Is there a glimmer of a coming Enlightenment…

European politics, philosophy, science and communications were radically reoriented during the course…

Embassy Disappearances: Jamal Khashoggi and the Foreign Policy…

“Do this outside. You will put me into trouble” (Mohammad al-Otaibi, Saudi…

Nauru - Is this a Mexican Stand-Off ?…

There are about 119 children currently detained with their families on Nauru…

DNA in Trumpland: Elizabeth Warren’s Native American Dance

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) made a fundamental error in chasing the coattails…

Climate recalcitrance

By John Haly“Recalcitrant” is what Prime minister Keating once described Malaysian prime…

The ridiculous state of politics in Australia

Scrolling through Scott Morrison’s twitter feed shows just how ridiculous politics in…

Stability, Promises The PM Who Was Elected Eight…

“With the Liberal Party, you know what you are going to get,”…

The Fallout from Wentworth

It takes a brave pundit to predict the outcome of the Wentworth…


Rossleigh is a writer, director and teacher. As a writer, his plays include “The Charles Manson Variety Hour”, “Pastiche”, “Snap!”, “That’s Me In The Distance”, “48 Hours (without Eddie Murphy)”, and “A King of Infinite Space”. His acting credits include “Pinor Noir Noir” for “Short and Sweet” and carrying the coffin in “The Slap”. His ten minutes play, “Y” won the 2013 Crash Test Drama Final.

Stability, Promises The PM Who Was Elected Eight Weeks Ago…

“With the Liberal Party, you know what you are going to get,” says the unelected PM who replaced the elected PM causing the surprise by-election.

He was speaking to the voters of Wentworth about the dangers of electing an independent.

The Liberals are all over the dangers of the “wrong” result on Saturday. It could cause a hung Parliament. And the last time we had a hung Parliament, we had a PM who – according to Alan Jones – should have been put in a chaff bag and thrown into the sea. And, in spite of all his support for farmers, Scott doesn’t want to end up in a chaff bag…

However, I was more concerned with Scott’s popular culture reference:

“It’s like the good old box of chocolates — you never know what you are going to get when it comes to voting independent.”

Now, it may come as a surprise to some of you, but chocolate boxes actually have things which tell you which flavour is which. However, I suspect that, like the reports they commission, the Liberals feel that they don’t have time to read anything which tells them what they’re likely to get.

The reference is – of course – from “Forest Gump”, as opposed to the recent remake “Forest Trump” where a simple man was urged to run for President, and owing to his refusal to bog himself down with reality, found himself elected.

Speaking of which, Trump has promised retaliation if the Saudis are found to be behind the disappearance of the journalist. I guess this means that if he finds the Saudis responsible he’ll bomb Iraq like George W did. Or Iran because it’s almost the same!

Anyway, back to Scott’s assertion that you don’t know what you’re getting with an independent…

One has to admire his chutzpah…

No really, there’s legislation in Parliament that says one has to admire the current government…

Or am I getting confused with the Pauline motion about it being ok to be white… It lost, so next time she comes into the Senate wearing a burqa, she can claim that she was just hiding her whiteness.

I had intended to write about how the whole drought thing is just a conspiracy from the National Party to convince us that climate change is real and we need to give money to farmers.

Or to point out that South Australia has electricity blackouts so it must be wind farms again because storms have never caused blackouts where coal-fired power stations are involved.

Ah, it’s a confusing week. And it’s only Monday.

Religious Freedom: A Tale Of Two Interviews

Mr Ruddock’s report is out…

Um, when I say it’s out, I think I need to be clear here. It’s out in the sense that the government has had it for five months and they needed time to consider what it said before they discussed it as a party where the considered and thoughtful discussions may have been leaked to the media who would have spun these considerations to sound like there were deep divisions within the party on such things as how do we best ensure that people’s rights aren’t being trampled by two individuals they don’t know to marry each other and how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. The second discussion point has already been thrashed out and a compromise reached: none. Those who don’t believe in angels were happy with that, and those that do were content when it was pointed out that angels can’t dance because they have no feet and, anyway, it’s wicked and sinful.

Anyway, looking at some of the suggestions about employment, I’ve decided to give you two scenarios of how this may work in practice.

Scene 1: Religious school. A job interview is taking place. Raymond has applied for a job.

Brother Tony: Yes, your qualifications and experience seem to be perfect. Are you a Christian?

Raymond: Yes, I actually went to this school in the 90s.

Brother Tony: Ah, you’ll probably find some of your old teachers are still here.

Raymond: Not all of them. Brother Thaddeus is in jail, isn’t he?

Brother Kevin: Let’s move on. There’s just one more thing.

Raymond: Yes?

Brother Kevin: Your shirt. It’s… ah… rainbow coloured.

Raymond: Yes.

Brother Tony: So we were just wondering…

Raymond: Yes?

Brother Kevin: Are you gay?

Raymond: Why? Are you?

Brother Kevin: I’ve taken a vow of celibacy.

Raymond: So am I allowed to be gay if I take a vow of celibacy?

Brother Tony: We don’t employ gay people.

Raymond: Isn’t that a bit discriminatory?

Brother Kevin: We have an exemption under the act. We don’t have to employ people whose lifestyle clashes with our beliefs. 

Raymond: I see. And what about Brother Thaddeus?

Brother Tony: He wasn’t gay! 

Raymond: No, but he was caught with an underage girl? Isn’t that a sin too? So have you sacked him?

Brother Tony: No… It’s not really relevant. The point is you may be gay and…

Raymond: But I haven’t said I am.

Brother Kevin: Yes, but that rainbow shirt. I mean, you’ve clearly got a political agenda here, haven’t you? 

Brother Tony: Anyway, thanks for your time. We’ll let you know.


Scene 2: Government school. A job interview is taking place. Eric has applied for a job.

Principal: Thanks. Now I notice that you left your previous school mid-way through a term. Why was that?

Eric: Yes, When they announced that gay marriage thing, I felt I had to do something about the break-down of civilisation and the family unit, so I volunteered to work for one of the organisations trying to stop it. 

Principal: I see. Um, you are aware that this school has a strong policy of inclusion and social justice? 

Eric: Yes, I felt it was a call from God that I come to work here. When I read about your “Respectful Relations” initiatives, I just knew this was the place for me.

Principal: So you support our Respectful Relations?

Eric: No, I think it’s just Safe Schools by another name.

Principal: You don’t support Safe Schools?

Eric: There’s nothing safe about inviting Satan in. Safe Schools is just a Marxist plot to try and make everyone the same. If God had meant us to be equal he wouldn’t have created rich people. 

Principal: I don’t think God created rich people.

Eric: God created everything.

Principal: Then he created LGBTI people too.

Eric: I don’t think you should say that. It’s blasphemous.

Principal: Look, I don’t think you’re really the right fit for this job.

Eric: Are you discriminating against me because of my religious beliefs? That’s illegal you know.

Principal: No, I’m not concerned about your religion. It’s just that you don’t seem to be supportive of the school policy.

Eric: That’s because the school policy is against my beliefs and if you don’t let me work here, then how am I going to save all those poor sinners?

Principal: You can’t push your religion on other people.

Eric: But my religion demands that I do, so if you try to stop me I’ll have you up before the courts for inhibiting my religious freedom. 

Ok, it mightn’t quite go like that. I guess the whole question of religious freedom is really the same problem that we always have when we talk about rights. To what extent should society police me exercising my rights when they interfere with your rights? For example, does my playing loud music interfere with your right to a quiet evening? To what extent does putting another Royal Wedding raise the blood pressure of staunch Republicans? With things like that, we have tried to have laws that find a sensible compromise.

However, when we attempt to find the sensible compromise in areas such as religion, logic and reason sometimes go out the window. It seems strange to me, for example, that some of the people arguing that we need protections for religious freedom were the same ones arguing to ban the burqa. Ok, I’m sure they’ll argue that the burqa is cultural rather than religious, but the same argument can be made for almost any religious practice.

Whatever happens, I’m sure of one thing: Scott Morrison won’t be trying to finalise any legislation on this before the Wentworth by-election.


This Is Not About African Gangs So Don’t Call Me Racist!

Picture the scene: Bakhit has been sentenced to community service for breaking and entering. He is meeting his a social worker to find out what he has to do… Slow down, slow down, I didn’t say what nationality he was, so don’t you accuse me of racism, you lefty hypocrites. Look, stick with this, I’ve already told you it’s not about gangs!

Anyway Bakhit is meeting his social worker, let’s take it from shortly after the introductions.

Caleb (social worker) – Don’t think of this as a punishment; think of it as an opportunity.

Bakhit – No, why should I?

Caleb – Well, it’s opportunity to learn new skills. You could help with food preparation or…

Bakhit – I don’t need any new skills. I want to do what I’ve always done!

Caleb – Ok, but I’m just saying that maybe you’ll find something that you like doing that you’re good at and…

Bakhit – I’ve already found something I like doing that I’m good at.

Caleb – Oh?

Bakhit – Yeah, breaking into houses and scaring the fuck out of people. 

Caleb – Yes, but that’s against the law.

Bakhit – The law? I didn’t agree to any law.

Caleb – I think you did. I mean I’m pretty you agreed to something.That’s why you got community service!

Bakhit – Yeah, but that was in the past and I don’t care about what I said then. I needed to say that, didn’t I?

Caleb – So you were lying?

Bakhit – No. I was just saying what I thought at the time. You bleeding heart lefties woudn’t understand. I do the burglaries for the money.

Caleb – But you shouldn’t go around scaring people and taking their stuff. It’s just wrong.

Bakhit – Look, how many aggravated burglaries were there in this city in the past year?

Caleb – I don’t know, about a thousand?

Bakhit – Yeah, and I committed about ten of them. So that’s less than one percent.

Caleb – Well, if I stopped, it wouldn’t make any difference, would it? I’d just have less money and nobody would be any better off. It’s everyone else who has to stop because they do 99% of the crimes.

Ok, you probably think Bakhit’s argument is pretty silly. Strange then that our PM and his band of unmerry men* seem to think that it’s a perfectly reasonable viewpoint. Obviously, though it depends on what we’re talking about. Certainly, if it’s “African” gangs we’re talking about, we need to be very concerned but when we’re talking about climate change, we’re fed the line that it’s less than one percent so it’s insignificant. Of course, given we have significantly less than one percent of the world’s population it could be pointed out that we’re doing pretty well per capita.

Yep, Scottie tells us we should stay in the Paris agreement because, well, it’d just sort of make us look like we weren’t going to do anything about climate change if we pulled out. So we’re going to stay in and do what’s appropriate. What’s appropriate? Why, burning more coal. Personally, Scott would like to see nuclear power used, but unfortunately, it’s not economically viable. If only it were, we wouldn’t have to use that dirty solar and wind stuff.

Renewables, they’re unreliable, don’t you know? Can’t switch them on and off at will. The Tesla battery? The one Scott Morrison said was no more useful than the Big Banana? Well, that’s costing the SA government $4 million a year. It’s making a profit? Well, they better sell it then. You can’t have governments exploiting the people like that.

Yep, how long do you think it will be before the SA biggest battery hits the market? And what’s the bet it’s sold to some Liberal donor?

Mm, when I said this wasn’t about gangs, I may have been a little premature.

*Robin Hood and his merry men were alleged to have stolen from the rich and given to the poor, so the opposite should be true for the Coalition front bench. Of course, I always used to think that he only did that because the poor didn’t have anything worth stealing. Omo Morrison has shown us that even taking away from people on disability pensions adds up if you have access to enough of them.

Where The Bloody Hell Are You, ScOMO? Oh, Hiding Behind Alan Jones…

While some were shocked at Alan Jones’ interview of Louise Herron over her insistence that the Opera House sails aren’t just some giant billboard. Some have even accused Jones of bullying because he said that she should be sacked for refusing to allow the Everest…

Oh, point of clarification, when I say the Everest, I am refering to a horse race, not the mountain. It’s the richest race in the world apparently, so it’s far more important than some pissy in the Himalayas.

Anyway, Jones told Herron she should be sacked for refusing to allow the horse colours, jockeys and a replica of the Everest trophy to be displayed on the Opera House. People who are accusing Jones of bullying fail to understand that yelling abuse at people is never bullying when you’re right and/or when you’re a privileged white male. Bullying only occurs when people do things that are politically correct and tell people not to say racist or sexist or untrue things. This is a violation of their freedom of speech and politically correct people shouldn’t be allowed to speak.

All’s well that ends well, of course. The Premier of NSW, Glad Todowhateverjonessez, quickly sprung into action and said that there would be a compromise and the Opera House would be displaying everything that the racing club wanted but that Louise Herron wouldn’t be thrown in front of the galloping horses.

The Premier was backed today by our interim PM, Scott Morrison who suggested that people were being precious.  “This is one of the biggest events of the year. Why not put it on the biggest billboard Sydney has?” Mr Morrison explained, for the benefit of those who were under the misapprehension that the Opera House was a cultural icon. By adding, “I come from a tourism background, these events generate massive opportunities for the state, for the city,” Mr Morrison reminded us that he was the guy behind the highly successful, Where the Bloody Hell Are You campaign which frightened off more people than his Stop The Boats follow-up.

Yes, so there you have it. Sydney Opera House is a billboard. Now that people understand that only precious snowflakes would think that using it to promote a horse race was tacky, we can start thinking creatively about ways to promote all sorts of things.

Ok, obviously advertising the Everest at the top of Mt Everest would be appropriate. However, as so few people make it to the top it seems like a waste of resources even if we could get signage up there.

But there are plenty of other things we could take advantage of. I mean, all that dead space on Uluru. Yes, the traditional owners might find it insulting, but we could just tell them if we’re prepared to use the Opera House, then who are they to be so picky just because it has some sort of sacred significance?

And let’s think creatively about Parliament House. Now that they’ve fenced off the lawn area, we could spray paint ads on the grass, thereby making great inroads into the deficit. If we get rid of those silly regulations about props, then MPs could wear billboards in the House, announcing which major corporation was sponsoring them.

In fact, each session of Parliament could be sponsored. The Speaker could announce:

“Today’s Question Time is being brought to you by Codral. Soldier On With Codral. I now call upon the Member for Warringah…”

Yes, we’re really missing out on a lot of revenue. We need to do something. I’m going to write to the man in charge suggesting it.

Anyone got Alan Jones’ address?


Scottie Morrison Was Right – The Banking Royal Commission Was A Waste Of Time!

While I’m sure some of you having been taking an avid interest in the Banking Royal Commission, there’ll be others who haven’t quite kept up.

One of the shocking takeaways so far is the discovery that banks are putting profits before their customers. Of course, when I say “shocking” I’m only refering to handful of people who’ve never had any dealings with a bank, because I’m sure the rest of Australia is well aware of the way in which banks work. You only have to look back to when some banks charged people who used the tellers because they wanted to “encourage” people to use the ATMs. When they’d got people accustomed to these machine things, they reduced the number of humans actually working behind the counter and started charging for using the ATM.

To anyone who’s dealt with a bank, the revelations at the Royal Commission are no surprise. It’s as predictable as Dan Tehan telling us that Labor’s proposal to fund preschool for three-year-olds is “a big headline number, it’s big spendage by Bill Shorten, which means that your taxes will go up. All it shows is that Labor will be a big-spending, big-taxing government.” We know that this is going to put our taxes up because it’s costing $1.7 billion, unlike the $4.3 billion which Tehan’s government just gave to the private schools. Anyone who’s listened to the Liberals knows that any money they spend is fiscally responsible, but any money Labor spends will put up taxes. (To be fair, Tehan’s remarks weren’t entirely predictable because I wasn’t aware that “spendage” was a word.)

One should hardly be surprised that the insurance and superannuation arms of many financial institutions were even worse. After all, when you campaign against changes that ensure when you give financial advice, you’re expected to be acting in the “best interests of the client”, sort of gives the game away. It’d be like doctors campaigning against legislation that prevented them from prescribing medicines that were likely to kill their patients, arguing that their livelihood depends on the kickbacks that they get from dangerous drugs.

So far it’s gone something like this:

Royal Commission: You seem to have sold inappropriate policies to some people. 

Financial Institution Representative: Inappropriate, how?

RC: Well, when they tried to collect, they discovered that they weren’t eligible.

FIR: Yes, well, that was because they didn’t fully understand their insurance policy. You see, people take out insurance so that they have peace of mind and they don’t always look at the fine details. 

RC: But you continue to take their money even though they weren’t insured against the disaster that happened?

FIR: Well, that’s because the disaster wasn’t anything they were insured against. For example, a casual employee doesn’t have a regular income so income protection doesn’t pay out because it only replaces their regular income and because they don’t have one, they don’t get anything. 

RC: So, effectively their paying for nothing?

FIR: No, no, of course not. Like I said, before they get peace of mind.

RC: But not if they actually need to collect?

FIR: Well, of course not. By then, they can’t work, their life’s in a mess and what good would money do when you’re too ill to work?

RC: You’ve also been charging dead people.

FIR: Yes.

RC: Well, that’s hardly ethical.

FIR: Well, none of them have complained. Look, you need to understand that the policy clearly states that we’re entitled to charge them until such time as the client let’s us know that he or she is dead. 

RC: How can a dead person let you know they’re dead?

FIR: Yes, I can see that it could be difficult. However, if their relatives or friends notice the policy and let us know, then we’ll stop just as soon as we get authorisation telling us that they are allowed to act on behalf of the deceased. 

RC: And where would they get that from?

RC: FIR: Well, the deceased person would need to give them power of attorney.

RC: Surely, you can see why people are appalled…

FIR: Yes, I can see that some people may not understand the way insurance works. 

RC: Which is?

FIR: Well, we take your money and give you peace of mind by telling you that we’re there if you need us. Then, if you try and collect, we’ll explain that it was a condition of the policy that you needed to make it clear at the time of signing that you didn’t have any pre-existing conditions, but clearly you must have or what happened wouldn’t have happened.  Now, some things are just bad luck, but we’d argue that people’s luck is a pre-existing condition…

RC: So you put profits before your clients?

FIR: Of course. However, over the past few days of this Commission, we’ve all come to understand that we may have been a little overzealous in doing that, so let’s just wind things up. We’ve learned some valuable lessons and we’re sorry and we won’t do it again, ok? 

Yep, the Royal Commission’s report will be completed but not fully released because the government will need time to digest it, look at the recommendations and get the election out the way before agreeing that the banks and others have already taken most of them on board, so legislation would just be expensive, unnecessary red-tape. Yep, it was the fault of ASIC for being asleep at the wheel.

So, all in all, if the public were silly enough to fall for the line in the sand argument again… Remember, Tony Abbott’s 2014 pronouncement that, after a few bad weeks, “Good government starts today!” or Turnbull’s suggestion that the government had lost its way but if he took over, it’d be a fresh start? We’re now up to Scott “third time lucky” Morrison telling us that everything’s back on track because he’s having a go. If the public were to buy the idea that things are ok now and re-elect the Coalition, the Royal Commission would have just been an expensive exercise which didn’t lead to any improvements in the financial sector and ScOMO would be proven right.

Although, these links make interesting reading when the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison/Dutton government try to lay the blame at ASIC’s feet:


Balancing The Budget Or Creativity Scott Morrison Style!

Concerned about energy bills? Not making ends meet? Well, I have a great idea for you. Just give me a large amount of money… say $10,000 and I’ll pay your energy bills for the next couple of years. That way you’ll have a balanced budget in the near future and you’ll have reduced your energy bills to zero.

If you think that sounds like some elaborate con, you’d be wrong. There’s nothing elaborate about it. Yes, you may be worried that I’d just abscond with the money and you’d get nothing for it. And I guess that’s a risk. However, that assumes that you trust me a lot less than the government trusts the Great Barrier Reef Foundation.

You see, Scott “Promo” Morrison has told us that the reason they gave so much money to the foundation was a strategy to ensure “our return to a balanced budget at the earliest opportunity”. Rather like the scheme I proposed for helping with skyrocketing energy prices. They’d promised money to help with the health of the Great Barrier Reef and giving it to any government department would have meant that the spending would have been listed against the Budget in the year that it occured. By giving it in one big hit, Morrison and the Liberals ensured that not only did it make future Budgets look better, but they weren’t accountable for how the money was being spent.

This is a pretty well-trodden path:

  1. Cut funding so that a public service department isn’t functioning efficiently.
  2. Anounce that you’re selling the particular department so that the private sector can turn it around and make it function properly which will lead to better service for less cost.
  3. Blame any shortcomings on teething problems for the first few years, while crediting any improvement on privatisation rather than the sort of technological breakthrough happening all the time. 
  4. When privatisation hasn’t brought the promised improvement, either say it’s a private company and nothing to do with us (see Public Transport) or, if that’s going to cause too much anger, tell people it’s because private companies are more concerned with profit and you’ll wave a big stick at them if they don’t smarten up their act (see Banks and Financial Institution).

It’s worked with the Commonwealth Bank, Telstra, electricity companies, Medibank Private, public transport and TAFE. I mean, here in Victoria we were told that privatising electricity would lead to cheaper prices because having mutliple companies pay armies of people to knock on our door and insist we switch providers was much going to give the system efficiencies that the government just couldn’t deliver because they had a monopoly. Thanks to privatisation we can all get a large discount as long as we paid our bill on Tuesdays via any method that didn’t involve cash or credit card.

Privatisation was meant to lead to lower prices. Then getting rid of the carbon “tax” was meant to save us $550 a year. Next, we were told that the NEG was going to save us $550 a year. After that, getting rid of the PM was meant to be the way to get lower prices. Now, it’s building more coal-fired power stations because a source that needs mining, transporting and burning will inevitably be cheaper than the wind or the sun. If you’re not noticing a pattern here, I suspect I should send you my bank details so you can deposit the $10,000 for the scheme I mentioned earlier.

Of course, some of you may think that spending a lot of money this year just so you can say that aren’t spending it in coming years does nothing for the bottom line, but clearly, you’ve never been Treasurer of Australia. This year, it’ll be part of the economic mess that Labor supposedly left, whereas in the future it’s part of their “sound” economic management.

It’s like big and small government. Labor apparently believes in “big government” so it can be blamed for absolutely anything that happens while it’s in power, but Liberals believe in “small government” which is code for nothing is ever our responsibility. You know how it goes:  Unemployment? Labor’s fault! But these people are just bludgers now we’re in power. Street crime? Labor’s fault! Hang on, we’re in power. It’s those bloody judges not filling up the private prisons owned by our buddies! Wind blows electricity transmitters over? Labor’s fault for building wind farms and encouraging all that wind! When coal-fired power stations fail to work with us in power, it’s because Labor didn’t do enough when they were in power. Removing an elected PM? Labor started it.  Needles in strawberries? Oh wait, we’re in power now. We believe in small government so that has nothing to do with us, but we’ll get cross as Punch and tell everyone that we’ll raise the sentence from ten to fifteen years. Thank god, they did that because I’m sure that there’d be thousands of people out there who’d be saying that they would have happily done ten years but fifteen means that they’ll think twice before adulterating strawberries.

It’s all very predictable. Just like the post-mortems on the Wentworth by-election. When Labor fail to achieve a 17% swing, we’ll be told what a good showing it was for Scott considering that Malcolm was a popular member and PM to boot (which they did), besides by-elections always show a swing against the government. If Kerrie Phelps happens to win, we’ll be told that it’s a really shocking result for Labor because – even with such a large swing – they failed to pick up the seat.

I just wish the lotto numbers were as easy…




Actually, Pauline, It’s Always Been Ok To Be White! Just Ask Tony…

Pauline Hanson recently proposed a motion in the Senate.

She wants the Senate to acknowledge: a) the deplorable rise of anti-white racism and attacks on Western civilisation b) It is okay to be white.

Now, I’d like to suggest that nobody is telling us that it’s not okay to be white. Generally speaking, it’s more than okay; it’s a great advantage to be white. I mean, it entitles one to have a view sometimes. Take our PM’s tweet from a few days ago. It began:

“Indulgent self-loathing doesn’t make Australia stronger. Being honest about the past does. Our modern Aus nation began on January 26, 1788. That’s the day to reflect on what we’ve accomplished, become, still to achieve. …”

Is he suggesting that Aboriginal people who want the date of Australia Day changed are guilty of “indulgent self-loathing”? Or is Scottie just complaining about the white people who want the date changed because, after all, the views of indigenous people aren’t part of the debate at all.

Perhaps I misunderstood. Anyway, it’s rather ironic that Scott Morrison who has an ornamental ship on his desk with the words, “I STOPPED THESE”, should think that the day when a few ships full of people who’d actually done something illegal was the beginning of modern Aus. I would have thought that the anniversary of the birth of a penal colony where people were whipped and oppressed wasn’t really a good day for anyone. Although maybe that’s what the Liberals think of when they think of modern.

Back to Pauline’s motion! PHON have expressed concern that the Senate has delayed debate on it.

Of course, it’s easy to see why. If they argue against it, they’re playing into Hanson’s hands because she can complain about political correctness. And if they vote for it, they’re playing into Hanson’s hands because she can claim that she’s made a stand on behalf of all those poor white people who are being subjected to things like… well, being criticised when they make racist remarks.

My solution would be to move a couple of simple amendments. For Part a), I would ask if the mover of the motion would object to the removal of the words “anti-white” and “Western” so that it read: the deplorable rise of racism and attacks on civilisation.

I mean, she could hardly object to that and if she did, she could be asked why. It would be hard to argue that while anti-white racism is deplorable, other forms are fine. Of course, I know that’s the way a lot of her supporters think, but at least by making it explicit, there’s no pretending any more.

Similarly, adding the words “or black” to Part b) would mean it read: It is okay to be white or black. 

If (or when) Hanson refuses the amendment to Part b), one could then move a further amendment so that her motion read: It is okay to be white, but not black. 

Thankfully, while Pauline has been concerning herself with oppressed white people, our Special Envoy for Photo Opportunities has been touring the Northern Terroritory and explaining things to the folks there.

As you can see from his Twitter feed, Abbott likes pointing things out to people. Probably his training as a priest… Or maybe that was why he stopped training as a priest. The place where he trained wasn’t all that receptive to his pontifications… After all, the Catholic Church already has a pontiff…

Don’t think I’m being anti-Catholic. I don’t think many religions like having things pointed out to them. They all tend to respond with, “Strap the Pagan to the fire and burn him!” Although the aboriginal communities haven’t responded by doing that to Tony yet.

Oh, in breaking news, I understand the indigenous elders in the places  he’s visiting have asked him to leave. I guess it’s because they don’t understand Western civilisation. When someone tries to impose their values on us, we generally do more than just ask them to leave. We insist that they learn our language and accept our values…

Right, I better stop here before I start speculating that Andrew Bolt will be the next Chairman of the ABC and the Liberal who reads my stuff and suggests it to the Cabinet will make that one a reality just like Malcolm and Scott becoming Prime Minister along with sundry other things.


Fair Dinkum, Scott Morrison Turning It Around!

When you hear that Scottie’s turning it around, most of you immediately think of boats where, as Immigration Minister, Mr Morrison stopped us hearing about all those drownings of the coast of Australia by turning boats around so that they could drown in Indonesian waters. However, he’s recently done something much more miraculous than that: according to various media reports, he’s turned around the fortunes of the Liberal party.

Now I didn’t read any coverage of Saturday’s preliminary final in “The Australian”, but I imagine it went something like this:

Melbourne’s performance in the 3rd quarter against the West Coast Eagles was truly sensational! They quickly doubled their first half score of 3 points and Melbourne’s top player beat the Eagles best in terms of possessions!#

Why? Well, that’s the way they covered the latest Newspoll. ScoMo, or more accurately ProMo (kudos to whoever came up with that one!) has apparently turned it all around. Ok, given that the poll after the leadership chaos was so low that announcing that you were putting a banker in charge of implementing the recommendations from the Royal Commission into child abuse because bankers are so trustworthy, probably wouldn’t have caused them to sink any lower. But, hey Scott has turned it all around.

He’s fixed the funding wars in Education by appointing Dan Tehan and giving $4.3 billion to the non-government system. It was quite simple really; they just wanted more money. Of course this has led to some asking why the government sector isn’t getting more money. That’s simple. Good education isn’t about more money, it’s about choice. And people who send their kids to Government schools have chosen to do so. If they wanted more spent on their child by the Federal Government, they should have chosen a private school. The money’s been promised to those who educate the children of politicians, the funding wars are over and stop this politics of envy and class warfare.

Speaking of education, our special envoy for Indigenous Affairs recently tweeted from an indigenous school

“It’s so important to have structured learning. Direct Instruction in action at Warruwi school”

I’m really pleased that structured learning is taking place, but I can’t help but wonder if the camera was a distraction which stopped Tony receiving the direct instruction he so desperately needs.

See, there’s another example of Scottie turning things around. Tony, whitesplaining to the indigenous people that they need to learn to speak English. Of course, we can’t have people in remote areas continuing to only speak their native tongue. I’m not sure why. I think it was something about if you’re going to live in this country you’ve got to learn to speak the language that arrived a couple of hundred years ago, not the one you’re ancestors have been speaking for generations.

In case you haven’t worked it out, I’m not so sure that Scottie is really turning things around. I mean, the “daggy dad” image that he’s trying so hard to cultivate doesn’t seem to be well thought out. After all, those of you who have a father or uncle like that, probably love him, but when your friends come over or when you spend more than a few hours at home, you suddenly remember why you moved out. You know, after he explains why you shouldn’t go out dressed like that or how your nose ring is probably the reason you’re unemployed and not the fact that your employer just moved his entire operation to the Philipines. I think that while some may feel a bit of empathy for Scottie “Daggie Dad” Morrison, we certainly don’t want him to live with us.

And let’s face it, how many of us would like to see our fathers Prime Minister?

#I’d like to apologise to any Melbourne supporters who happen to be reading this by mistake because we all know that nobody who barracks for the Demons would be deliberately reading anything on a socialist site like this. Also, I didn’t check the statistics so I don’t know if that suggestion about the Melbourne player is true or not but, in my defence, I was parodying how a Murdoch paper would approach it!

Scott Morrison Cancels Government!

Right, just remember that you read it here first.

Any day now, ScoBro will cancel the government. I mean, they can’t go all the way to May of next year without everyone noticing that the only reason for replacing Turnbull was that Rupert Murdoch said so, and Morrison and company are having trouble working out what to do because Rupert hasn’t actually given them any specific instructions. And to think it’s the Americans worried about foreigners interfering with the democratic processes.

(As an aside, I’m calling Rupert Murdoch a foreigner because he’s a citizen of the USA, having renounced his Australian citizenship. Yep, he can’t be an actual MP. If anyone tells me that he was born in Australia so he’s Australian, I hope they’re not the same people who told me that I can’t keep saying that I couldn’t call Tony Abbott English.)

Lately, the Liberals have been changing their minds even more often than they’ve changed their Prime Ministers. Let’s look at all the cancellations and sudden changes over the past few weeks.

  1. Parliament was cancelled so that the leadership could be sorted out.
  2. Malcolm Turnbull’s leadership was cancelled
  3. The Emissions Reductions part of the NEG was cancelled
  4. The Guarantee part of the NEG was cancelled.
  5. The NEG itself was cancelled.
  6. Malcolm Turnbull resigned as an MP
  7. The investigation into bullying was cancelled because those women decided that they weren’t being bullied after talking to the PM.
  8. Scott cancelled COAG telling us that this would only lead to less TimTams being eaten in Canberra. (This is an actual statement of his, in case you think that I’m just making a pathetic joke!)
  9. The Coalition cancelled the idea of the Westminister system where misleading Parliament was a sackable offence by deciding that Peter Dutton didn’t actually mislead Parliament because when he said he didn’t know the people requesting special treatment with the au pairs, Dutton was using “know” in the Biblical sense.
  10. The announcement of an extra $4,000,000,000 to the private schools cancelled the whole idea of needs based funding in education and any idea that the Liberals actually believe in a fair go. Unless, of course, you “have a go” by hiring a lobby group to ensure that you get one.
  11. And today, our decisive PM changed his plans at the last minute and didn’t appear at press conference in Wentworth which Kerry Phelps gatecrashed. It must have been last minute because it caught the Liberal candidate by surprise.

So, it seems only reasonable to presume that Scott will announce that he can’t continue with such an obstructist Parliament where he keeps having women wear red and people moving no confidence motions. He’ll claim that an election will give us all fresh air and it’s the one sure way to unite everyone behind Rupert.


Adani To Go Announces Its Intention To Continue Announcing Deadlines…

Every now and then The Australian Financial Review has an article that gives me a good laugh.

Ok, it’s behind a firewall so I can’t give you a link but today’s article about Angus Taylor begins:

“Energy Minister Angus Taylor has slammed greenhouse gas reduction policies as “corporate greed dressed up as saving the planet” while a key ratings agency warned the government-created vacuum in energy policy was putting reliable energy supply at risk by delaying investments in on-demand generation.”

Apparently, it’s only thanks to those philanthropic coal barons that we’re going to get lower energy prices. Meanwhile, Melissa Price, the Minister for Environment or something unimportant, is looking to continue Tony Abbott’s Direct Action policy. This is the policy where we give the worst polluters money and ask them to stop making as much mess with their emissions. It’s rather like the policy where people pay criminals large amounts of money and in return the criminals don’t set their business on fire. The only difference is that criminals actually keep their end of the bargain.

Mr Taylor has the backing of ScoBro who told us:

“Angus is bringing back a package of things right now to see how we can get greater investment in what I call fair dinkum power, that’s the stuff that works when the sun doesn’t shine and wind doesn’t blow.”

Personally I suspect that the day “the sun doesn’t shine” we’ll all be in a lot of trouble, but hey, I just love that they’re trying to get greater investment in “fair dinkum” power. Bloody bonza, mate. This is more important than a few sheilas being bullied, eh? God, if you can’t stand the heat, get back to the kitchen where youse belong.

Ok, that was just a little audition in case Scooter Morrison needs a speech writer. It’s a job I wouldn’t mind because – at my age – I don’t like taking on long-term jobs, prefering short term contracts.

But speaking of fair dinkum things. Did anybody notice that Adani missed their funding deadline again? No? Well, they did. You see, Adani keep giving themselves a deadline for getting funding and when they don’t, they give themselves a new deadline. It reminds me of a friend I once I had who kept announcing their deadline for giving up smoking. The only difference was that the friend did occasionally stop smoking for a few weeks before announcing his new deadline. Still to give the guy his due, he hasn’t had one since his funeral.

Well, Adani may not be able to get funding, but they can get water. I know that there’s drought, but our PM is praying for rain so it should be no problem that Adani is given 12.5 billion litres of water without an environmental impact assessment .

I mean, who needs an environmental assessment when a coal company’s involved? They’re not the ones “virtue signalling”. Their ads are just reminding us that coal is good for humanity and that they only mine it to provide jobs for people.

So any day now I’m expecting one of two things:

  1. Adani will announce that they’re deadline for funding is March 2019.
  2. Scott Morrison will announce that they’ll lend Adani the money as part of their plan to reduce energy prices.

Yes, number 2 would be one of the stupidest decisions ever made by a political party, but we are talking about one who allowed Tony Abbott to be Minister for Women and whose signature policy was paid parental leave because, as we all know, babies are the only thing that matter to ladies.

The policy, like Tony, was eventually abandoned.


Who Fracking Tonight? And Other Great Hits By DJ ScoBroMo…

Ok, when somebody asks if I’ve got a fifty dollar bill followed by, “Put your hands up!”, it suggests to me that I’m about to be robbed.

Just in case this is a little unclear, you need to see the clip which Sco “The Bro” Mo tweeted. Of course, you can’t because Scottie put it up and Scottie took it down. It’s unclear whether he took it down because it was a clear breach of the guidelines for the use of Parliamentary clips or whether he took it down because people were worried that the later lyric of “Who fucking tonight?” may have Barnaby Joyce putting his hand in the air.

Of course it’s a shame that this should take away the momentum from all the achievements of the Morrison government. Just a few weeks after there were allegations of bullying, Scott has successfully put a stop to this. In the past few days, it’s been made very clear that we won’t have any more of these sorts of allegations. Nope. It wasn’t bullying, it was just the same sort of misunderstanding as someone asking you about your money and telling you to put your hands in the air. If you interpret that as a robbery and hand over your money, well, it’s hardly the robber’s fault. Similarly, standing in someone’s office and saying you won’t leave until they sign is the same sort of tactics that any good salesmen would use. Bullying, pah. And anyone who says that there was will be dealt with.

Speaking of bullying, did anyone find Pauline’s response to the nine year old confusing. She said that she’d like to give her “a kick up the backside”. Now I do realise that she was probably being metaphoric… Obviously, you can’t kick someone up the backside when they’re refusing to stand. However, while she was suggesting that the parents had put the child up to it, she was threatening to do (metaphoric) physical harm to the child, rather than the parents. She was telling us that the parents were brainwashing the child and her response was that the child should be thrown out of school. Was she suggesting that the girl would be better off being homeschooled?

Of course it’s been a week for contradictions. We just had Liberal MP, Ian Macdonald tell his colleagues not to send Peter Dutton to the High Court because: “A byelection in Dickson wouldn’t be easy, and could change the government six months before the Australian people go to a general election.”  Strange. I thought that the legal advice was that there was definitely no need to send him to the High Court because he was completely in the clear and there was absolutely no doubt and that it would just be a “lawyers’ picnic”. Yet it seems that some Liberals are suggesting that they shouldn’t send him to the High Court because that might cause a byelection. But how could it when there’s no doubt that he doesn’t need to go?

But back to the achievements of the Morrison governments. They’re doing their bit to ensure more women in Parliament by endorsing a man for the seat of Wentworth. Ok, they preselected a man, but Scott Morrison, Peter Dutton and Malcolm Turnbull all seem to be working in unison to ensure that Kerryn Phelps, the female independent candidate, gets elected.

However, that’s not all the Liberals are doing to help get more women into Parliament. No, Helen Kroger has adopted their successful NEG strategy. That’s the one where you give something a name and then you tell everyone that this is your plan and, hey presto, everyone stops worrying about it because when anyone asks you can tell them that you have a plan and what’s more it’s got a name. Kroger has helped create the Enid Lyons Fighting Fund, which doesn’t plan on fighting Enid Lyons as the name suggests, but rather intends to help women get elected to Parliament by letting them shadow MPs and get mentored and all sorts of other swell stuff. It sounds really good and even if it hasn’t been given any funding, it is a plan and I’m sure that one day someone will be able to say that the only reason that they’re in Parliament is because of Enid Lyons Fighing Fund which as yet is only the Enid Lyons Fighting because as I mentioned has no fund attached.

And let’s not forget energy prices. Every time I see the ad on TV telling me how the Federal Government is working to reduce energy prices I feel a little warmer… which is good because I’m trying not to put the heater on. Exactly what they’re doing wasn’t clear from the ad, so I did what it suggested and went to the site where it told me that they were: “Holding energy retailers to account to ensure consumers are aware of the options they have to change energy plans.” 

Awesome. That should work. But that’s not all. As well they are: “Increasing the scrutiny of the energy market with MORE FUNDING to the Australian Energy Regulator and the ACCC to ensure consumers and industry get a fair deal.”

You’ll notice, if you go to the Powering Forward website, the Government is using LOTS of CAPITAL LETTERS and BOLDFACE to show ExAcTLy HOW much they’re DOING.



Charity Begins At Home Or We Need To Talk About Harriet

School Counsellor’s Office. Mr and Mrs White enter.

Counsellor: Ah, thanks for coming in.

Mr White: We’re really glad you called.

Mrs White: We’ve been really worried about Harriet.

Counsellor: I understand, but really, it’s nothing to worry about.

Mr. White: Yes, but some of the things she’s been doing. She keeps taking her younger brother’s toys and insisting that he shouldn’t have them until he’s earned them. I mean, I do appreciate a work ethic, but…

Mrs White: But he is only two. And then there was what she said when she saw that the government was helping farmers with the drought.

Mr White: Yes, she insisted that we shouldn’t be giving charity to people who didn’t come from the same house as we did. I said that they were in need and she just said that they didn’t have the same surname so why should we help them. And she locked one of her friends in the cupboard because she didn’t come in the right door.

Mrs White: We’ve been asking her for the key for months now, but she insists that the friend has to stay in the cupboard so none of her other friends come in by the wrong door.

Counsellor: So she does have friends?

Mr White: Well, not so many since she had her thirteenth birthday and told them that they had to make a large donation to sit at the table with her.

Counsellor: Yes, well, I can see how this may seem like a real worry to you. However, I’m just throwing this out there, but have you ever considered that she might be…

Mr White: Go on!

Counsellor: A Liberal!

Mrs White: No, she can’t be. I mean what sort of…

Mr White: Not our daughter surely. I mean, she can’t be. She’s female.

Counsellor: Now I know that you may need some time to adjust to the idea but believe it or not, there are female Liberals. It’s just that they’re much more likely to be hidden away than the type you see in the media, but female Liberals are more common than you might think.

Mrs White: But what makes you think that she’s a Liberal?

Counsellor: Well, one of her teachers noticed that she kept blaming everyone else whenever she made a mistake. By itself that wouldn’t be unusual but then we noticed her complete lack of empathy and her inability to make a consistent argument for anything. For example, when she was doing group activities, she’d insist that she’d done all the work and then when the marks were in, she’d loudly declare that this shouldn’t go on her report because the other students had done it. Classic Liberal behaviour.

Mr White: Is it… Is it something to do with the way we raised her?

Counsellor: Now, you mustn’t blame yourselves. Sometimes these things just happen and because we live in a tolerant society she’ll be able to lead a relatively normal life. Of course, she’ll never be able to make a meaningful commitment or trust any of her friends, but apart from that, she’ll be able to function just like a normal person.

Mrs White: Is there anything we should be doing? Like is there any treatment or help available.

Counsellor: I think the main thing is just continuing to be supportive and remembering when attempts to install herself as head of the household, that it’s the condition and nothing that you should blame her for.

Mr White: So there’s no cure or…

Counsellor: Well, there are people trying a radical new therapy. Apparently if you give Liberals lots and lots of money and keep telling that they’re the adults, they behave politely and only lash out at things like renewable energy or unemployed people.

Mr White: How much money?

Counsellor: All of it, but I only mentioned that to say that people are trying to help. I don’t know if there’s any scientific validity behind the therapy.

Mrs White: But the lack of science wouldn’t matter, would it? I mean, if she’s really a Liberal…

Counsellor: The main thing is not to over-react. As unbelievable as it may seem, there are lots of Liberals out there and if you can just steer clear of certain topics, you might never even be aware that they’re any different from you or me.

Mr White: Is there some sort of support group? Malcolm Fraser inspired a lot of people by showing that you could make an almost complete recovery from being a Liberal.

Counsellor: That’s what I mean. You shouldn’t talk about recovery. You should just respect her choices.

Mrs White: So it is a choice thing?

Counsellor: Look, I’m not an expert. We do have someone at the school who’s very good at understanding they way Liberals think and he’ll be able to give you some strategies for getting Liberals to do what you want.

Mr White: Who’s that?

Counsellor: The school chaplain.



Scott Morrison Worried About Whisperers But Dog Whistlers Welcome!

Scott Morrison is tweeting like a Trumpster. One of his recent little gems contained the following in response to a “Daily Telegraph” article about a course to help teachers identify students who may be transgender:

“We do not need ‘gender whisperers’ in our schools. Let kids be kids.

Now there’s so much here that I’m almost at a loss for words… Which some might say is the first positive achievement for Scottie. I could start with the absurdity of taking anything a Murdoch paper says as being remotely connected to reality…

Speaking of Murdoch Muck, here in Victoria, the government tabled 80,000 pages of documents which showed that the Opposition leader, Matty “Family” Guy, spent over two million dollars of taxpayer money to settle a legal case even though the advice was that they’d have an excellent chance of winning the case. As far as we know, it didn’t go to a Liberal donor or the Great Barrier Reef Foundation, but the strong suggestion was that he did it to save his job. This was only worthy of a small article on page 3. However, the next day when it was discovered that the 80,000 pages also contained some privacy breaches of private citizens, this was front-page news. Balance?

Anyway, I’ve decided to start with some statistics. There was a county in the USA which had one of the lowest rates of people per square kilometre in the country. There were no big factories and the cities were all relatively small. It had one of the highest rates of cancer in America. Why? Ok, I’ll give you the answer later.

All right, back to gender issues…

Speaking of gender issues, isn’t Julie Bishop a beacon of light these days? Now that she no longer has much power to do anything about it, she’s speaking out about the terrible culture of bullying in Parliament. Ok, I shouldn’t be too cynical. After all, Julie has always been a supporter of women. All right, she did say that she wasn’t a feminist but that’s ok, because you don’t need to be a feminist to believe that women should be selected on merit and if there aren’t a lot of women in the Liberal Party that’s because there are no women of the calibre of George Christensen, Craig Kelly, Tony Abbott or Kevin Andrews. But one has to remember how Julie sprung to Prime Minister Gillard’s defence after her misogyny speech telling us:

“I think the Prime Minister’s problems have got nothing to do with gender, most of her problems are her own doing and it has to do with her competence, her honesty and her trustworthiness…I don’t think it is a question of toughness, I think it’s a question of competence and I think we’re overdoing the women have to be tough, women have to be competent.”

Bishop’s stand now seems quite different from her approach when we had a female PM, but, in terms of forgetting one’s past statements, she doesn’t even rate a bronze medal. Scott’s statement at the end of his tweet about letting kids be kids wouldn’t be so bad if he hadn’t – as Immigration Minister – been happy to lock them up on Nauru and ignore any suggestions of abuse because these are operational matters.

Of course, the whole idea that somehow teachers and counsellors are encouraging people to become transgender would be laughably absurd were it not for the fact that after the election of Donald Trump people are often happy to believe that laughably absurd is happening.

The implication of Morrison’s term “gender whisperer” seems to be that some people are going around slyly trying to convert kids into adopting a transgender personality.

Now let me quite clear here. I know so little about transgender people that I’m way out of my depth. I personally know of several. However, I have never talked to them about it, nor have I ever counselled someone going through any issues associated with it. In one case, I talked to one about poor attendance when she was a female student, but I have no idea if her poor attendance was relating to gender issues because nothing she told me gave me any inkling that she had any. In short, I am a complete moron on these matters and, as a teacher, it may have helped if I’d known a bit more about how to identify what was going on so that I could have referred her to someone who would have at least helped her work through these and not drop out of secondary school.

But even as a complete moron, I understand that the concept of satanic teachers whispering evil thoughts into students’ heads is neither likely to be happening, nor very likely to be effective. This is akin to the old idea that if you don’t talk about something then kids won’t know about it and they’ll be safe from it. This has been applied to such things as sex, suicide and same-sex attraction. And, as with all those things, people don’t suddenly change because you mentioned it.

I mean, if I say: “Have you thought of joining the Liberal Party?” I doubt that many of you are going to rush out and sign up in the next few minutes, but if I ask why you haven’t joined GetUp! then I may just give some of you a nudge which has you sending your hard-earned money to that terrible organisation trying to unseat Dutton.

Now the article which inspired Scott to tweet after taking as fact something from Rupert’s propaganda unit pointed out that since there was a significant increase of over 200% in people wanting to change their gender in the past three years and it suggested that was because teachers were being trained to identify possible transgender kids. This may be true. After all, there was a significant increase in the number of left-handers once schools stopped giving corporal punishment to anyone trying to write with their evil hand. Prior to that, there was no such thing as a left-hander and it’s only political correctness that allows the left to exist.

But back to the USA county with the high rates of cancer. Did you work out why? Yes, it’s because it has a small population. The county next to it had the lowest rate of cancer. If you only have a small sample then two or three can make an enormous difference. For example, homicide rates over Melbourne won’t vary much from one year to the next. but if there’s a triple murder in one street then the murder rate in that street will probably have jumped quite substantially. It doesn’t mean that the street is suddenly less safe. Similarly, a jump of 200% is pretty meaningless unless we know if that’s six kids instead of three, sixty instead of thirty or six hundred instead of three hundred.

Perhaps it’s time to stop expecting consistency from our politicians and accept the fact that Scott can change from the stern Immigration Minister who ignored reports about the sexual abuse of children to a kind person who just wants kids to be kids.

Unless they’re on Nauru where they need to be punished for the “sins” of their parents.

Scott Morrison And Other Ugly Things

Well, ScoMo – as we’re all encouraged to call him – saw something ugly. Not just ugly, but “one of the ugliest things I’ve ever seen”!

What was it?

The testimony of those abused by that Royal Commission we didn’t need? No, not the one into the banks. The one into sexual abuse of children at the hands of institutions. Remember the Liberals were dragged kicking and screaming into that one, too.

Or was it the sight of children in detention? No, that’s a deliberate policy. It’s a deterrent. I mean, if you have children self-harming and suicidal that should put people off coming to Australia without their au pair papers in order.

Was it animals dying in the drought? Of course not.

It was, of course, a union official who photographed his kids. Yes, John Setka. tweeted photos of his kids holding a sign telling the Liberals to fu#k off and catch real criminals. He acknowledged that it was a mistake and took it down.

So, if that was one of the “ugliest things” Scottie’s ever seen, I would suggest that he doesn’t get out much…

Although the Liberal bloodbath of the past month should be enough to make Mr Morrison aware that life is not as sweet as we’d like it to be.

I heard on the news that the government was close to reaching a deal over Gonski with the Catholic system. Of course, they don’t have to reach a deal with the public system because nobody who counts sends their kids to a public school.

Scott himself, for example, sends his kids to an independent Baptist school. I know this because I read a little article about how he doesn’t want anyone imposing their values on his children… Apart from him, of course.

Why don’t Baptists have sex standing up?

They’re afraid it might lead to dancing.

And, in that way we’ve come to expect from public apologies, if any Baptists were offended by that, I’m sorry. Anyway, Scottie is sending his kids to a Baptist independent school so that they won’t have values imposed on them!

Which is all very well. I mean he’s suggesting that public schools shouldn’t be imposing values on children. And that sounds fine.

Except for two things:

  1. John Howard suggested that it was the lack of teaching values in public education that was reason for parents choosing a private school. He fixed this by giving every school a poster with a list of Australian values and a photo of Simpson and his donkey. Simpson, ironically, was an “illegal immigrant”. As, if one thinks about it, were all the ANZACS invading at Gallipoli.
  2. It’ impossible to run a school without the teaching of some values. For example, when a teacher chooses to intervene and stop a child being bullied, he or she is making a values decision. “Harden up, princess,” isn’t something that a teacher would get a lot of support for… Front bench of the Liberal Party is another story. Similarly, when one tells people that everyone needs a turn, one is telling people that fairness is important. One could say that we’re basing it all on merit and the white males should get all the turns, but outside Parliament, this is considered politically incorrect and gets lots of criticism.


Scott Morrison And How Jesus Got It Wrong With That Loaves And Fishes Miracle!

Now some of you may have noticed that we have a new Prime Minister…

I mean Scott Morrison, just in case some of you either haven’t caught with the news or were afraid that Peter Dutton had decided to have another go as revenge on whichever Liberal leaked the fact that old Mr Potato Head does, in fact, have a compassionate side. Ok, it may only be for French au pair girls, but it sort of undermines his image as the hard man of the party.

Anyway, Mr Morrison – or ScoMo, as we’re all encouraged to call him – is an evangelical Christian. That’s ok. I have nothing against religion. Whether you want to believe that God created a world with sin in it just so he could crucify his son and forgive us for the transgressions of Adam and Eve or whether you think that saying “Beam me up, Scottie” will get you back to the mothership, that’s fine with me. It’s only when you people start trying to impose their religion on others that the trouble starts.

Of course, Mr Morrison is a member of the Liberal Party so this shouldn’t be a problem. As you may have noticed, the Liberal Party have no trouble asserting their strong beliefs and values in principle and then totally ignoring them in practice. Take free speech and Chelsea Manning, as a recent example. Or take one of their most cherished beliefs: The market is best and governments shouldn’t interfere with the free market. This is one of their core tenets… Except, of course, when it comes to coal-fired power stations. Obviously, Mr Morrison isn’t going to let his beliefs as a Christian – or a Liberal – have any effect on his term as PM.

Mr Morrison is on your side. I know this because, at his first press conference, he looked straight at the camera and said, “I’m on your side!” This could be confusing to some people. Was he talking to the cameraman? Or the person behind the cameraman? Or was he talking to someone he knew was listening to the press conference, like the IPA? Or was he talking to Malcolm, just to remind him that he really was on Malcolm’s side still and he only took the job as PM as a favour to the leader he was so ambitious just a few days earlier?

In fact, he cleared it up with a tweet. “Today I gave each of my Ministers a lapel pin with the Australian flag on it. I’ve been wearing this for many years now. The reason I wear it is because it reminds me every single day whose side I’m on. I’m on the side of the Australian people.”

Of course, this would have been a difficult tweet to get exactly right. I mean if he hadn’t added that last sentence it might have still been unclear about whose side he was on. Or if he’d written: “The reason I wear it is because it reminds me every single day I’m on the side of the Australian people”, it may have sounded like there was likely to be some confusion and he needed reminding about whose side he’s on. After all, I’m sure Barnaby Joyce’s new partner wouldn’t like it if he announced that he was wearing a pin because it reminds him that he’s committed to her and without it, he’s liable to forget that he’s not to hang around in bars trying to pick up women.

So Scott’s on your side. But apparently only if you “have a go”, because as we learn from Mr Morrison’s Twitter account:

“Family businesses like Galvatech are more than just companies. They represent Australians – like John and Darren – having a go and getting a fair go.” 

As the Liberal Party clarified on Twitter by quoting our unifying leader:

“If you have a go in this country, you will get a go. There is a fair go for those who have a go – that’s what fairness in Australia means.”

In Australia, in Australia, you must “have a go to get a go”. By inference, if you don’t have a go, you don’t get a go. And “having a go” means being in business, obviously, because it’s partners like John and Darren that represent Australians. By “partners”, of course, I mean business partners because – given his stand on marriage equality – there’s no way Scott would be endorsing them as representing Australians if they were a same-sex couple. Neither would he be encouraging them to “have a go”. However, they’re in business and that means they’ll get a “fair go”, but if you’re not getting a “fair go” then that’s probably because you’re not “having a go” and that’s got nothing to do with the government, because the government helps those who help themselves. Like, for example, au pair girls because they’re prepared to “have a go”, while those arriving in a leaky boat are queue jumping who doesn’t deserve a “fair go” because they’re not ‘having a go”. Although I would have thought that risking your life trying to emigrate to another country might be construed as “having a go”, but I’m not the expert here.

Apparently, this is where Jesus got it wrong. No, not because his parents being illegal immigrants into Egypt, fleeing their homeland just because Herod was “having a go” and slaughtering the firstborn son in every household, thereby getting rid of potential challengers in a way that was even more ruthless than recent Prime Ministerial spills. According to the press releases, Jesus managed to feed a multitude with just a couple of fish and a few loaves of bread. However, he distributed them to everyone,  Bloody bleeding heart. This is not the sort of Jesus that the Liberals believe in. Surely reports of Jesus kicking the money lenders out of the temple are fake news and he merely accidentally knocked over one of the tables in his rush to pat them all on the back. Surely Jesus wouldn’t have fed people merely because they were hungry, without asking if they were “having a go”! No, according to Scoomoo, this sort of approach isn’t the Australian way.

In Australia, you need to prove yourself worthy before you’re entitled to a “fair go”. And one of the best ways to show you’re “having a go” is to not need any government help – unless you’re a farmer in a drought area or a coal miner.

Scroll Up