AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:Hockey has officially left the building too.
Good fucking riddance.
Off to his cushy job in the US.
-PB Yep, what a self-serving farewell speech as well. Terrible Treasurer.
|
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
AzzaMarch wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Constant governing by opinion polls leaves politicians in charge that are too scared to make any significant decisions and that's not a recipe for a successful country no matter what your politics.
I think the biggest issue is that we have had a run of incompetent PMs more than anything else. The opinion polls only mattered because they were so unpopular! How many times do we see policies announced out of thin air, only to be withdrawn months later? That is not how you govern. You need to prepare the public, and argue your case. I disliked a lot about John Howard - but I always respected the fact that he took an unpopular issue in the GST, announced the policy BEFORE the election, and took time to argue the merits of it. Then after the election, negotiated with the minor parties, and got the legislation passed. That is how things are supposed to happen. Not announcing the day before the election that "nothing would change" then pulling out a huge range of spending cuts in the first budget with no lead-up. Yeah all of that. Abbot was a clown and it's good to see the arse end of him.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:AzzaMarch wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Constant governing by opinion polls leaves politicians in charge that are too scared to make any significant decisions and that's not a recipe for a successful country no matter what your politics.
I think the biggest issue is that we have had a run of incompetent PMs more than anything else. The opinion polls only mattered because they were so unpopular! How many times do we see policies announced out of thin air, only to be withdrawn months later? That is not how you govern. You need to prepare the public, and argue your case. I disliked a lot about John Howard - but I always respected the fact that he took an unpopular issue in the GST, announced the policy BEFORE the election, and took time to argue the merits of it. Then after the election, negotiated with the minor parties, and got the legislation passed. That is how things are supposed to happen. Not announcing the day before the election that "nothing would change" then pulling out a huge range of spending cuts in the first budget with no lead-up. Yeah all of that. Abbot was a clown and it's good to see the arse end of him. I include much of Rudd/Gillard in the list of "incompetence" - whilst I agreed with some of the policies eg ETS, Superprofits tax, pokies reform, it was so badly brought in that they have created scorched earth for many of theose reforms for years to come. But I think Abbott was the worst. However, he was only able to get in because Rudd/Gillard were so dire.
|
|
|
marconi101
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 16K,
Visits: 0
|
[youtube]r6Y_p9dXZGE[/youtube]
He was a man of specific quirks. He believed that all meals should be earned through physical effort. He also contended, zealously like a drunk with a political point, that the third dimension would not be possible if it werent for the existence of water.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
AzzaMarch wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:AzzaMarch wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Constant governing by opinion polls leaves politicians in charge that are too scared to make any significant decisions and that's not a recipe for a successful country no matter what your politics.
I think the biggest issue is that we have had a run of incompetent PMs more than anything else. The opinion polls only mattered because they were so unpopular! How many times do we see policies announced out of thin air, only to be withdrawn months later? That is not how you govern. You need to prepare the public, and argue your case. I disliked a lot about John Howard - but I always respected the fact that he took an unpopular issue in the GST, announced the policy BEFORE the election, and took time to argue the merits of it. Then after the election, negotiated with the minor parties, and got the legislation passed. That is how things are supposed to happen. Not announcing the day before the election that "nothing would change" then pulling out a huge range of spending cuts in the first budget with no lead-up. Yeah all of that. Abbot was a clown and it's good to see the arse end of him. I include much of Rudd/Gillard in the list of "incompetence" - whilst I agreed with some of the policies eg ETS, Superprofits tax, pokies reform, it was so badly brought in that they have created scorched earth for many of theose reforms for years to come. But I think Abbott was the worst. However, he was only able to get in because Rudd/Gillard were so dire. Whilst others will disagree, to me Gillard's problem was that Rudd undermined her during the election campaign and that caused fatal damage to the Labour Party's chance to govern in their own right and forced her to govern in a minority government which is why his bastardry in that affair should never be forgiven by the Labour party. Had Gillard won, with a clear majority, none of the shit that went down, due to the cross-benchers, including the carbon tax need not have occurred. For sure, she still could have been an absolute basket case of a PM, but thanks to Rudd and his sniveling, back-stabbing, smug-fuckery, Gillard started behind the 8 ball, never recovered and we'll never know if she had the goods or not. Rudd fucked it all up and should hang his head in shame. Edited by munrubenmuz: 22/10/2015 04:10:14 PM
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
Murdoch Rags Ltd
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Your statement typifies simplism - vote for personalities rather than policies. The people vote for the party, the party votes for the leader.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Murdoch Rags Ltd wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Your statement typifies simplism - vote for personalities rather than policies. The people vote for the party, the party votes for the leader. Well done, you've figured me out. If there's one thing I take away with me from reading your contributions is that your posting typifies your idiocy. I wish I lived in a world of only blacks and whites just like you.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
Murdoch Rags Ltd wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Your statement typifies simplism - vote for personalities rather than policies. The people vote for the party, the party votes for the leader. Swing Voting 101 -PB
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:AzzaMarch wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:AzzaMarch wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Constant governing by opinion polls leaves politicians in charge that are too scared to make any significant decisions and that's not a recipe for a successful country no matter what your politics.
I think the biggest issue is that we have had a run of incompetent PMs more than anything else. The opinion polls only mattered because they were so unpopular! How many times do we see policies announced out of thin air, only to be withdrawn months later? That is not how you govern. You need to prepare the public, and argue your case. I disliked a lot about John Howard - but I always respected the fact that he took an unpopular issue in the GST, announced the policy BEFORE the election, and took time to argue the merits of it. Then after the election, negotiated with the minor parties, and got the legislation passed. That is how things are supposed to happen. Not announcing the day before the election that "nothing would change" then pulling out a huge range of spending cuts in the first budget with no lead-up. Yeah all of that. Abbot was a clown and it's good to see the arse end of him. I include much of Rudd/Gillard in the list of "incompetence" - whilst I agreed with some of the policies eg ETS, Superprofits tax, pokies reform, it was so badly brought in that they have created scorched earth for many of theose reforms for years to come. But I think Abbott was the worst. However, he was only able to get in because Rudd/Gillard were so dire. Whilst others will disagree, to me Gillard's problem was that Rudd undermined her during the election campaign and that caused fatal damage to the Labour Party's chance to govern in their own right and forced her to govern in a minority government which is why his bastardry in that affair should never be forgiven by the Labour party. Had Gillard won, with a clear majority, none of the shit that went down, due to the cross-benchers, including the carbon tax need not have occurred. For sure, she still could have been an absolute basket case of a PM, but thanks to Rudd and his sniveling, back-stabbing, smug-fuckery, Gillard started behind the 8 ball, never recovered and we'll never know if she had the goods or not. Rudd fucked it all up and should hang his head in shame. Edited by munrubenmuz: 22/10/2015 04:10:14 PM Yep - fair point. Agree with all that.
|
|
|
Roar_Brisbane
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 14K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Constant governing by opinion polls leaves politicians in charge that are too scared to make any significant decisions and that's not a recipe for a successful country no matter what your politics.
Good luck with that, if Turnbull gets re-elected I can't see his party keeping him around for a full term.
|
|
|
Condemned666
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.4K,
Visits: 0
|
heres a homage to the gaffman himself, Joe Hockey->
|
|
|
paulbagzFC
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 44K,
Visits: 0
|
Yup. Say hello to fucking cushy job 101. -PB
|
|
|
Murdoch Rags Ltd
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 1.2K,
Visits: 0
|
paulbagzFC wrote:Murdoch Rags Ltd wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Your statement typifies simplism - vote for personalities rather than policies. The people vote for the party, the party votes for the leader. Swing Voting 101 -PB Yep its unfortunate but true. As I mentioned previously, its a falsity that swinging voters are considered in their voting choice. The truth is that, typically, they are poorly informed (and hence more likely to vote based on superficialities)
|
|
|
JP
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.5K,
Visits: 0
|
marconi101 wrote:[youtube]r6Y_p9dXZGE[/youtube] Yeah I went to this; was an interesting discussion. We need more politicians like Keating. Whatever you think of his politics, he clearly had what it took to lead the country - and unlike most of today's politicians, he always had a very clear long-term plan for Australia. Edited by JP: 22/10/2015 11:09:03 PM
|
|
|
marconi101
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 16K,
Visits: 0
|
I don't see why anyone can disagree with him on the republic or of creating a better image of Australia. The monarch is useless in todays day and age and we need to escape the (as he said years ago) cultural cringe that conservatism stains us with
He was a man of specific quirks. He believed that all meals should be earned through physical effort. He also contended, zealously like a drunk with a political point, that the third dimension would not be possible if it werent for the existence of water.
|
|
|
JP
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 2.5K,
Visits: 0
|
marconi101 wrote:I don't see why anyone can disagree with him on the republic or of creating a better image of Australia. The monarch is useless in todays day and age and we need to escape the (as he said years ago) cultural cringe that conservatism stains us with Yeah his comments on the Republic, the flag and aboriginal recognition were all spot on.
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Abetz in trouble for using the "disparaging" term Negro in an interview. Honestly had no idea that was even offensive. Googled it up and they were saying the preferred term is "black" or "African-American". Weird because "nigger" gets a fair run out on triple j by a fair few of the American rappers and hip hoppers.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
Condemned666
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:Abetz in trouble for using the "disparaging" term Negro in an interview.
Honestly had no idea that was even offensive.
Googled it up and they were saying the preferred term is "black" or "African-American".
Weird because "nigger" gets a fair run out on triple j by a fair few of the American rappers and hip hoppers.
This is a hit-> [youtube]Z-48u_uWMHY[/youtube] ^ but only Kendrick Lamar is permitted to use it
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
Condemned666 wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Abetz in trouble for using the "disparaging" term Negro in an interview.
Honestly had no idea that was even offensive.
Googled it up and they were saying the preferred term is "black" or "African-American".
Weird because "nigger" gets a fair run out on triple j by a fair few of the American rappers and hip hoppers.
This is a hit-> [youtube]Z-48u_uWMHY[/youtube] ^ but only Kendrick Lamar is permitted to use it I love triple J and will defend it to the hilt but when that abortion of a song comes on it I switch stations. It does my head in. A lot of music I can say "I don't like it but I can see why people do" but that (and death metal) is beyond my scope of understanding.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
Murdoch Rags Ltd wrote:paulbagzFC wrote:Murdoch Rags Ltd wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Personally, for the sake of the country, I hope he gets re-elected. 5 PM's in 5 years is a joke and a farce.
Your statement typifies simplism - vote for personalities rather than policies. The people vote for the party, the party votes for the leader. Swing Voting 101 -PB Yep its unfortunate but true. As I mentioned previously, its a falsity that swinging voters are considered in their voting choice. The truth is that, typically, they are poorly informed (and hence more likely to vote based on superficialities) Actually swinging voters are typically more intelligent than rusted on Labor and Liberal voters.
|
|
|
Condemned666
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.4K,
Visits: 0
|
Munrubenmuz wrote:Condemned666 wrote:Munrubenmuz wrote:Abetz in trouble for using the "disparaging" term Negro in an interview.
Honestly had no idea that was even offensive.
Googled it up and they were saying the preferred term is "black" or "African-American".
Weird because "nigger" gets a fair run out on triple j by a fair few of the American rappers and hip hoppers.
This is a hit-> [youtube]Z-48u_uWMHY[/youtube] ^ but only Kendrick Lamar is permitted to use it I love triple J and will defend it to the hilt but when that abortion of a song comes on it I switch stations. It does my head in. A lot of music I can say "I don't like it but I can see why people do" but that (and death metal) is beyond my scope of understanding. Rap is the transgressive poetry (Bukowski, Ginsberg) of contemporary society. People will be studying Kendrick Lamar, Drake, Tyler the Creator, Action Bronson, Future 50 years from now Anyway to the point of Kendrick Lamar, that song was made in the generation of Ferguson and Trayvon Martin, the ending of the video says it all I dont listen to triple J, I consume music from critical reviews [size=1](and a station from Seattle)[/size]
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
I'm not anti-rap or hip hop. I just hate that farking song with an absolute passion.
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
u4486662
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 8.8K,
Visits: 0
|
Just read up on the Abetz comment and the context it was used in. What a typical overreaction from the authoritarian left taking things out of context once again. Jacqui Lambie is smarter than I thought, recognising she can win easy brownie points with here hysteria whipping.
Reminds me of the whole Sam Harris vs Ben Affleck racist hysteria.
|
|
|
Carlito
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
Negro isnt racist at all. If he said n!^^@^ then he would be im a whole deep shit
|
|
|
Muz
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 15K,
Visits: 0
|
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:Negro isnt racist at all. If he said n!^^@^ then he would be im a whole deep shit Well apparently it is. In November last year the US Army was reportedly forced to apologise after it emerged official policy stated it was acceptable to refer to a black service member as a "negro". A new policy limits the acceptable terms to "Black or African American".http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/senator-eric-abetz-drops-racist-slur-on-radio-while-defending-opposition-to-gay-marriage-20151022-gkg7y9.html
Member since 2008.
|
|
|
Carlito
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 28K,
Visits: 0
|
Well you learn something new every day.
|
|
|
rusty
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 6.1K,
Visits: 0
|
MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:Well you learn something new every day. How long till black and African American are deemed racist terms?
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
In the Australian context we don't hear much about it because it generally isn't relevant to us. But it is generally regarded as no longer appropriate given the historical context.
But its more akin to your old grandpa saying "coloureds", "japs", etc out of ignorance, rather than any malice or intention involved.
To me it just indicates an out-of-touch old man who is a bit tone-deaf when it comes to these things, rather than anything significant. Especially when the point he was making wasn't related to that term used.
But, as a minister of govt, he should know better.
|
|
|
AzzaMarch
|
|
Group: Forum Members
Posts: 1.7K,
Visits: 0
|
rusty wrote:MvFCArsenal16.8 wrote:Well you learn something new every day. How long till black and African American are deemed racist terms? At the point that black people find them offensive, presumably. How else? I think not liking the term 'negro' is understandable. But it is a contested term. Quite interesting that the term "black" was initially regarded as offensive, but has now become an acceptable term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NegroUnited States
Negro superseded colored as the most polite word for African Americans at a time when black was considered more offensive.[3] This word was accepted as normal, including by people classified as Negroes, until the later Civil Rights movement in the late 1960s. One well-known example is the identification by Martin Luther King, Jr. of his own race as "Negro" in his famous speech of 1963, I Have a Dream.
During the American Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, some black American leaders in the United States, notably Malcolm X, objected to the word Negro because they associated it with the long history of slavery, segregation, and discrimination that treated African Americans as second class citizens, or worse.[4] Malcolm X preferred Black to Negro, but also started using the term Afro-American after leaving the Nation of Islam.[5]
Since the late 1960s, various other terms have been more widespread in popular usage. These include black, Black African, Afro-American (in use from the late 1960s to 1990) and African American (used in the United States to refer to black Americans, people often referred to in the past as American Negroes).[6]
The term Negro is still used in some historical contexts, such as in the name of the United Negro College Fund[7][8] and the Negro league in sports.
The United States Census Bureau announced that Negro would be included on the 2010 United States Census, alongside Black and African-American, because some older black Americans still self-identify with the term.[9][10][11]
The word Negro fell out of favor by the early 1970s in the United States after the Civil Rights movement. However, many older African Americans initially found the term black more offensive than Negro. In current English language usage, Negro is generally considered to be acceptable in a historical context, such as Negro spirituals or baseball's Negro Leagues of the early and mid-20th century, or in the name of older organizations, as in the United Negro College Fund or the Journal of Negro Education. The U.S. Census now uses the grouping "Black, African-American, or Negro." Negro is used in efforts to include older African Americans who more closely associate with the term.[12] According to Oxford Dictionaries, use of the word "now seems out of date or even offensive in both British and US English".[13]
|
|
|
Condemned666
|
|
Group: Banned Members
Posts: 3.4K,
Visits: 0
|
[youtube]4gx8hTYyuzA[/youtube]
|
|
|