The Russian YouTube Singer from Yes We Canberra - Hilarious

#ausvotes #auswaits

This is the clip from Yes We Canberra where they imitate and mock a Russian YouTube singer Eduard Khil:

 

Here is the original

The Media We Deserve

#ausvotes #auswaits

A critique of the uninspiring performance of the media during the Federal Election Campaign.

It was an uninspiring election campaign, but in the end, did we get the politicians and media we deserve? Media Watch looks at the trivialities that overshadowed policy announcements, the media's self-obsession, and the role that gender played in the coverage.

See the full video at Media Watch

Or see Bernard Keane’s critique at Crikey where he says:

Yes, this election is rubbish, and it represents the lowest point in policy debate since, probably, 1980.

Yes it’s boring, and visionless, and run by two parties that are entirely risk-averse and who have turned their backs on so much achieved by previous generations of leaders. Parties for whom a key campaign strategy is to explain to voters that they have no intention of carrying out reforms they have long insisted were crucial.

But bad luck – it’s your fault.

…

Why I voted Greens – Yes We Canberra!

#ausvotes #ausvoted #ywc

Lets hope the Chaser come back bigger and better!

Facebook: Vote for PM

#ausvotes #RootyQ

I saw today an online quiz on Facebook asking who I was going to vote for.  This is the option I was presented with:

Looking at the photo’s I wonder who this is sponsored by? 

Coalition’s Broadband Policy according to the Yes, We Canberra!

#ausvotes

Yes, We Canberra! provides a hilarious take on the Tony Abbott’s back to the future broadband policy.  Even faster than dialup!

 

Tony Abbott’s dismissal of gay marriage

#ausvotes #qanda

On Monday 16 August 2010 Opposition leader Tony Abbott appeared on the ABC’s program Q & A.  He was asked a very heartfelt and personal question from a Mr Geoff Thomas, Vietnam veteran, plumbing contractor and father of a gay son.  (See full video below)

He asked:

Thank you. I am a Vietnam veteran, I have been a plumbing contractor for 37 years and I support, with a social conscience, the Liberal philosophy. I have a gay son. When I was confronted with that situation in a very short amount of time and with due consideration I accepted his position and I overcame my ignorance and my fear of gays and the idea of gay marriage. When will you, Mr Abbott, take up the same - when will you, sir, overcome your fear and ignorance of gay people and give them the dignity and respect that you'd happily give to all other Australians?

Mr Abbott’s response was the usual political spin of – I respect gay people but I just don’t want to let them get married.  What struck me as odd, (and I may be overreacting) was his choice of language when responding.  He said the following line:

… I would always try to find it in my heart to give dignity and respect to people, regardless of their circumstances, regardless of their opinions, so that is absolutely my position but I think that there are lots of terrific gay relationships, lots of terrific commitments between gay partners, but I just don't think that marriage is the right term to put on it.

I found this comment odd.  Why does he need to try to find it in his heart.  Is it because he is still confronted by gay people.  Like I said I may be overreacting to this turn of phrase but it struck me immediately when he said it. 

My final point of disgust with Mr Abbott’s answer to this question was the part in the middle of his answer where he almost mocks gay people by grabbing the show’s host, Tony Jones’ hand and saying that he knows gay men.  Although the crowd had a bit of a laugh it struck me as distasteful that the alternative Prime Minister would make a subtle joke about gay men in this way. 

And don’t take this as a pure rant on the Coalition.  I have previously expressed my disappointment with the ALP in this issue.  See my previous blog post here.

I’ll give him some credit for trying to admit his failings on the subject by saying:

[Sometimes] our initial reactions to some of these things can be far from perfect and I'm sure that at different times I have reacted a bit poorly at first to things but I hope I would always find it in my heart to treat people the way everyone should be treated, with dignity and respect and I think that people who know me well who are gay would be only too happy to testify to that.

But I think the quote of the night for me was this, by Geoff Thomas when asked if Tony Abbott had answered his question satisfactorily:

Well, we all talk about it, don't we, but we don't get there. If I'm in a loving relationship, it's fundamental to me that I want to marry that person. I mean, I'm sure I listened to Graham Richardson on this program a few weeks ago and Penny Wong and I thought their comments were insulting. Graham Richardson said that gay people have to wait. They shouldn't have to wait. You're in the government; you should do something about it now. These are decent people who just want to lead decent lives like everybody else. That's it.

Definitely, could not have said it any better myself!

(Video of the Q&A on gay marriage via Q & A.)

 

See here for an article where Geoff Thomas is interviewed after the show.  He is a very good man!

The iAbbott launches!

 

Media Watch smacks 4BC’s Michael Smith for telling porkies on asylum seekers

For many months, perhaps years, I have wanted someone to take apart the ridiculous statements that the 4BC Drive Program (or as I have dubbed his show - LNP Radio) announcer, Michael Smith has been making on well…. any topic really. 

Media watch this week took him to task on asylum seekers.  Good on you Media Watch.  You know you’re doing a good job when the people your scrutinize attack you and doesn’t answer the question. 

The political ad too risqué for YouTube

#ausvotes

This ad received widespread criticism when it was released and it was removed from YouTube.  The creators, the ACTU said that Liberal supporters were responsible for its demise.  It has now made its way back on YouTube. 

I personally don't think it is worth the attention. I think it is just plain stupid and not very clever.

I think that Gruen Nation has a lot to answer for.  Making me expect quality political advertising.

 

The Australian Sex Party’s new ad

#ausvotes

I thought this was a spoof ad in the same vein as the GetUp! advertisements on Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott.  But apparently this is a legitimate ad.  Very amusing, if not a little disturbing!

 

 

Via @peterjblack at Election Blackout

Economics: Some very basic basics

#ausvotes

I am not a student of economics.  At times I struggle to understand all the implications of the Macro and Micro Economic situations of my household budget let alone Australia and the World.  But last week I read an article on Peter Black’s Election Blackout Blog written by Tom Gole an Economics student from UQ now studying his PhD at Harvard University.  This article put into perspective why we don’t need to be worried about Debt (at least at Australia’s current levels).  Here are some of the pertinent points. 

… it seems that a lot of the confusion about the level of federal government debt stems from the natural intuition of comparing a nation to a household. If it makes sense for me or my family to avoid taking on too much debt, surely a country shouldn’t either.   …

The reasoning behind households not holding too much debt is based on a lifecycle pattern: people should borrow when they are young to finance purchases they don’t have enough savings for (houses etc), then as their wages grow as they get older they pay off those loans, and then accumulate an asset base to live off once they stop working.

There is no analogous lifecycle for a country: Australia, as a nation, will never collectively stop working, so we will never need an asset base to live off. And the point goes further: Australia’s earnings, our GDP, will continue to grow, with the occasional up and down, for the foreseeable future.    …

It’s worth noting that the other reason people don’t want too much debt is so they have something to fall back on if they lose their job or get sick. In one sense, the household analogy is appropriate here – if you hit bad luck, you should use up some of your savings or go into debt until you get out of the bad times, and the government should do the same thing in a recession.     …

And there’s a further catch: most people cut back their spending in bad times, because their income has fallen and they don’t know how long it will be until they get back on their feet. On the other hand, if the government cuts its spending in a recession, it usually makes the economy take even longer to recover. The instinctive urge to tighten the belt during bad times is appropriate for a household, but if a government does the same then things only get worse.

After reading this I wondered why I hadn’t heard such an easy concept like this before.  I was then gobsmacked to hear Julia Gillard make the analogy to Laurie Oakes of the Weekend Today program:

JG: Look, I understand people worry about debt, I worry about debt too Laurie. I also understand that as we emerge from the global financial crisis, our debt position as a nation is like someone earning a hundred-thousand dollars a year, having a $6,000 loan.

When Tony Abbott is out spruiking his debt and deficit lies, why are we not hearing the fight back put in such simple terms.  I think a lot of people would be scared by the debt and deficit scare campaign and by hearing Joe Hockey talk of our borrowing Billions of dollars. 

But when the Government (and Opposition) claim they will be in surplus inside 3 years and thus be able to begin paying off our $6000 (equivalent) loan, I tend not to worry so much and I am thankful the Government didn't tighten their belts and see us enter recession! 

Family First: Intolerance, bigotry and bile

Say what you will of the major parties, but I would sooner vote informally than vote for Family First.  And I really cherish and value my vote. 

This week Family First Senate Candidate Wendy Francis made disparaging remarks likening same sex couples to child abuse.  She has since removed the comments from her Twitter page.  She (or as she now says her staff) wrote:

"Legitimising gay marriage is like legalising child abuse"

She has since apologised: (via: ninemsn) 

"I take responsibility for what was sent from my office and I acknowledge that the words used caused hurt and anguish for many people," she said in the statement.

"For this I sincerely and unreservedly apologise," she said.

But she went on to say she believed children were better off being raised by a mother and a father.

"I do not believe that upholding marriage or preventing children being raised in homosexual families is discrimination," she said.

"We can't govern Australia by legislation based on pleasing each group who wants things their way."

"My staff in Brisbane worded a media release on this issue. When I received the statement I felt that the language used was inappropriate and so I changed the wording.

"However due to my schedule these changes were accidentally not relayed to my Brisbane office and the wording from this incorrect release was transferred to Twitter."

Notice how she actually only apologises for the hurt her comment may have caused.  She does not distance herself from the comment or more particularly the sentiment behind it.  This is her way of saying don’t hold it against me, but this is how I feel.  Or at least this is how the people running Family First feel. 

And in her statement of "clarification" she comments that:

I hold no personal animosity against homosexuals.  The way people choose to conduct their lives is up to them and I will defend the right of every Australian to live according to their personal beliefs as long as their choices do not infringe upon the rights and choices of other Australians or the nation as a whole.

What does that mean.  Is she saying that homosexuality is a choice?  I hope not. 

But in her final insult to the gay community she says:

I reach out to those within the homosexual community and ask them to understand the thoughts and feelings of the many Australians that believe as I do. Respect and understanding goes both ways, and as we vigorously debate the issues it is important that none of us lose sight of the fact that we are all people of great value. Every Australian has a right to personal safety, respect and dignity and I extend the hand of friendship to those who share opposing views across this emotive subject.

Family First’s message to the gay community is:

Please respect us and our views even if we can’t respect you. 

Do you feel the loving embrace of Family First? 

 

UPDATE:

In another development on how right wing Family First are:

Family First last night disendorsed the city-based accountant after revelations he signed a “secret affidavit” denouncing many of the party’s conservative values.

In the document Mr Barrow outlined support for same-sex marriage, mooted supporting safe drug injecting rooms, called for drug possession to be decriminalised and argued against religion being taught in schools.

He also wants same-sex couples to be allowed to adopt children and access IVF treatment and says abortion should be a woman’s choice.

(via Knox Leader Newspaper)

 

This is Family First.  Vote for them at your peril!

Coalition running scared on policy costings

Andrew Robb the Shadow Finance Minister, today announced that the coalition would not release a further set of policy documents to Treasury for costing until it was known who leaked a policy costing document to the Fairfax newspapers earlier this week. 

You can listen to the interview with Andrew Robb:

I smell a rat. 

The Coalition probably have every right to be upset that this damning assessment of their spending promises was released to the newspapers but they still haven’t explained the real issue - Why are their costings not backed up by Treasury.  Why is the an $800 Million+ hole in their estimate of one policy.  They aren’t claiming that this document is false, they just demand that the leaker should be found and arrested.  On this basis they are confirming that there is a hole in their assessments. 

And now the clincher.  They aren’t going to release any more costing documents to Treasury until the leaker is found.  What spin.  They are now terrified that the rest of their policy costings are grossly underestimated that they do not want Treasury to review them.  This si the easy out.  They know that the leaker will not be found.  At least not in the next ten days.  They can try to walk the high moral ground while at the same time withholding from the Australian people vital information with which they can use to assess the truthfulness of their promises.  The Coalition (and all other parties for that matter) should be forced to release the costing documents to Treasury for analysis when they release the policy.   This would ensure that we have more than just  a politicians word that the figures are right.  That would be a true ‘Charter of Budget Honesty’

Abbott does the Time Warp!

This is a very funny advertisment produced by the ALP. 

 

My only question is why they don’t release ads like these on mainstream media.  This would have people talking and produce a much more favourable result than the typical ad with a horrible black and white picture of Tony Abbott and a large stamp across his face with slogans like “Don’t risk him”.  Here is an example of the later advertisement.

 

Thank God Latham has a terrible handshake!

Mark Latham yesterday confronted the Prime Minister Julia Gillard at the Brisbane Exhibition (EKKA) and complained about not being granted an interview.  He then took a further shot at Former PM Kevin Rudd saying that he was the source of the leaks of the past couple of weeks. 

His bile knows no boundaries!  This man who once ascended to the heights of the leadership of the ALP no shows no reverence for the organisation that once mistakenly made him leader.

This is the footage of his confrontation with the PM yesterday:

 

And now even his employer, Channel 9, has come out and apologised for his disgraceful conduct.   

All I can say is thank god he has a terrible handshake.  Because had he been Prime Minister were would we be now?  To borrow a phrase from Kevin Rudd, I think we would be rat-f**ked!

 

Update: That handshake!

GetUp!’s latest ad: Tony Abbott’s archaic views

GetUp! have created a new advertisement creatively showing us the old world views of Tony Abbott.  Peter Black commented today:

I think this is one of the more effective negative ads we have seen in the campaign so far, and reminds people that the very measured, restrained Tony Abbott we are seeing throughout this campaign, is not the Tony Abbott we have seen over the past few years.

(Via Election Blackout)

Newspoll: 50/50 – But scary for the ALP

According to the latest Newspoll the two party preferred is 50/50.  But the ALP would be very worried by the primary vote.  The primary vote is nearly back where it was when Julia Gillard took over the top job. 

Kevin Rudd was at 35% primary vote on 18-20 June 2010.  Julia is now on 37% and heading downward.  There needs to be a massive shakeup in the ALP camp and not just by throwing more money at the electorate.  I think next weeks Newspoll will be the most telling and politically terrifying for Julia Gillard and the ALP. 

I want both parties to engage, make some hard decisions, give us a point of difference and stop being small targets.

 

PRIMARY VOTE+ 

IN THE FEDERAL ELECTION FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO BE HELD ON SATURDAY, THE 21ST OF AUGUST, WHICH ONE OF THE FOLLOWING WILL YOU VOTE FOR? IF “UNCOMMITTED”, TO WHICH ONE OF THESE DO YOU HAVE A LEANING?

		COALITION %	LABOR %	GREENS %	OTHERS %
Election	24 November 2007	42.1	43.3	7.8	6.8
Newspoll	28-30 May 2010	41	35	16	8
Newspoll	18-20 June 2010	40	35	15	10
Newspoll	25-27 June 2010	40	42	10	8
Newspoll	16-18 July 2010	38	42	12	8
Newspoll	23-25 July 2010	42	40	12	6
Newspoll	30 July - 1 August 2010*	44	37	12	7

*4 per cent “uncommitted” and 2 per cent “refused” excluded.

 

 

TWO PARTY PREFERRED+
Based on preference flow at November 2007 Federal election 

	COALITION	LABOR
Election 24 November 2007	47.3	52.7
Newspoll 28-30 May 2010	49	51
Newspoll 18-20 June 2010	48	52
Newspoll 25-27 June 2010	47	53
Newspoll 16-18 July 2010	45	55
Newspoll 23-25 July 2010	48	52
Newspoll 30 July - 1 August 2010	50	50

A fantastic critique of political journalism in Australia

In General the media have turned politics into nothing more than that: politics.  Once upon a time politics was about policy and vision.  Now it is nothing more than point scoring, buying votes and one-up-manship.  It is a sad indictment that political journalists (in general) care more about fights, leaks, he-said she-said politics than the actual issues affecting the everyday lives of Australians. 

The Blogger at Grog’s Gamut articulates this best when he slams the media for caring more about comments by Mark Latham rather than vital health and disability policy.

Election 2010: Day 14 (or waste and mismanagement – the media)

Here’s a note to all the news directors around the country: Do you want to save some money? Well then bring home your journalists following Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard, because they are not doing anything of any worth except having a round-the-country twitter and booze  tour.

It is a sad thing to say but we could lose 95 percent of the journalists following both leaders and the nation would be none the poorer for it. In fact we would probably be better off because it would leave the 5 percent who have some intelligence and are not there to run their own narrative a chance to ask some decent questions of the leaders. Some questions which might actually reveal who would be the better leader of this country.

…

This morning John Bergin tweeted that Tony Abbott was making an announcement about disability support for students. As I noted yesterday I have a vested interest in the topic so I quickly put on the Sky News stream to watch the press conference. He announced that:

[severely disabled] students would be given a $20,000 education card, with the measure costing $314 million over four years.

and:

the Coalition would also nationalise disability definitions across the country in a bid to ensure people in different states are treated the same way by authorities.

They are good policies. They don’t “trump” the ALP’s policy of yesterday because the ALP’s focuses on early intervention for pre-school aged kids. Both are good, and in fact in my dream world both would be introduced (and expanded).

But I had some issues – what is meant by “severely disabled”. Now my daughter has Down Syndrome, and it might sound surprising to people, but I don’t actually view her as severely disabled. I assume she would come in under the clause, but as someone who just views her as my little girl and often forgets about the DS, I was wondering if she would qualify.

So I waited for some questions from the journalists. They came and guess what, they were all about politics. They were about Mark Latham’s comments about his believing Kevin Rudd leaked to Laurie Oakes. They were about foreigners owning our farms and whether he disagreed with a National’s senator. They were about nothing to do with the press conference. Did they test the policy? Did they ask who will qualify and why? Nope. Not at all.

 

Read on at Grog’s Gamut