The Peters and the Pauls: The fight for…

By Jezabel  Decriminalisation is being fought for in Queensland right now, with a…

Days of wine and lost horizons ...

Days of beer and weed ...Growing up in the 70’s … The…

Fast Bowling, Concussions and Jofra Archer

We should all be cheering on some level. So much in this…

The attack on women by Australian politicians, and…

Things have been just dandy for women in the last forty eight…

The Bobble-headed Boofhead

By Grumpy Geezer  Ever since the welcome and suitably humiliating demise of the egregious ecclesiastic…

Be wary of a Trump-Morrison alliance

By Ad astra  Have you noticed the growing bond between President Trump and…

Quiet Australians will never permeate the Morrison bubble

In what appears to be an attempt to emulate John Howard’s battlers,…

Great Australian political policy stuff-ups (part 3): Whitlam…

Perhaps the most controversial Prime Minister we have ever had. I first…

«
»
Facebook

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.

The Public Service Needs To Be More Accountable… Like Politicians Are!

Lately Scott Morrison has started praising the “quiet Australians” as being those for whom he is governing. Obviously if you say anything you’re not one of those quiet ones and can therefore be ignored.

Apparently, the quiet Australians have lost faith in the public service. How Scottie knows this is anybody’s guess because the quiet ones don’t say anything which is their great appeal. Maybe the “strong minority” in the Coalition government has been telling him what the quiet Australians actually think because they know things that ordinary people can only understand through listening to what people say whereas the Craig Kelly’s of this world know things without either talking to people or reading reports.

So Scottie told the Public Service

“Only those who have put their name on a ballot can truly understand the significance of that accountability. I know you might feel sometimes that you are absolutely right in what you are suggesting, but I can tell you when it is you that is facing the public and must look your constituents in the eye, it gives you a unique perspective.”

Well, it got me thinking. And then I started to imagine what it would be like if public servants behaved more like politicians. Would it be something like this?

Minister: Congratulations on your promotion.

Public Servant: Thank you very much. Great to be here.

Minister: So, why did your predecessor resign suddenly?

Public Servant: Sir. I had nothing to do with his resignation. It became clear that the government were no longer supporting the previous Public Servant. In that context and I had nothing to do with his resignation and any suggestion that I plotted it is just offensive…

Minister: I was merely asking. I was just wondering if it was because of some clash of..

Public Servant: If you’d allow me to finish, I was just making the point that this was nothing to do with me and frankly I find your question offensive!

Minister: Anyway, that’s not why you’re here, I was wondering…

Public Servant: No, but it is why I’m here. It’s because my predecessor resigned and if it wasn’t for that I wouldn’t be here, so you’ve completely missed the point.

Minister: Let’s move on. This is about the proposed changes to pensions.

Public Servant: But I think that it’s important to acknowledge that I had nothing to do with my predecessor’s removal. My hands are clean. Look at them. I’ve washed them several times and there is absolutely no blood on them. I’m here now and this is a great honour, but it’s time to get on with things and not live in the past; the line has been ruled on those issues of several weeks ago, which I accept were deeply troubling to Australians. But what they want to know now is; ‘where are we going?

Minister: Which brings me to the pension changes. Do we have the modelling on the proposed changes?

Public Servant: If I may be candid, the modelling was meant to be done by my predecessor and, let’s be clear here, he was a Labor appointee and he really didn’t know how to manage the department, so it’s really lucky that I’m here now and you’ve got an adult in charge. There are important responsibilities that Australians expect and they expect things to happen, and I intend to make them happen.

Minister: So you have the modelling?

Public Servant: No, but equally the modelling that I will have in the very near future will be much, much better than any modelling we’ve had in the past.

Minister: Why is that? Are you suggesting that your modelling will be more accurate?

Public Servant: No, I’m suggesting it’ll be closer to what you want it to say… those Labor hacks just kept letting little things like expected changes to get in the way of more positive prognostications.

Minister: That’s all well and good, but how soon will you have the actual modelling?

Public Servant: Well, if I may be permitted to quote Menzies who, I think we can agree was not only the founder of the party, but a great PM… a veritable colossus. Menzies was a very witty man and he once said that time was something that we all need more of, but then so it money, hence the expression, “Time is money!”

Minister: Menzies said that?

Public Servant: I have no evidence that he didn’t. 

Minister: So you’re telling me that the modelling won’t be available for the Cabinet meeting tomorrow?

Public Servant: Sorry, but I don’t think that’s a fair representation of what I said…  Or didn’t say… as the case may be… or not…

Minister: WILL I HAVE THE FUCKING THING OR NOT!

Public Servant: I don’t think it’s necessary to speak like that 

Minister: Sorry, but I just want a clear answer.

Public Servant: I don’t think I could be any clearer.

Minister: Just go away…

Public Servant: Hey, if I was actually a politician you’d thank me for my time

Minister (sighs): Ok, thank you very much for your time.

Public Servant: Thanks a lot. It’s been my pleasure!

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Why Alan Jones Deserves Another Chance… Or Two!

Now Alan Jones attracted a lot of outrage with his suggestion that he hoped that Scott Morrison would “shove a sock” down Jacinda Ardern’s throat. Of course, Alan had to apologise the next day because some people wilfully misinterpreted this literally when all he meant that Jacinda herself should “put a sock in it”…

Of course, this begs the question, why did he bring Scottie into if it was the NZ PM herself who was meant to place the offending sock in a place that was nonspecific in Jones’s apology? I mean, there’s a world of difference in Don Corleone saying that you should hold your tongue and him saying that he hopes that one of his henchmen rips out your tongue…

Mm, that analogy may be inappropriate because it suggests that Scottie is merely a puppet of Alan Jones who’ll do exactly as he’s told when we all know that our PM doesn’t take orders from Jones, even if Malcolm Turnbull thinks we should cut Morrison some slack because he has to operate in the real world. Yes, Malcolm is bitter and never misses a chance to remind us about Tony Abbott and his inability to do that. However, Turnbull was even nastier when went on to say about ScoMo, “He’s not a dictator or a president, he’s a prime minister, like I was.”  I didn’t actually think that Morrison was quite that wishy-washy, but when Turnbull says that he resembled him as a PM, it’s a pretty nasty assessment.

I mean, Scott Morrison has been getting on the front foot and actually doing positive things like ignoring the investigation into GetUp! which found that they weren’t a political party and announcing that he’d be doing something about them because they were hiding something and that they were “a wolf in wolf’s clothing”,.. Now I’d think that a wolf in wolf’s clothing is being pretty upfront about who they are, but I guess that’s why I’m not leader of the Liberal Party.

Anyway, this is about Alan Jones and climate change so I shouldn’t be distracted by things like Turnbull telling us that Liberal leaders can’t do anything about climate change because of the strong minority in the party opposing it. Yes, I guess one can infer that just leaves the weak majority who’d like to do something but you know how minorities dictate everything these days…

I shouldn’t even get distracted by the Deputy PM saying that the Pacific Islanders shouldn’t worry about climate change because they can always come here and pick fruit. I particularly shouldn’t get distracted by that comment because, when I try to imagine just what he meant by that, my head hurts in ways that make me wonder if this guy is the best the Nationals can do as leader, what would the worst look like? Before you say Barnaby Joyce, remember we could ask the same about him…

Anyway, let’s take Alan at his word and accept that he wasn’t trying to encourage our PM to assault the leader of New Zealand. I mean, after all, we know that Alan has a history of saying something that gets misunderstood. For example, he didn’t mean to incite the Cronulla riots when he read out texts like: “Come to Cronulla this weekend to take revenge. This Sunday every Aussie in the Shire get down to North Cronulla to support the Leb and wog bashing day …” He went on to caution people shouldn’t take the law into their own hands, so he wasn’t endorsing vigilante justice even if those Lebanese guys deserved it…

And when he said that Julia Gillard should be put in a chaff bag and thrown into the sea, he didn’t mean a literal chaff bag, any bag would have done. Of course, this did mean some ambiguity about the word “sacked”, when he suggested that Opera House chief, Louise Herron, should be sacked for refusing to acquiesce to his demands over a horse race.

And when one of Turnbull’s lawyers contacted him, the old rascal realised that calling Malcolm “a traitor to the nation” may have been open to misinterpretation.

Then, of course, was his comments last year when the leadership of Turnbull was under threat: “The n—– in the woodpile here, if one can use that expression – and I’m not going to yield to people who tell us that certain words in the language are forbidden – the person who’s playing hard to get is Mathias Cormann.”

Yes, Alan Jones deserves a second chance. We all make mistakes and say things that we don’t mean in the heat of the moment… It’s just that most of us don’t do it on radio because we don’t have our own sock jock show. Whoops, I meant shock jock.

So let’s be like Alan’s employers and forgive him so long as he promises that this is the last time, as well as promising that he really means it this time. If he doesn’t, I think that someone should show him the real meaning of “shock” and actually give him a literal one…

Oh, I just realised, that last statement could be misinterpreted and someone could think that I was advocating strapping electrodes on Jones and giving him electric shocks.

Whoops. Sorry, Alan. Hope that doesn’t happen.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Nigel Farrage Or What’s A Conservative Anyway?

Recently we had a number of foreigners come here and tell us what was wrong with the place. If they’d been from some countries we’d have told them that we shall decide the circumstances in which they come and whether they’re allowed say anything at all, but they were mainly from Britain and the United States so it was all ok, because we have a long history of being told what to do by those countries.

I refer, of course, to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Sydney. You may have read reports that when former Breitbart editor, Raheem Kassam, started speaking about Kristina Kenneally, sections of the crowd broke into chants of “Send her back”, which had a certain irony and just because of the number of speakers who were from her country of origin. As Kenneally herself pointed out, the original chant was because Trump had suggested that four congresswomen go back to their “crime-infested” countries of origin and start fixing things there, so the crowd was basically suggesting that the USA was a crime-infested country that needed fixing.

The conference was full of speakers happy to tell us that the greenies had taken over the world. Ok, let’s ignore the fact that we have three of the biggest buffoons to ever make it to high office and they all identify as conservative. Ah, for the days of those intellectual giants like Ronald Reagan, John Major and Billy McMahon… No, we just recently had communists like Malcolm Turnbull and David Cameron running things…

Now, I would have thought that trying to preserve the planet was about as conservative as you could get, but apparently not. It seems that by “conservative” what they all seem to mean is what I understood as “reactionary”: a person who opposes progressive social change and wishes to return to the halcyon days when everyone had the right beliefs and you could get a fair day’s work for a fair day’s whipping.

Most of you probably have an image of a conservative as someone like Bob Menzies, a defender of tradition, so long as it was British and suited his political agenda, and a keen lover of the Royal Family. However, Nigel Farage’s little speech made me wonder just what a conservative is these days.

Farage came to prominence as a member of the pro-Brexit UKIP party. I always thought that “kip” meant to have a sleep so when people say the name, it always makes me wonder who they’re suggesting should go to sleep. Nigel still holds ambitions of becoming PM, and given the situation, it’s highly likely that, were he to find an electorate silly enough to elect him, then he may be the only person silly enough to want the job in a post-Brexit Britain.

Surely someone like Farage would be a staunch supporter of the monarchy, I thought. Well, he sort of is. He loves the Queen – “an awe-inspiring woman, we’re bloody lucky to have her” – but he’s not so keen on some of the others in the family. Apart from describing the Queen Mother as a “overweight, chain-smoking gin drinker”, he told us: “Well, if I want the Queen to live a long time to stop Charlie Boy becoming king, I want Charlie Boy to live even longer and William to live forever to stop Harry becoming king,” His concern was prompted by Charlie Boy and Harry’s attitudes to climate change. (I’m presuming that “Charlie Boy” is Prince Charles and not one of the Queen’s racehorses).

Of course, this is a monarchy and, as such, it doesn’t really matter what a common man like Nigel thinks about succession so I don’t know why he’s bothering with an opinion at all. I also don’t think he quite understands that Harry is so far down the list now that the chances of him becoming king are less likely than Farage becoming PM. Still, his desire for William to live “forever” does seem a little extreme. Unless by forever, he just means to the end of the world which, if he and his fellow travellers get their way, may come a lot sooner than we’d like…

P.S. On Sunday night, the ABC ran David Attenborough’s “Climate Change; The Facts”. I understand, that there has been some backlash because they didn’t balance this by presenting non-facts. Malcolm Roberts is said to be ropable and is planning to write to the ABC management just as soon as he learns his other letters.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

What About The Religious Public Servant?

Public servant, Michaela Banerji, was sacked for criticising government policy even though she did it under a pseudonym. In the past week, the High Court has ruled that the sacking was correct because the public service needs to be apolitical.

Of course, I immediately thought of Israel Folau. Not in a sinful way, but I wondered if this had any implications for his case, but before I could fully form my thoughts a friend told me that the cases were entirely different, because this was to do with people working for the government and their need to be seen to have no opinion about government policy.

“So does that mean that they can’t be supportive of government policy either?”

“Well,” said my intelligent friend, “I suppose it does, but what government would sack someone for supporting their policy.”

“They wouldn’t, but what if there’s a change of government? Remember how Tony Abbott sacked Martin Parkinson because he implemented government policy? I mean, are we going to have public servants saying that they can’t write press releases that are positive about government policies because it looks like they are taking a political stand?”

I was told that I was taking things to an absurd level, which made me wonder if I should join the Liberal Party because clearly I’m a potential minister.

Anyway, I decided not to pursue the point with my friend because he has a tendency to get frustrated by what he considers my stupid questions. However, I couldn’t stop thinking about Israel Folau and the whole idea of legislation to enshrine religious freedom.

So let’s imagine that they get some sort of legislation that protects my religious freedoms. And while we’re imagining that, let’s imagine that I’m a Commonwealth public servant who worships at Father Rod Bower’s church and I take my conduit to God very, very seriously and I feel the need to tweet:

Scott Morrison is going to Hell over his treatment of asylum seekers!! 

Does the religious freedom legislation trump the public service legislation? Can I argue that even though I have no political freedom of speech, I do have a religous freedom of speech which allows me to denigrate the government in a spiritual, but stil apolitical way?

Remembering A. Bolt keeps referring to the Green Religion, could that be used as evidence in a court case where someone is trying to argue freedom of religion to justify their attack on the government for their love affair with coal?

Love affair? No, that’s not quite right. When I think about the way they all handled that lump of coal that Scottie passed around, it seems more like a fetish…

Ok, I’m sure that Scottie and his mates would argue that some religions are too political and any religion that has a view that they disagree with, isn’t a religion but a political stand… Still, it is really hard to right legislation that asserts only religions that never disagree with anything that a Coalition government proposes are valid.

Yeah, all I can do is plead with people to stop asking the question: How bad can this government get? I mean, we all read it as a rhetorical question… They seem to think it’s a request to show us!

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Albanese May Be The New Moses!

Moses, for those of you who lack the biblical background, was the leader who led his people around in the wilderness for forty years instead of going to the “promised land”. It wasn’t because his satnav was broken; he’d been instructed by a higher power. “You’ve done the wrong thing, so you’ll just have to wait until I say it’s ok,” said God who, according those wandering in the desert was even more powerful than Rupert Murdoch, who also said much the same thing about the Labor Party. “And I won’t say it’s ok,” God told them, “until every last one of you has died and it’s your children who settle there!”

Albo seems to have a similar plan to Moses. He seems to intend to have Labor wander round in circles for a number of years until the current mob are all dead. His strategy seems a complete misunderstanding of the MeToo# movement. The Coalition propose something which most thinking people would oppose. Labor say they won’t vote for it. The Government then makes the issue all about the Opposition, even when they’ve got the numbers to pass it whether Labor vote for it or not. Labor then backs down and agrees to vote for the proposed legislation.

I’m really not sure what the point of this tactic is. From a tactical point of view, it would be better to say, “We’re not the government and we won’t make up our minds until we’ve seen all the amendments and even then we may just decide to abstain while we wait and see how it all turns out. In fact, we’ve decided to boycott Parliament for the next few months as a protest over Morrison’s use of the phrase: ‘Unfudned empathy’!”

At last that would make them look like they stand for something…

Not that standing for something is actually a prerequisite for winning an election. It just makes one a potentially better government if one does happen to be elected, and one can actually start doing more than starting every third sentence with, “How good is…?”

“How good is Australia?” “How good are jobs?” “How good is coal?” “How good is unfunded empathy?”

Actually that last one isn’t very good at all, apparently. Although it does invited the question: What the fuck did Morrison mean?

Is empathy only ok when it’s funded like it was when the Labor were trying to prise franking credit refunds from people. In Dick Smith’s case it would have been hundreds of thousands of dollars. Poor Dick. Anyway, somehow these and various other things like tax cuts to those who are earning over $200,000 a year and therefore “working harder” are all “funded”.

Or was Morrison suggesting that we shouldn’t be empathetic to those on Newstart because they weren’t having a go. We can deduce this by remembering that Scott the Moribund is fond of reminding us that those “who have a go, will get a go.” Clearly, the unemployed aren’t getting a go so therefore they mustn’t be having a go.

Of course, Channel 7’s “Sunrise” program were in no doubt that the unemployed weren’t having a go, giving us the statistics about how many of them have had their benefits suspended. I’m not going to bother to repeat the numbers because one of the great things about statistics is how meaningless they can be if you don’t have anything more than the raw data. For example, if you are given the statistic that over ninety percent of those surveyed didn’t go out on a Saturday night, it might be worthwhile to also know where the survey was taken. If it were in a nursing home or a jail, for example, it’s hardly a high number.

Anyway, a government department cuts people’s payments because they’re not having a big enough go, or sometimes they’re meant to be having a go in two places at once, and then the government puts out the statistics to convince us that they were right to cut the payments because these are the sort of people that get their payments cut.

It was also interesting that “Sunrise”, the show that helped boost Pauline Hanson’s profile when she was in the political wilderness, also saw fit to equate having one’s benefits suspended with being a “dole bludger”… which is an oxymoron even before one starts to analyse the morality. If one isn’t getting payments any more, can one still be a “dole bludger”?

But it gets back to this whole idea that we want people to be miserable if they don’t have a job. I guess it’s because a lot of working people hate their jobs and think that if they’re miserable, then why should someone else have the right to be happy when they can’t even get a job…

Our Deputy PM, Michael Whatisname, suggested that the unemployed should be prepared to move to get a job. He wasn’t very clear about where there was a shortage of workers. I think that his idea was that it might help if country folk moved to the city and the city people moved to the country. That way they’d all be away from friends and family AND unemployed. That should really show them…

But let’s imagine that someone on benefits in Tasmania were to pack up, procure a tent and move to Queensland to enable them to leave more cheaply in better weather. Why, that would be outrageous. Moving just so they could camp out? Let’s cut them off benefits and confiscate their tent!

On the subject of contradictions, but did anyone else find Andrew Bolt’s attack on Greta Thunberg rather strange given his stance on Adam Goodes? Bolt, you may remember, suggested that Goodes bullied a poor, thirteen year old girl who wouldn’t have realised that the word “Ape” was racist and Goodes should have been able to pick her age in a second and not pointed at her so that security could remove her. However, two years of age  makes an enormous difference and Bolt has no trouble writing, “I have never seen a girl so young and with so many mental disorders treated by so many adults as a guru” about Thunberg. He went on to say worse…

But you’re probably right. It’s better not to give him the publicity he so pathetically craves.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

“It’s Called Newstart Not Nostart, So We Don’t Need To Raise It…”

Ok, I tried to get an interview with one of the Federal Ministers who’ve been telling us that there’s no need to raise the amount that unemployed people are getting, but apparently they’re all too busy ensuring that people have jobs… Not everyone, mind you, just the people who are aspirational and having a go… Oh, and their mates, of course.

Eventually, after much ringing around, I was able to get an interview with someone who works for Centrelink. Yes, I know. It’s a sign of my privilege and contacts that I was able to actually speak to a Centrelink worker, but I’ve never tried to hide the fact that I’m an Anglo male, so I can do or say things that would get anyone else into trouble. The Centrelink person spoke on condition that I keep him (or her) anonymous and don’t expose any links he (or she) may have to any human living or dead. In fact, like any Centrelink worker, any resemblance with any real person is pure coincidence. For the purpose of this, we shall call him (or her), “Worker”.

Me: Now, a number of politicians have been suggesting that two thirds of people are on Newstart for less than a year. Is this true?

Worker: Yes.

Me: So, most people find a job within a year?

Worker: No, we just find a way to kick them off benefits by doing things like sending them Robodebt notices and while they’re on the phone waiting to sort that out, they usually miss a job interview so we can suspend their benefits. 

Me: Are you admitting that Robodebt is just a scam to punish the unemployed?

Worker: Not at all. It’s a perfectly reasonable way of ensuring that welfare expenditure has been well-spent. 

Me: But it’s totally flawed and it frequently targets people who don’t really owe the money.

Worker: Yes. What was your question?

Me: Is that fair?

Worker: No, of course not. I just told you it’s all about ensuring welfare expenditure is well-spent and spending it on the unemployed is really a bit of a waste.  

Me: But you just admitted it wasn’t fair…

Worker: I don’t understand why you’re having trouble understanding that point. What’s fairness got to do with it? Are you a socialist or something?

Me: I’m just saying that it seems strange that you admit that it’s unfair when there have been suggestions that Robodebt letters have led to suicides and that nobody responsible seems to care…

Worker: That’s a shocking accusation!

Me: So how would you refute it?

Worker: Now, stop trying to verbal me. I said it was a shocking accusation, I never said that it wasn’t true. 

Me: So you have no problem with the idea that the policies you implement are causing suicides? 

Worker: Look, I’m just doing what I can to help the government get expenditure down so we can balance the budget. I don’t make policy. I just follow orders and if what I’m doing helps to reduce the number of unemployed then that should help reduce the bottom line.

Me: So how does what you’re doing help anyone get a job?

Worker: I never said it did. I just said it reduced the number of unemployed.

Me: Are you telling me that this is a deliberate policy to drive people to suicide?

Worker: That’s a shocking accusation!

Me: So you’re denying that you… Oh! Forget it.

Worker: Yes, that’s what most people end up saying!

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

I Didn’t Realise That George Calombaris Was A Union!

Now that it seems that Labor has decided that their best strategy is camouflage – agree to everything and hope that Queenslanders mistake them for the Liberal Party – I’ve been trying to work out how it’s all going to play out in the coming years.

One thing I’ve always believed is that ninety percent of everything is predictable. That’s what’s makes us so surprised by the unpredictable. After a few shocks, we feel we’ve entered a sort of Humpty Dumpty world where the guy sitting on the fence is tellling us the meaning of words even though we want to argue that words do not have a particular meaning just because a guy we thought couldn’t be put back together has somehow found himself sitting pretty…

Anyway, my twitter feed has been telling me about the Coalition’s determination to stop those nasty unions from taking away worker’s entitlements by introducing some Integrity Bill. I can’t remember what it’s actually called because every time the Liberals use the word “integrity”, I immediately have to spend a lot of time working out whether they’re for or against it.

Personally, I found it strange to see these in the same week that Masterchef George had “mistakenly” underpaid his workers $7.8 million dollars…

Now, I probably shouldn’t put the “mistakenly” in inverted commas. That implies that I didn’t really think it was a mistake. I mean, mistakes are easy to make. I’m sure George would understand if I went into one of his restaurants and mistakenly ran up a bill of $500 when I only meant to spend the fifty I had,  and he could take it or leave it because who could afford that sort of money for a meal so I just presumed that the prices were wrong…

So how will things play out?

Will Trump lose the election and declare martial law?

Will Boris suddenly decide that Brexit is all to hard and attempt to argue that Britain has already symbolicly left the EU so they’ve made their point and everything can just continue as is?

Will Scott continue to start sentences with “How good is…” until he makes the ultimate faux pas and says something like, “How good is indefinite detention?”… Oh wait, he’s already done that one. Maybe “How good is climate change?”… Nup, he’s done that with a lump of coal.  “How good is the gullibility of voters?”  No, the gullible will just cheer… “How good is the privatisation of Medicare?” 

Sorry, that’s just a scare campaign. Although like the “Never, ever” GST, two elections have passed and so we should have all forgotten.

Yep, this predicting business is harder than it looks. Although I’m pretty sure that the sun will rise tomorrow…

But even a prediction like that may get me in trouble with all those who argue that renewable energy like solar is unreliable…

sigh<

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Let’s Hear It For The Adolescent Politician… And The Childish Voter!

Now this probably sounds a little arrogant, but I’m an adult…

I know, I know, telling the world that one is an adult is little suspect after Abbott’s election where we were told the adults were back in charge. I mean, adults don’t go around telling you that they’re adults, do they? It’s like saying, “I’m very sophisticated.” The fact that you say it, sort of undercuts the whole idea…

Anyway, I happened to suggest to someone that Brexit reminded me of a teenager announcing their intention to move out of home. You know the sort of thing: “Mum, Dad, I’m sick of you telling me what to do and now I’ve got a job at Hungry Jack’s, you want me to pay for my own video games, so screw you, I’m moving out.” However, when the parents tell the child that they intend to change the locks, the adolescent announces that they want more time to negotiate such things as use of the washing machine, television, fridge and computer, whereupon the parents say that using such things will be fine, occasionally, so long as one gets permission and enters by knocking and…

Ok, the analogy now makes even more sense with the decision to install Boris as PM…

I could go on and talk about Brexit for ages but I’ll only offend the English. Let’s face it, the English are a population who’ve been invading other countries for centuries. The idea that they want to retreat and just be their own little island – (ok, they’re sort of happy to include Wales, Scotland and Ireland too) – is probably something most peoples of the world are more than happy with. It’s like the boring guy who often sits beside you uninvited, suddenly announcing that if you don’t pay more attention when he’s speaking, he’ll just sit somewhere else…

But I’m an adult, so I’d like to move onto general things instead of insulting the English people who may read this and think that they’re so offended that they’ll not only leave the EU, but move to expel Australia from the Commonwealth… Which may be the quickest way to a republic, when I think about it.

It seems to me that experts have bored people for years. Let’s be real. Think of all the times you’ve been at some barbie or dinner party and you’ve had a few glasses of this or that and you’ve started explaining the problems of the world and why your ideas will solve them, when someone who works in the area or has studied it at university embarrasses you by pointing out that your ideas are so completely wrong that it would take them more than an hour to dismiss the basic hypothesis before they got onto nitpicking all the minor ways in which you’ve quoted the wrong person and misunderstood the basic problem. I mean, those bastards who actually know things. Who invited them? We were having a good time until someone introduced facts into the discussion until they started using language like that. Hypothesis, for fuck’s suck…There may be children present. Thank god, for Pauline I say. Nobody could accuse her of letting evidence stand in the way of a good rant.

And so it seems to me that the recent political events are a response to years of having politicians citing experts. We’re damned sick of it, so when a Trump comes along and says that he knows better, he gets a cheer. When the experts start to point out that he’s wrong, we love him even more. Not because he isn’t a complete dunce, but because he is. I mean, don’t we feel great that we’ve got a leader who doesn’t make us feel inferior. At last someone with the self-confidence to stand up to all those experts and not be intimidated by the fact that he knows almost nothing about the topic at hand.

When I read the letters page in the Murdoch newspapers, any self-doubt immediately disappears. Not because I disagree with some of the letters, but because without any knowledge of the subject under discussion these people are expressing an opinion which is so little logical consistency with itself that I wonder how nobody has pointed out their stupidity… And then I realise that people have. Which is why someone like Trump or Boris appeals. They take the heat off the stupid. The experts are so busy talking about them that everyone else gets off scot free…

Mm, Scott free. Nice idea.

Anyway, I suspect that we’ll eventually get sick of it and, just like the person who gives up on the thing that isn’t working and goes back to the doctor, we’ll start to elect people who actually know things.

Or at the very least don’t pretend that they know things when they don’t.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

“How Good Is PR?”

“Hi there, this is your head of Public Relations, Scott Morrison with a very important massage:

“In 2017 over 3000 Australians died by their own hand. It’s affecting our young people, it’s affecting our veterans, it’s affecting boys and girls in remote indigenous communities. It’s affecting middle-aged men 45-50 living in suburbs, the highest rate of suicide in the country. Now just this week acting on OUR initiative to make a towards zero goal a national priority, I appointed Christine Morgan as the national suicide prevention officer and that should be enough so we don’t have to worry about doing things like raising Newstart because HOW GOOD ARE JOBS? We certainly don’t have to worry about Robodebt because people should pay back money which they can’t prove they don’t owe and certainly nobody can prove that they topped themselves because of the debt.

“As for those on Manus and Nauru, we don’t have to worry because our towards zero only includes Australians, so they won’t go into the statistics…”

Too far?  Well, sadly it probably doesn’t go far enough because most of it is straight transcription.

Scott Morrison on suicide prevention

Even the “How good are jobs?” was a response to Barnaby calling for an increase in Newstart. The man is a satire of himself, but who notices in a post-Trump world where the son of an immigrant can tell the daughters of other immigrants to go back to where they came from because they dare to criticise his America which isn’t like the “crime-infested places” they came from even though Trump himself complained that the USA was full of Mexican rapists and murderers, and whenever there’s a news story about a mass shooting there, I’m never sure whether it’s a new one or the same shooting that I heard about in the day before’s news?

Someone did a mock-up where footage of Hitler was inserted into a Trump rally. It only looked out of place because Hitler was black and white, and not orange.

sigh<

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Tim Wilson Can Go To Hell!

No, I haven’t started playing rugby. I’m suggesting that Tim Wilson can go to hell for reasons which have nothing to do with his personal life. Nor am I asserting my religious freedom by judging others.

Although that does beg the question that if I actually suggested he was going hell because he was gay and that Scott Morrison would join him for allowing such a man to be part of his government, would the Liberal Party still support my right to free speech?

This has to do with Timmy Wilson using his recent swearing in to express his religious views to the world. In case you aren’t aware, the book he held in his hand was “Capitalism And Freedom” by Milton Friedman. Now some held a religious tome; others chose to simply swear an oath. As far as I’m aware Wilson was the only one to raise Friedman’s ideas to the level of the Bible, the Torah or the Koran. Apparently Wilson is suggesting that Friedman is some sort of latter day messiah. Why else hold the book in your hand while being sworn in?

Good on him, I say. At least we can check his holy book to understand where he comes from.

While many of you may be aware that many conservative politicians follow the teachings of Saint Milton, how many of you are familiar with his gospel?

Saint Milton has lost many followers in the past few years… mainly because they’ve discovered that his ideas just don’t work in practice. However, a few – like Timmy -stubbornly stick to philosophy like doomsday cultists who wake up to find that the world hasn’t ended as predicted. Like doomsday predictions, Friedman’s disciples always argue that it should have ended and if it weren’t for government intervention then the divine properties of the free market would have destroyed us for our decadence…

On a side note, isn’t it interesting that Josh the Treasurer tells us that it’s good that he and his government will have a surplus but why don’t you people go out and spend your money so that we can and you’re the ones who end up with too much on the credit card…

Ok, ok, I know that we have religious freedom on the table and my mocking may soon be against the law. So in the interest of fairness… No, not the sort of fairness that Hitler liked. The sort of fairness which demands that when the ABC publish the truth, they also give the Liberal Party equal time.

Anyway, here’s some random thoughts from St Milton the Freid…

  • There’s no such thing as a free lunch.
  • Well first of all, tell me, is there some society you know of that doesn’t run on greed?
  • The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit.
  • There’s no way a government could land on the moon so it must have been a made-up thing!

All right, that last one I made up. But he would have said it, if it didn’t make him sound like the looney that he was. Although he did say: “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there’d be a shortage of sand.”

That was the one that Donald re-tweeted…

You see, while his ideas are dead, thanks to his followers, they keep rising.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Loving Scott Morrison… And Praying For Him, Too!

 “That’s what we all need. That’s what our country needs. That’s what our nation needs. That’s what we’re here to do as Christians. Not here to judge. Not here to lecture. Just here to show the amazing love of God.

“My job is the same as yours: love God, love people. We’ve all got the same job.”

Scott Morrison

When Scott Morrison told us that we needed more love, I must admit that I was a little cynical. Was this the same Scott Morrison that locked up asylum seekers, wanted those under thirty to wait six months for the dole, opposed marriage equality, restricted the notion of a “fair go” to those “having a go”, promised to repeal the Medevac legislation, and relentlessly attacked Bill Shorten and the Labor Party? Surely not! It must be some other Scott Morrison. Was our PM going soft? What next? Will he be out hugging some distraught voter Jacinda Adern style? Apart from his attachment to a lump of coal and his affectionate hug of Malcolm just before he screwed him, I’ve never seen anything resembling love from the man.

Ok, ok, love is a very private thing… Unless you’re Barnaby Joyce who’s prepared to talk about it publicly providing you can pay $150,000 for an interview.

Anyway, Mr Morrison seemed to have relinquished the idea that politicians can achieve anything when he told the congregation at Hillsong: “Our nation needs more prayer, more worship. That’s how things are overcome.”

Well, at last I understand why the Liberals are reluctant to throw money at society’s problems. That’s not the way to get things done. Prayer! That’s the answer. Mr Morrison apparently prayed for young people thinking about suicide, for veterans, and rain to ease drought to restore rural communities…

Don’t know why old people thinking about suicide were ignored, but Mr Morrison is the one with the direct link to God, so I’ll presume there must be a higher wisdom at work. After all, as I write this, I can look out the window and see that it’s raining so Scomo’s prayers have worked already. Next time he may need to be more specific about where the rain needs to land.

Now that Labor are being abandoned by all and sundry because of their attempts to co-opt the MeToo hashtag and turn it into a small target strategy for the next election, I must admit that I have been a little confused about where to put my energies. I’d embrace The Greens but they seem more concerned with putting the boot into Labor than actually mounting attacks on the government. One Nation is out of the question and Clive Palmer seems to have disappeared now that his prediction that his party was on track to become the next government has proven wrong. Perhaps, I should listen to Scoot and put my faith in prayer and give up on the whole political thing altogether.

Mm, it has it’s appeal. A religious conversion may be exactly what I need. Particularly after the government work out what extra rights religious people will be afforded in the religious freedoms legislation…

Now I’m not going to mention that overpaid sportsman who seems to be arguing that his religion is so important that he can’t avoid tweeting about it, but not so important that he can forgo the ridiculous amounts of money he’s paid by the sort of people who are clearly all going to Hell. Lately, I’ve noticed that when ever this person with the initials, IF, is mentioned people tend to roll their eyes and wonder whether to politely change the subject or slap the person speaking very hard in the hope that it brings them back to a reality where we can all agree that there’s a certain absurdity when the people who want to remove unfair dismissal laws argue that a particular person should be to be allowed to defy his employer without consequence. However, this is bringing a lot of attention to the restrictions that religious people face which prevent them from doing the sort of things that they’ve been allowed to do for centuries such as persecuting those who are different, burning witches and censoring anybody who says or does anything they regard as blasphemous. Consequently, the government will need to pass some sort of law to keep them happy.

I mean what’s the point of being in a religion if you can’t feel special. And in the age of moral relativism, people don’t automatically cower when you tell them that you’re saved and they’re not, so laws are needed to emphasise that these people can’t be treated like everyone else. Like exemptions from discrimination laws for religious organisations because it would be unfair to force them to employ someone whose beliefs didn’t fit with theirs. If there aren’t exemptions then they could be forced to employ a single mother, which would be especially confusing in some Christian schools because younger students may assume that she’s the Virgin Mary. And if there aren’t very specific laws, then atheists may be able to turn around and say that they’ll only employ other atheists which would be so unfair.

So with the lack of other options available, I’ve decided that prayer is the answer.

“Please God, can you end the drought with a massive storm and a lightning bolt that strikes down large numbers of politicians?” 

The song “What if God were one of us” just started playing on the TV as I write this. Seriously. That really just happened as I was writing the prayer.

Perhaps it is a sign.

Mm, will I be held responsible if the lightning bolt does happen? And can I claim freedom of religion to exonerate myself?

Strange days, indeed.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

 

Why I’m Never Voting Labor Again…Or For The Greens…

Liberal Party Headquarters, May 20th

Strategy Meeting. Barry and Harry, two strategists are meeting after the re-election of the Coalition Government.

Barry – Morning, how you feeling?

Harry – Ok, quite a victory party, wasn’t it?

Barry – Yeah, I didn’t really expect Scomo to pull it off, but there ya go!

Harry – What do you mean, Scomo? I’m the one who’s been working on strategy for the past few years! He just came along and reaped the rewards from all my brilliant work.

Barry – Yeah, but he still had to deliver, didn’t he? It could have still all gone pear-shaped if he hadn’t run such a great campaign.

Harry – Great campaign? What was so hard about reminding people that Shorten’s first name was “Bill” and linking it to the bills people have to pay? “Electricity Bill” remember that one. That was mine too.

Barry – Yeah, but the great strength of the campaign was reminding people how Labor was likely to send us into further debt just after we’ve got everything under control, even though we haven’t.

Harry – Great strength? Bullshit! Liberal leaders have been blaming Labor for everything ever since Whitlam was elected and we managed to blame him for the oil shocks of the seventies. That’s just par for the course. The trick is making people believe it.

Barry – Well, don’t we have a problem now? I mean, Bill’s gone. We’ll have to come up with a whole new strategy. It won’t be as easy to link the new leader’s name to debt and spending. I mean there’s not much you can do with Tanya or Chris or Anthony… Although if it’s Chris, we could try: “If you chose Bowen, you’ll end up owin’!”

Harry – Ha, that’s the least of our worries. The problem is that now that we’ve been re-elected by telling everybody how good things are, how do we tell them that a surplus would be economically irresponsible because the economy is tanking?

Barry – But isn’t a surplus the result of good economic management?

Harry – Only if you’re trying to take money out of the community because the economy is overheating. When growth is more anaemic than a haemophiliac in a roomful of vampires, you need to be putting money in.

Barry – Sort of like Labor did in the GFC.

Harry – Exactly. So what are we going to do?

Barry – Blame Labor for talking down the economy?

Harry – Good idea. But I’ve got an even better one. I’ll contact a few of the boys at Sky News…

Barry – That’s a bit sexist. What about the girls?

Harry – Good one. Love your sense of humour.

Barry – No, I was being serious. I meant Peta Credlin and that other one… what’s her name?

Harry – Anyway, I’ll get on to a few of our press mates and tell them to focus on whether Labor’s going to support our mandate or not. You know, lots of articles about how their blocking the will of the people and all that.

Barry – So they shouldn’t oppose all the policies that we took to the election like…um, the… um. What policies did we take to the election?

Harry – Don’t elect Labor!

Barry – Yeah, well they can’t really stand in the way of that one.

Harry – Don’t make Bill Shorten PM!

Barry – I think they’ll all be right behind that one now.

Harry – There were the tax cuts, Adani and nuclear power.

Barry – We’ve already approved Adani and didn’t Morrison say that the Labor Party were using a desperate scare campaign when they said we’d introduce nuclear power.

Harry – Doesn’t matter, he never said that he wouldn’t do it. Just that it was a sign of Labor’s desperation.

Barry – Still it’s not much, is it?

Harry – Look, whichever way it goes we can still use the Adani strategy with the tax cuts.

Barry – The Adani strategy.

Harry – Yeah, get the media to stick them between a rock and hard place. If Labor had come out and opposed Adani, we would’ve attacked them on jobs and being captive to The Greens, but if they’d backed Adani we could have just let The Greens cannibalise them from the left by telling everyone that there’s no essential difference between the two major parties. In the end, they sat on the fence and lost out both ways.

Barry – But can that work again?

Harry – Yep, I reckon we can bully Labor into voting for them, then when the Budget’s in deficit, we can blame Labor for voting for the tax cuts.

Barry – Surely that wouldn’t work. I mean, they’re our tax cuts.

Harry – Hey, just look at what happened after the AFP raids. More people blamed Labor for supporting the legislation that enabled it, than blamed us for creating it.

Barry – There’s just one problem with that.

Harry – What’s that?

Barry – The AFP raids haven’t happened yet. It’s only May 20th.

Harry – Don’t worry. Everything’s so predictable. We’ll get the support of the cross-bench in the Senate, Labor will capitulate so that they can’t be accused of opposing tax cuts at the next election and then all those who thought this just makes inequality worse, will direct their anger at Labor and Scott will win the first Newspoll in three years.

Barry – It seems unbelievable. How can Labor keep getting the blame for the things we do?

Harry – It’s a mystery, but some things just seem to work no matter how many times you try them… Well, that was a good day’s work. Shall we take an early lunch?

Barry – Why not?

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

“I Believe In Miracles,” Says Scomo; “I Don’t!” Says Albo!

Autocorrect changed “Albo” into “Also”, which I hope isn’t some harbinger of things to come.

Let’s recap:

Why are you only asking Labor the hard questions in this election campaign? the media gets asked.

“They’re likely to be the next government of Australia and their policies need to be examined.”

Scott Morrison wins the election and makes the extraordinary declaration that he believes in miracles. This doesn’t get commented on by the media. After all, as I pointed out before, me winning Wimbledon this year would be a miracle, Ash Barty, not so much. When an incumbent PM tells you that their victory was a miracle, rather than a mild surprise, that surely tells you something about how bad his government actually is.

So now that Scomo has had his miraculous victory, the attention, of course, turns to… Labor. How did they lose? Why did they lose? What’s wrong with the pollsters? How did the betting markets get it so wrong? Hey, those of you criticising the media are just sore losers. Don’t you understand, Scomo was brilliant! The way he dodged and weaved past all those tricky questions like “Why are you so popular?” and “Do you have any good curry recipes?”

Anyway, the media has done its in-depth analysis of Labor’s failure to win support for its controversial policies such as free cancer treatment, ensuring that people paying no tax don’t get a refund cheque from the government for the tax they haven’t paid and their climate change policy. Apparently, saying that a coal mine has to stack up commercially and that Labor wouldn’t be giving away taxpayer money to support it was too green for the  people of Queensland, but too unclear for all those inner city latte-sippers who don’t understand unless we have a healthy economy there’s no point in having a planet to put it on.

The Coalition’s first item of business is the tax cuts. Good things, tax cuts. Don’t we all want money in our pockets? This is not like when those lefties try and give you money for nothing by funding schools and hospitals. No this is giving more of your own money back to you, so you can afford to go to the doctor so long as you don’t do it too often. Besides, the economy is “facing headwinds” in spite of being brought back to excellent health by the current team in the six months they’d been there so a little stimulus is a good thing, right?

Yes, six years ago the Liberals went into the 2013 election telling us that they had a plan for jobs and growth. Now, it seems to me that I could similarly stand for election by saying that I had a plan for the drought. Just as the Liberals said we need growth to promote jobs, I could say that we need rain to break the drought. “That’s my plan,” I’d say, “making sure that the fundamentals are right and then rain will occur.” It seemed to be working for the Liberals because just like the inevitability of a drought being broken eventually, so too, after the GFC was growth likely to return. Unfortunately, it seems to have deserted us lately, but that’s surely not their fault, any more than the lack of rain is mine.

Of course, we now have a Budget surplus so we can afford these tax cuts in spite of the “headwinds”. Except these headwinds may put the surplus at risk, so we need the tax cuts to stimulate the economy. And they will. Stage 1 will start appearing once people have done their tax. But it does seem hard to argue that Stage 2 and 3 will encourage growth in the current fiscal year given they don’t come into play until after the next election.

The government refused to spit the Bill as Labor wanted, so the media’s attention turned to whether or not Labor would buckle. Or whether they’d be pig-headed. They were the two choices for Labor. And let’s be real here. We need to talk about what Labor’s going to do, at this point. We don’t need to talk about how intractable the government is when it refuses to split the various stages. We don’t need to discuss the massive change to the progressive nature of the income tax system. We don’t even need to point out that the changes benefit the people voting for them. No, we need to concentrate on Labor and what it will do.

Even after Senator Lambie agrees to a handshake deal and forgets to count her fingers afterwards and the government has the numbers to pass it whatever Labor votes, we need to talk about Labor.

We need to get very, very angry that they didn’t understand that because they’d lost the election they must acquiesce to the government’s mandate. Or, if you think that governments don’t really have a mandate to dictate policy on tax two elections into the future, we should get really angry with Labor for capitulating and not making a principled stand.

Ah well, I guess that Labor have worked out that if they just go along with everything the government does, eventually some of the criticism must eventually be levelled at the Coalition. Although, surely Albo must have been around long enough to notice that strategy has never worked in the past. I mean, you only have to go back to the AFP raids on the media a few weeks ago to notice that people were criticising the Labor party for supporting the legislation in about equal measure with horror at the raids themselves. Very few people seemed to be actually suggesting that the government had failed to put adequate safeguards in the legislation.

Yep, maybe the autocorrect was onto something. Maybe it’s not Scomo and Albo. Maybe it’s going to be Scomo and Also.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Jesus Demands $10 Billion For Wrongful Crucifixion – Personally, I Blame His Dad For Not Marrying His Mum!

Now, if any of you are offended by the headline, I have one thing to say: You have absolutely no understanding of the Christian message and you’re going to Hell.

Ok, maybe not forever, but certainly for the next few minutes as you read what I’m writing and get so angry because… well, I’m just wrong, aren’t I? What’s more, I’m one of those heathens who shouldn’t be allowed to make films like “The Last Temptation of Christ” or exhibit photos like Serrano’s “Piss Christ”!

I guess the whole “political correctness is shutting down our freedom of speech” thing has been a bit like a pebble in my shoe. It’s irritating. But not so bad that it’s made me stop and take off my shoe to find the pebble and throw it away. However, the whole Israel Folau thing has turned the pebble into a rock and it’s hard to walk when one foot is so weighed down that you keep thinking about it and ignoring everything that’s really important…

Yes, I am aware of the irony here. I’m simply trying to take off my shoe here and remove the pebble…

Gee, with analogies like this, I sort of remind myself of Jesus who used parables to express his beliefs. I guess, GoFundMe and lawyers weren’t available in those days.

Suddenly the epiphany hit me. Just like Saul of Tarsus who was struck blind on the road to Damascus# because of his “lifestyle”…

Now, this is almost worth a book and I’d start a “GoFu##Me” campaign myself, were it not for the fact that they may shut it down when I announce that I may use it to write a book that supports striking people blind on the way to Damascus…

How on earth – or indeed, in Heaven – can you complain about political correctness stopping you from expressing whatever view you like when you – as a religion, if not personally – have been responsible for most of the censorship for the past several hundred years?

Yeah, nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition and all that… Do you even know what the Spanish Inquisition was? Google it, before you talk about Israel Folau’s rights being ignored!

Yeah, all right. I’m a bit slow and some of you already got to this point a long time ago.

Yeah, there are more important things in this world than whether an indulged man gets his millions in some court case.

Yeah, if God can do anything, couldn’t He have just forgiven us without crucifying his son?

And isn’t a compassionate god more likely to be on my side than Folau’s when I  say that Peter Dutton and Scott Morrison are going to Hell for their treatment of the people on Manus and Nauru? I say this without even arguing for a moment that these people – including the children that Peter “Before the cock crows will deny that his constitutionally eligibility three times” Dutton insists aren’t in detention –  have the right to seek asylum and are not people arriving in this country illegally… Ok, I know you may spend several minutes unpacking that sentence… Like I said, we’re all in Hell now.

Speaking of which, I did notice a story about how Scott Morrison would consider military support to help the US just as soon as The Dumpster works out which war he intends to fight in order to boost his re-election chances…

SIGH<

The more things change…

We can beat these fuckers, you know. It’s not easy. But they feed on our despair. Hope is a currency that doesn’t get doled out by governments and banks. I’m sorry if I made you lose it, I don’t intend to. I’m just old and tired and finding it hard to have much hope in a world where Rupert Murdoch hasn’t just decided to enjoy his billions with his bride… Or alternatively, been struck by the same God that allegedly struck down the twin towers of Sodom and Gomorrah… Mm,  Rupert dies suddenly tonight, I may have a whole new religion, started by me and the amazing serendipity of all things. 

Mm, I may just start that as a religion anyway. If you want to join, please join my GoFundMe campaign. If I tag it “Religious freedom for hating”, I may pick an extra million from confused Israel followers.

That was Israel Folua followers, in case you misunderstood.

#No spoilers here for all you good Christians who’ve actually read the Bible and not relied on some half-baked American version, but Saul did recover his sight and changed his name to Paul, stopped having sex with men and wrote the quote that Israel Folau tweeted about “Drunks, etc…”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Scott McIntyre, Lest We Forget…

Ok, I figure I can use the phrase “lest we forget” because I’m not a woman wearing a head scarf like Yassmin. Yes, it was a pretty head scarf and she certainly looked a lot better than Pauline in her head to foot contraption. Although I must say Pauline looked better in her head to foot contraption than when she took it off…I could be wrong. Who knows? I may be driven out of the country just like Yassmin. I’m just not sure whether it’ll be by people complaining about my use of the phrase “Lest we forget” or by political correctness because I started talking about how women look…

I simply want to make the point that Scott McIntyre was an SBS journalist who was sacked for his tweets about ANZAC day.

Now, I’m not wishing to support Scott McIntyre’s tweets here… Mainly because I can’t remember them… Yes, we forget…

That was “Yes, we forget”, not “Lest We Forget” in case anyone is hard of hearing…

But I simply want to make the point that I don’t remember most of the free speech warriors who are telling us that Israel Folau has a right to tweet whatever he wants because of his religious beliefs were strangely silent when McIntyre was sacked.

I don’t wish to distract things here, but I would like to take an aside and point out the Izzy himself must be going to Hell because he is now arguing that Rugby is his workplace and simply something he liked doing on the day of rest. The Bible expressly forbids working on the Sabbath, yet Mr Folau has been happy to spend it working at his chosen employment of trying to catch balls or grabbing other men and dragging them to the ground.

So are we meant to presume that people are going to have freedom to tweet what they like if it’s a religious tweet, but not if it’s a political tweet and where does that leave Father Rod Bower of the Gosford Church?

Or is it just a case of people can tweet whatever they like so long as it agrees with the prevailing government of the day’s religious or political viewpoint?

Personally, I’d like to see Rugby Australia re-instate Folau’s contract, tell him to tweet whatever he likes, but get all their players to wear rainbow colours when training… I’m not sure whether they have the right to demand a urine sample at any time, but it could be interesting if they did it in the middle of a church service.

Yes, that sounds vindictive and nasty. Far better just to point out that Folau is going to Hell because the Bible forbids tattoos. That’s just me following his religion. Or somebody’s. Apparently it doesn’t matter so long as one is religious.

Aw shit, I had intended to write about Scott Morrison’s plan to revive the “animal spirits” in the economy. Did he really say that, or am in some dream? And is attempting to revive animal spirits in the economy going to require a religious ceremony involving the sort of things that happen in hippy communities on a full moon?

There’s so much I don’t know… However, I do know this with some certainty:

McIntyre, Yassmin and various other people shouldn’t be employed because they crossed the line. But when other people cross the line it’s a violation of their right to free speech to give them consequences. It’s sometimes going too far if one should dare to criticise them…

On this day, “Yes We Forget!”

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Donate Button

Scroll Up