overnight he wakes up with a heart… change, in his perceptions of women. Compassion that had eluded him while his own wife raised their children, and he suddenly finds it only days after making allusions of enacting violence against the female prime minister.

Abbott says:

Abbott insists his full-pay parental leave scheme sits squarely with conservative philosophy. I think a very strong ‘conservative’ case can be made for it because the most conservative thing anyone can do is have a family, and far too many bright, modern women have no children, or fewer children than they would like, because it is just too difficult given the necessities or complexities of modern life.
Source: here

Perhaps Mr Abbott could have a quiet word to Julie Bishop, his Deputy, about her lack of children.

But, I have a question for Mr Sensitive New Age Man – what about gay and lesbian families? You say it is a true conservative value to have a family, yet you refuse to allow the members of your party a conscience vote on whether to legally recognise marriage equality.

Some families are more family than others?

But why is the lifestyle choices of parents being subsidised by the taxpayers, many of whom have no children. This so-called policy is a continuation of the Liberals Nationals belief that taypayers must fund the private health care of the rich, the private schools of the rich, the private hospitals of the rich. This is not a policy aimed at improving the lives of all women, just the wealthy.

It’s the Liberal way. It is not a cost-of-living issue, this is a lifestyle issue. Funded by taxpayers. But we must preserve their Right To Choose! For the rich, the right-to-choose is another way of saying, transfer the paying the bills onto someone else. It is about the wealthy and their freedom of choice, but, for the poor it’s about their right to continue paying for it from their PAYE, or… no, PAYE taxpayers have no options.

And, does Australia have enough qualified child carers to cater for this policy?
Perhaps Abbott plans to import skilled migrants, in order to provide these nannies. There must be Third World workers waiting for visas to fill this role. As long as they don’t arrive by boat, come on in. More importantly, will Abbott face the same scrutiny he levelled at Minister Garrett over the pink-batts scheme if one of these nannies does harm to one of their clients?

Will these nannies by paid a fair wage?
The poverty line in India has been reclassified as 44 cents a day India govt. accused of concealing poverty by lowering poverty line to 44 cents per day, surely there are some people in this country willing to work for 45 cents a day.

Will the nannies be on work-choices-wages?
Since nannies don’t contribute to the national economy to the same extent as tax-minimising mining multi-nationals, do these nannies even deserve a full wage

Simply more middle class welfare, after all someone else has to pay for all those babies brought into the world for their parents to qualify for Costello’s middle class baby-bonus. Will the nannies by mean-tested? Can multi-millionaires claim this?

Where will the money to fund this policy come from? Unlike Annabel Crabb, I seriously doubt that Tony Abbott will be paying for it. So the money will have to be found somewhere? You can’t maintain a budget surplus otherwise – services to the the disadvantaged, the working-poor, the aged, they may have to have their budgets trimmed.

Are the faceless billionaires in this country in such desperate dire-straits that they need the taxpayer to step in and financially looking after their offspring? If so, then perhaps this is a situation best dealt with by children’s services and not throwing more taxpayer money at it.

image of Fran Drescher and Charles Shaughnessy in The Nanny , used for illustrative purposes and is no way meant to suggest they or the copyright holders in anyway endorse the contents of this post
text by @redglitterx