Dear Ms Lambie,
Firstly may I congratulate you on your election to the Senate. You have undertaken a huge responsibility and I wish you well with it.
I have heard you interviewed a few times now and I have a few concerns I would like to discuss with you.
You seem very passionate about Tasmania. In an article in the Tasmanian Times you said “If I am elected I will be the first Senator that will be delegated the portfolio of Special Minister for Tasmania”. I am not sure if you typed that article yourself but you really need to edit it. There are many typos and you even got your party name wrong in one tortuous paragraph:
“The Australia United Party will give an immediate Duty off Care to the men and women that have been physically or psychologically damaged because of Military service that they received by placing their lives on the line for our country.”
More recently, you said on the ABC “like I’ve made quite clear, if it’s not going to suit my Tasmania, then I’ll be crossing the floor. That’s just the way it is. I have to put Tasmania first.” May I ask why you ran for Federal Parliament because you actually need to be basing your decisions on what is best for the world when you are running a country.
In a letter in the Advocate you said “We must become pro-active and install respect back into our youth,” suggesting a reintroduction of national service. I am not sure how one “installs” respect but, considering the number of cases of sexual abuse and physical degradation at the hands of their fellow soldiers that have come to light, and the failure to do anything about it, I am not sure everyone comes away from a military experience brimming with respect.
Rather than conscription, we could perhaps earn the respect of our young people if we stopped lying to them and actually started helping them. They might feel better if we considered them a precious resource and an investment in our future rather than a burden. We should be providing MORE choices for our kids rather than taking them away. Listening to them and involving them in decisions teaches them far more than dictating to them.
You list your Primary Policy Interests as Tasmania, Unemployment, National Security, Seniors and old age pensioners, the underprivileged, our youth (13 – 21), small business and Veterans Affairs. Unfortunately, when you have the responsibility of the balance of power, you can’t limit yourself to your areas of interest. You are going to have to put in the hard yards to understand every piece of legislation that comes before the Senate. This is an onerous task – just ask the Independents.
You are a very confident, strong woman and that is a good thing. Are you strong enough to know when you are wrong?
Which brings me to my greatest concern – your dislike of environmentalists and your absolute certainty that environmental protection and action on climate change are bad things. I hope I am wrong about this – it’s early in our relationship – but I am not encouraged by what I am hearing from you.
“What we will not abide by is a toxic economic dictatorship led by a minority.” July 20, 2013 criticising environmentalists who were opposing a proposed Tasmanian mine.
“We have had enough of people like you trying to shut down our livelihoods and drive our children out of Tasmania.” Letter in the Burnie advocate criticising a Tarkine forest campaigner.
“Who decided that animal rights had become more important than human rights?” I don’t think we have the right to wipe out other species by destroying their habitat just to give someone a job cutting down trees or digging up minerals. Most of our medicines have come from nature and messing with biodiversity can have unforeseen consequences.
When you were interviewed on the 7:30 report in September last year you said
“I support tearing up the carbon tax to a certain degree but some of that carbon tax is quite good. So, you know what, tearing something up and restarting again takes longer. We probably need to start that carbon tax at maybe three or four per cent.”
That does not fill me with certainty that you actually understand the carbon pricing scheme. Three or four per cent of what?
Then this week on the ABC you said
“Oh yeah, no, the carbon tax needs to go. It’s been an absolute mess since that was introduced. It is absolutely killing the nation.”
That’s not actually true Jacqui. I know you don’t listen to Tony Abbott but if you want my opinion I wouldn’t listen too closely to Clive on this matter either.
The CPI went up about 0.7% due to the carbon tax. By contrast, the introduction of the GST resulted in a 2.5% rise in the CPI in 2000 and the sky didn’t fall in.
Furthermore, in the first year after the carbon tax came into effect, more than half a trillion dollars was added to the combined value of housing and stocks listed on the Australian Securities Exchange, and total employment rose by 160,400.
Federal Treasury estimates that 51 per cent of an average household electricity bill is spent on network charges (compared to nine per cent on the carbon tax). Most of that is going towards paying off the $45 billion network companies have spent on updating and building new poles and wires over the last five years because they predicted an increase in demand for electricity.
Despite the clear reality of falling demand, the network companies insisted that demand was rising, and they carried on investing billions of dollars into the grid. Every dollar of that investment is now being recovered from consumers, via our power bills. Every dollar, plus 10 per cent: a guaranteed return granted to them by the Australian Energy Regulator.
The irony is, we’re paying higher electricity prices at a time when Australia has more energy than it can use. Nationally, energy demand is now lower than it was in 2006, which is due to the decline of the manufacturing sector, the rollout of energy efficient appliances and because over the last six years, 1.3 million households have installed solar panels on their rooftops.
We need carbon pricing for many reasons – to make polluters help pay for the damage they cause, to make industry invest in research and development of sustainable practice, to make business and individuals change their behaviour, to encourage investment in renewable energy which will be a growing industry of the future, to avoid being hit with tariffs or sanctions by other countries who have carbon pricing, but most of all to save the planet for our children.
I can only hope that you truly are your own woman and that you will feel the same anger that the rest of us are feeling at being so blatantly manipulated by corporate liars.
Well good luck with that Kaye. The woman is your typical Dunning Kruger. Lack of actual knowledge and (subsequent) competence writ large leading to manifestly incompetent decision making and outcomes. Add to that her loathing of virtually all environmental policy (duh!) and you have another dipstick propelling the country headlong into backwards thinking and long term disasters. It has become abundantly clear, that unless ALL of us become very, very green very, very soon we are fundamentally stuffed. To be frank, I see very little in politics or policy anywhere in the world (beyond Germany and the Scandinavian countries) that gives any hope at all we will survive beyond this century given our current trajectory. The science – and there’s LOTS of it – indicates we’re screwed. Jacqui Lambie is just another of a long line of depressing impediments. I am in grieving stage in relation to our Planet now. I see very little that gives me hope of meaningful change anywhere. Happy days. So long and no thanks for all the dickheads. (Nee voters!)
How did this woman get elected? She can’t even think. We should not be dependent on individuals who are uneducated, ignorant, and an all round loose cannon. Someone please take her in hand.
Kaye lee
You certaily do not shirk the difficult and dangerous.
Difficult because Taswegiams like western australians carry a sprcial feeling of being shit upon by mainlanders on Tas’s case and Easteners in Wait Awhiles case.
Dangerous because it almost seems as though there is no way of moving aside the chip that is carefully carried against the “other”, and the best that seems achievable in that circumstance is to create balance. Somewhat like placing a chip on both shoulders as a balance to the one shoulder chip.
I wish you success but know that an exhausting amount of time can go into attempting the impossible.
First a miracle then the impossible is an expression that is apt.
I know this much Kaye that without your effort we all are the poorer.
In the spirit of oneness the miracles and the impossible become achievable.
All strenght to you in communicating and relating with the political newby.
What it is, roight, is that loike the thing of what it is about Jacqui is she has loike, looked at the whole rectum of what it is about politics and its loike she feels she can make a difference? So Jacqui, yeah, greenies get roight up my goat too. This old greenie sheila seen us throwing Macca’s shit out of the Hoilux an goes “I oughta report you for littering!”, so I go, ” OK Mrs So-called greenie expert! It were vegeble matter anyhow an’ vegeble matter rots down! Plus them cans get picked up by the council (oi fink), so basically moy litterin creates jobs.” The score were RA–1, Old Greenie Sheila–Big Fat Zero. So you go, Jacqui an remember that comparisons are odourless, an when the media go barkin up the wrong dog by axein yer dopey questions, say loike ‘ey do on them Yankee cop shows; ” Oi take the Fith”.
All very well you belittling Jacqui…how she speaks, what she says.
How about you keyboard warriors go out and get yourself elected?
She sold her house to campaign, how many of you feel strongly enough about anything to do that?
Kaye, as always, you hit the nail on the head, please keep hitting hard.
Who was it said “with friends like this-who needs enemies” along with an almost silent car enthusiastic new Senator elect, I fear for the future, not only for Australia, but the planet.
Catarina,
Selling your house to become a senator doesn’t impress me. It indicates an investment, not ideology. To be sure Jacqui will be well rewarded for her time in parliament as do most others.
Wanting a job and being able to do it are not necessarily the same thing Catriona. I am sure Jacqui is very well meaning and I have no beef against her personally but for the next six years, she will be making decisions that affect the whole world. It’s kind of important that she knows what she is talking about and her performance to date suggests more willing than able.
What an contemptible idiot! People like Jacqui Lambie are the useful idiots employed by the ruling class to dump shit on their own kind. She epitomises what is wrong with political discussion in this country…. and why it’s going to get a lot worse.
Kaye Lee… I think I get the intent behind writing this article. If it’s for the purpose of discussion… fair enough. It you rote it in the hope of somehow opening Jacqui’s mind, you have wasted your time. She is utterly beyond help.
Everything I write is to open up discussion. Jacqui says that she is a lobbyist for the Country Women’s Association Social Impact Fact Finding Team. I thought I should share a few social impact facts with her since she seems to have no idea what carbon pricing is about other than she wants to get rid of it. She has previously run for preselection so one would have thought that she would have a handle on it by now but apparently not.
Jaqui’s life is sbout to be completely and utterly changed may be forever may be for the better and may be a total disaster.
she needs to get some serious education about her role as a senator, the word ‘objectivity’, subjectivity, due process, procedural fairness, bias, predujice, legal process and the origins of law. Because if she doesn’t it is more than likely to end in disaster for her.
I do not like her politics but I feel sorry for her – she is in for some crying time!
so she will earn her place in the canberra trough.
S
Kaye Lee, I wonder if you would share this article on Facebook through the AIMN Page. I always enjoy your articles, they make me think. I would hope your written words could start to convince others who are starting to question the current state of play. They are the ones that need to be confronted with the truth, not have it thrown in their face, but have it discussed with logic and reason and truth. Please keep writing. Thanks Martin
who is Kaye Lee
I don’t know how to answer that Mary.
Kaye Lee:
And I am sure you are going to eating those words very soon, Kaye Lee. As faint as your compliment is, I’m sure Jacqui will quickly make it clear that she is anything but well meaning.
Jacqui is an insular, ignorant, small-minded bogan. She lists Tasmania, Unemployment, National Security, Seniors and old age pensioners as her favourite causes… but I doubt she has the brains to attend to even one of these topics properly. She is a clueless, parochial amateur… a simpleton… a muppet who will be easily manipulated by the plutocrats and swayers.
Jacqui was in the Military Police – she has a kind of Wyatt Earp approach that she will roll into town all guns blazing and clean up the joint. I too am concerned that she will be fed misinformation. BTW has anyone heard from the brick with eyes aka the PUP Senate leader?
“Glenn Lazarus gagged by Clive Palmer ahead of assuming Senate balance of power ”
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/glenn-lazarus-gagged-by-clive-palmer-ahead-of-assuming-senate-balance-of-power/story-fnihsrf2-1226953764996
I wonder how much control Palmer will have over his pups, and what he has put in place to maintain that control? Has he wined and dined them, expensive hotels, lots of “freebies” leading to an implied contract or at least sense of obligation? And what will he do when they stray from the path?
Without wishing to disparage any of them, they are in for a real baptism of fire over the coming weeks and months. Jacqui may be able to handle it better than others, but I’m not sure she is prepared enough yet.
Should be an interesting ride……
The insanity about to be propelled through this country will never be rectified.
All Australia will be is the White-Trash of Asia.
Our lack of national consciousness has brought us to this.
Can someone PLEASE tell me when people started giving any credibility to Clive Palmer?
Have we forgotten that this is the bloke who claimed that Rupert Murdoch’s ex-wife Wendy Deng was a Chinese spy… and that the Greens were conspiring with the CIA to destroy Australia’s resources industry. How are supposed to believe this man?
I don’t know if it matters if Jaqui is “her own woman”. I think it matters that she’s not very smart and probably has no clue if she is really her own woman or not. She gives the impression of being about as intelligent as my left testicle and my lest testicle can complete a Rubic’s Cube faster than Tony Abbott.
Sure, it’s commendable that she’s had the courage to enter politics and open herself up to everything that entails. However, the question I find myself having to ask is whether she’s smart enough to even understand what she’s done.
I think it’s a truism, more or less, that the people most equipped for political life are the ones that wouldn’t consider it even if you put a gun to their head.
Mr Druery said Mr Muir was “not an obstructionist” but would most likely not signal his position on the majority of issues early in the debate. “He just wants to do good things for ordinary people in Australia.”
And these people are now earning $195,000 a year plus all the perks. Wonder how Ricky will enjoy being driven around in a comm car . Doughies in the driveway?
mars08,
In my view, his credibility, such that it is, is a direct result of the disquiet people feel with the major parties. It’s no more substantive than that. But that fact is scary because it means that pretty much any doofus spouting populist garbage and offering barely literate candidates can attract political attention.
Australia is in a world of political hurt and it terrifies me to think that only the Labor Party can remotely fix it – and they suck.
Dan Rowden:
I deliberately used the word “credibility” as opposed to asking why people are listening to him. The “disquiet people feel with the major parties” would explain why they are listening… but it SHOULD NOT give him any credibility. But… yeah… i get your point.
mars08,
I don’t think Clive has any “credibility” in the sense that you and I understand that term. I’m not sure what the “electorate” considers “credibility” to be anymore. Maybe Mark Textor can tell us, or maybe he can tell them, then he can tell us based on their response to what he told them.
The Palmer party’s newest Senator-elect and lead of the party in the Senate is Dio Wang. Wang was the managing director of mining company Australasian Resources, 70 per cent-owned by Clive Palmer, before he gave up his mining career for politics.
SARAH FERGUSON: How would you describe your politics before you joined Palmer United?
DIO WANG: My politics? Oh, zero.
…….
SARAH FERGUSON: Even if it was proved that Mr Palmer had misused funds in a business relationship, you wouldn’t consider severing your ties with him?
DIO WANG: No, I wouldn’t.
SARAH FERGUSON: Part of these allegations also include a very specific allegation from CITIC, the Chinese company, that money from the fund it’s set up with Clive Palmer’s company was being used for work on another project run by your company, Australasian Resources. Is that what happened?
DIO WANG: Sometimes I’m not really across that specific invoices, but sometimes when the engineer – engineering companies do the work, they forget to change their invoice, the recipient of the invoice and the name of the recipient of the invoice. So, it could be that they made a mistake putting my company on that invoice.
SARAH FERGUSON: Shouldn’t you be pursuing this matter with a lot more energy than you seem to be?
DIO WANG: Because I don’t believe that’s the case. I believe the allegations are wrong.
SARAH FERGUSON: But don’t you want to know for sure?
DIO WANG: I think I know for sure.
“A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves”
~Edward R. Murrow
<
I found this Article informative :
http://www.theage.com.au/comment/how-tony-abbott-made-the-carbon-tax-work-20140630-zsqj4.html
I wonder if Jacqui reads Fairfax or is stuck with Murdoch ?
Ahhh… I wonder if Jacqui reads…
New Idea still has articles, doesn’t it?
Stop picking on Jacqui! She’s a genuine ‘bogan’. A real ‘representative’ of so many in the electorate. Read her Wiki bio for some insights. For example:
So tell me, who hasn’t done that? Getting pissed and then going the ‘biffo’. For god’s sake she just like the rest of us? Isn’t she? Add 50 points.
Then:
I suspect she just lost 10 points. LOL. A ‘real’ woman is supposed to get them bigger, not smaller. Just ask Kathy Jackson.
And just to prove, she’s one of us:
Clearly a ‘bludger’ writ large. Add 20 points.
But she believes in ‘conventional’ marriage:
Got to be a big bonus at this point. Add another 50? Nevertheless, she is prepared to make some short term commitments:
As I said at the outset, Lambie is ‘one of us’. She’s a voter. A citizen. A result of an education system, including what the military has to offer post primary and secondary.
The New Senate. God help us all.
Dan, relying on ‘magical interpretations’ of the world got us into this mess. Don’t add to it!
No more ‘incantations’ please!
Jaqui is no doubt sincere.
“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The road back is paved with those of humility”
From the interviews with her I was fearful. She’s kind of sincere but kind of ignorant of important stuff. I do hope that she is getting wise council from wise people. Oh gawd…
Jacki Lambie at first impression.
An unapologetic(ex-cherryberry no less) headkicker and anti-ecologist with very strong opinions but less than few details who likes to intersperse simplistic hyperbole and mangled diction(complete with tautologies) with regular punctuations of um.
Kind of like a deeper voiced Pauline without the overt racism.
Glad we have her voice added to the counsel of the wise elders of the upper house, to dilute me aspects Ser Tonee’s foolish extremism and elevate and moderate the levels of debate.
What to make of someone who approached and was rejected by both the LNP and Labor?
Let’s be positive and say pragmatic and persistent.
Feeling strongly does not in itself make anyone fit for public office. Look at the current crop of malignant morons in Canberra. She clearly loves Tasmania but doesn’t have the faintest idea of how to work for its good. It takes more than emotion to make a valuable politician; it is also a requirement of her office that she consider the good of all Australia, and not just Tasmania. On her own showing she doesn’t even think of that.
She will have more power than she knows what to do with; to leave power of this kind in the hands of a person so bereft of intelligence, is madness, and I dislike intensely the voters who did this.
Finally, if a person puts themselves up for public office, the criticisms or kudos go with it. Stop whining on her behalf.
Carolyn Janson,
I second your comments, it says a lot about the folks who voted for her! This is why we have the current Abbott government, people voted without thinking,(or got sucked in by his lies) just voted for a ‘change’, without giving a thought to what that change may be. A disaster as it turns out. She is not the only new Senator elect who will be way out of their depth.
As Tony Abbott said on gaining the leadership of the Liberal Party (something which even surprised him)
“We are all promoted to our own level of incompetence. So sooner or later mine will be reached.”
I think we passed that point long ago Tony
corvus boreus
Sorta funny innit? You assume an ex-military type would appreciate that a mind is like a parachute. It only works if it is open. Yet all indications are that young Jacqui’s mind is more like an anvil!
Most succinct comment Kaye…..like the frightful Brian Harradine who was constantly trying to grease Tasmania’s wheels at the expense of the rest of Australia.
“like I’ve made quite clear, if it’s not going to suit my Tasmania, then I’ll be crossing the floor. That’s just the way it is. I have to put Tasmania first.”
May I ask why you ran for Federal Parliament because you actually need to be basing your decisions on what is best for the world when you are running a country.
My current opinion of the abilities of Jacqui Lambie has been extensively covered by my AIMN comrades. I happily await enlightenment 😉
Do have one comment, someone stated Ms Lambie sold her home. A well calculated risk I would posit. For the next 6 years she is guaranteed of the following:
http://maps.finance.gov.au/entitlements_handbooks/senators-and-members/Entitlements_Summary_-_Salary.asp#Salary
Power and money – for the next 6 years at least. Not a bad gamble at all.
I think people, including this reporter, would be good to remember that Senators represent their state, which Senators of the last 3 decades have forgotten. It is good to hear a politician say that she will say and do the same thing, which unlike our current crop of LIARS, is a refreshing change. This reporter was probably one of the commentator “experts” who said PUP would not win one seat! Clive does not pull this ladies strings, nor the other PUP Senators. The man listens – a rare commodity in modern politics. Go get em Jacqui, you have our full support.
I think many, if not most of our current batch of politicians are lacking in any understanding of what the majority of Australians are subjected to on a daily basis. How we live our lives bears no resemblance to the privileged life of a politician and the wealthy families that most come from. It is for this reason that they can suggest and enforce their own ideals and beliefs on a population that is unable to do anything about. We are all subjected to a biased media and the outright lies of our so-called leaders. You all want to bag Jacqui for being a bogan? Have any of you ever watched the embarrassing display that is Question Time? Wow, talk about bogans. At least Jacqui has an excuse. Unlike our current politicians, she has not spent her whole life being groomed to political office. She says it how she sees it and obviously like many Tasmanians see it too. I am hoping that we see more people in politics who say what they think. Better than the perpetual lies that we have been hearing for decades.
At that rate of pay and allowances, if she spends her money wisely, she can buy a much better home for cash at the end of 6-years.
A lot of people do not even earn her annual dollar ‘allowances’.
There should also be a performance based review every 6-months and salary adjusted accordingly-this should apply to all politicians, after all, it applies to the majority of workers these days.
If her Facebook page is anything to go by the first thing Jacqui needs to work on is her literacy level.
Pay attention to the three R’s!
It seems that some people are terrified of representative democracy if it starts to be representative.
<
Apparently Jacquie Lambie is not as bad as she has been made out here on The AIM Network.
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/jacqui-lambie-takes-a-swipe-at-tony-abbott-for-parading-daughters-around-says-clive-palmer-not-a-puppet-master-20140703-3b9m8.html
Calling Abbott a "political psychopath" has got the tick of approval from me.
Sadly, the more of her I read the more she looks like a doofus. Clive really has sold us a PUP.
Stephen,
I’m not sure where you got the idea that Senators are there to represent only their state. If that was the case it seems hardly fair that Tasmania have the same number of Senators as NSW which has 15 times the population. The Senate is a house of review and a powerful check on the government of the day. If you want to only worry about your state then Federal politics is NOT the place to be.
Kat,
I agree the behaviour in QT is deplorable but I disagree that we should have politicians just saying what they think. They are not the experts. They need to be advised by people who actually know what they are talking about rather than going in with their own ideas based on nothing more than opinion. It is obvious that Jacqui does not have a clue about carbon pricing and yet she has very strong views about it. That worries me enormously. With the composition of our current Senate, the fate of the world is in the hands of a few people. These few people, against ALL expert advice, have decided not to take action on climate change. I am also a bit concerned about Jacqui’s preoccupation with the military. We are spending a ridiculous amount on defence and everyone seems quite happy about that. We have enough people pushing the military barrow already.
I believe Jacqui feels she can make a difference which is a good thing but we shall see if she is up to the rigours of Senate Committees where you really need to know what you are talking about. I am not sure that the PUP Senators are up to reading and understanding every piece of legislation before the Parliament, because that is what they are expected to do.
As Rob said
“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
The road back is paved with those of humility”
Firstly, at the time Jacqui wrote that portion, it was not her fault that leadership had declared the party name as Australia united party and many members wrote the same name. Secondly, Jacqui seems to know her role better than her critic, it is to do both tasks, represent tasmainia/tasmanians and in so far as passing legislation look after the nation interests that arise in that sphere. Jacqui is federal and has no say over state power utilities, and the CPI rises of utilities and rent and housing rises seem to have been omitted from CPI figures conveniently. Jacqui will work hard to her people even the very one picking on her in this article. Why bite the helping hand.
I hope she knows how to listen and learn because at this stage she gives the appearance of being little more than a highly opinionated bogan. That’s a very dangerous thing to be for anyone, let alone a Senator. If she can’t get her head around Carbon Pricing – and she clearly can’t – how is she going to tackle broader economic matters?
Ok, I’m now fairly convinced she’s a dangerous idiot:
Firstly, Jacqui called it the Palmer United Party in every OTHER paragraph in the article so I would suggest it was indeed a typo. Secondly, what do you mean by “represent Tasmania”? Why would Tasmania have such a disproportionate voice – six Senators, same as every other state? You say Jacqui has no say over state power utilities – then how come Tony Abbott and Clive Palmer are saying they will legislate to make sure savings are passed on? Are they lying about their powers? And you are wrong about utilities and housing not being in the CPI
All groups CPI, goods component: Comprises the Food and non-alcoholic beverages group (except Restaurant meals); Alcohol and tobacco group; Clothing and footwear group (except Cleaning, repair and hire of clothing and footwear); Furnishings, household equipment and services group (except Domestic and household services sub-group); Utilities, Audio, visual and computing equipment and services, and Newspapers, books and stationery sub-groups; and New dwelling purchase by owner-occupiers, Pharmaceutical products, Motor vehicles, Automotive fuel, Spare parts and accessories for motor vehicles, Equipment for sports, camping and open-air recreation, Games, toys and hobbies and Pets and related products expenditure classes.
<
Each and every one of the new Senators can say whatever (stupid ?) things they like.
The proof of the pudding will be in the way they vote.
Spelling is irrelevant. Ideas are what is relevant.
Of course it’s ideas that are primary, but things like syntax, grammar, punctuation and spelling matter in the context of the conveyance of those ideas. We certainly don’t need to be overly rigid about them, and we can even be creative and playful with them so long as clarity of meaning is retained, but it’s crazy to suggest they don’t matter.
“It seems that some people are terrified of representative democracy if it starts to be representative.”
Representative of what is the question Terje.
I don’t want ill-informed people making decisions that will affect my life and that of my family. I don’t just want enthusiasm – I want intelligent factual debate. During her campaign Jacqui said the PUP would increase old age and disability pensions by 20% quoting specific dollar amounts. When asked how much that would cost she admitted she didn’t have a clue. It’s ok to have ideas but to make such pronouncements with no work done on the cost or feasibility is just silly. “Elect me and we will have free ice cream” sort of stuff. I have a sinking feeling that the PUP Senators have no idea of the amount of work entailed in governing and I have grave reservations about their intellectual ability to absorb the mountains of paperwork with which they will be presented. if they don’t truly understand legislation then they will be reliant on someone else to tell them how to vote. I am worried that the PUPs will become puppets, at the mercy of those who misinform them.
Terrified of representative democracy?
Ricky Muir got into the senate with a primary vote of 0.51 percent or just 17,122 first preferences. How is that representative?
Speaking of Ricky. This stuff just makes you want to cry:
http://www.hawkerbritton.com/images/data/Australian%20Motoring%20Enthusiast%20Party.pdf
Indeed
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BpvV3wuCYAEPhqo.jpg:medium
To Ricky, what is balance of power?
Oh, that’s easy, it’s when your pistons aren’t so big that they make your diff fall out but enable you to do perfect doughys in loose gravel. Everyone knows that.
Shoulda known that.
This is all very confusing and interesting.
Kaye’s piece has brought out a new cross section of commentators and that is the interesting bit. They are standing up and saying ‘good on Jacqui’ and how she is ‘representative’ of ‘us’.
Since the Senate is the “House of Review”, by its very name means there has to be some understanding, nay, even some legal nous in being able to attend to business it performs. If things are now more complex than ever before and all legislation must pass through there, it seems strange that just ‘any ol’ person’ can stand for the Senate. Being a ‘Representative’ is a whole nuther fish, I would think.
The idea of getting each of your 6 Senators for each State and 2 for each Territory to be up with the purpose and reason for the Senate’s existence, might be a little more important than just ‘representing’ your State. (There’s that word again; Represent).
Legislation and the running of our Nation is getting a little more complicated and complex.
Am I up to the job?
Hell no.
Is Jacqui?
I doubt it.
Are any of the PUP or Independents?
No.
I, however, would hate to put a restriction on who can run for Senator of their State ( or Territory), but I think the voter may have to be more responsible here, more educated in the way our system works, and more aware of how far flung the House of Review’s power is able to affect our lives and those who we interact with on the world stage.
(By the way; Jacqui sounds a lot like my older brother, but he would sprinkle more racism in there. He was a ‘Natio’ and dragged himself up to millionaire status. He knows he is better than me, because he ‘worked hard’ to get to his elite position. Stiff titties if I am but a carer and I chose to marry the wrong person who became chronically ill. My fault/my problem.)
Oh, and where the hell is The Brick with Eyes? Given he’s now a professional motivational and keynote speaker you’d think he’d be front and centre leading PUP’s senate media efforts. Maybe he’s busy formulating policies, like these:
Can I assume that there are NO basic education or aptitude requirements to being a politician?
mars08
Good thing these people aren’t held to 6 month performance reviews then, eh? eh? eh?
In speaking about dodgy Senators we can’t forget gun-loving Libertarian loon David Leyonhjelm (who wants to abolish the ABC and cut the guts out of the CSIRO) or Bob Day of Family First. The more I think about this new Senate the more worried I become. It’s total shite.
Jacqui in July, 2013… “What we will not abide by is a toxic economic dictatorship led by a minority.”
Irony much?????
Another disgraceful bogan Tasmanian infecting Parliament.
Most of the comment and also the the main article seek to criticise Jacquie for not being highly educated. Well Hallelulja, neither am I. I have replaced it with life experience and being an avid reader of news and a variety of literature ranging from Greek classics to “penny dreadfuls”.
I also like opera and hard rock.
I do recall that the reason for the Senate was to provide states with a voice. It was not really intended for Executive Goverment, but a House of Review as so-called Conservatives are wont to claim. One might therefore refer to “Conservatives” as “Rampaging Radicals” whose purpose is to reduce the Senate to a “Rubber Stamp”, as it used to be when I was a lad.
One might ask “Is Jaquie Lambie less of a bogan than Tony Abbott and Christopher Pyne who choose to ignore science; also Malcolm Turnbull who has bragged that he has always lived in Sydney Eastern suburbs ? Who is the Bogan NOW ??
Jacquie stands for Tasmania, a place with a deeper gene pool than Eastern Suburbs of Sydney.
She was voted in for that purpose not to be a sychophant of some opaque lobby group.
And finally, Jaquie is AUSTRALIAN not a pommy import.
I can’t help but wonder if Senator elect, Glen Lazarus, understands the semantic and philosophic implications of the banner quote from his personal website. If he does, it’s deeply disturbing; if he doesn’t, it’s still highly disturbing. http://glennlazarus.com.au/
“What you get out of life is determined by how much you put into it.”
That is simply trite bullshit. More than that, however, it is dangerous bullshit. It’s that sort of New Age, “motivational”, fortune cookie nonsense that lies at the heart of the mentality that says poor people deserve and are responsible for their poverty. I can assure the good Senator that persons like Gina Rinehart get a good deal more out of life then they ever put in. I equally assure the good Senator that someone like my girlfriend has never gotten anything from life remotely commensurate with what she’s put in. And, never will.
If this piece of demented inspiration fable is truly reflective of the psychology of its purveyor we have a problem.
Gerry,
Word to the wise: if you’re going to write in defense of someone, which is perfectly fine, of course, it’s probably not a bad idea to spell their name correctly.
Oh, and flag waving is a monumental alarm bell ringer for some people, myself included.
“And finally, Jaquie is AUSTRALIAN not a pommy import.”
Sigh.
“Most of the comment and also the the main article seek to criticise Jacquie for not being highly educated. ”
Could you show me where anyone has said that Gerry? I have certainly questioned Jacqui’s understanding of the carbon pricing scheme. When she says “I think it should be 3 or 4 %” it shows she has no idea at all of how it works. Considering it is probably the MOST important decision facing our government, I find it lazy and arrogant that she has not bothered to understand it, yet is certain that it should go. She says it has wrecked the economy when all the data shows that to be patently untrue. That means Jacqui is not doing the research necessary to know the truth. it isn’t that hard to find if you have the interest and I would have hoped that someone who wanted to enter Parliament would have thought it important to bone up on the facts BEFORE she starts shooting her mouth off on tv. When someone talks crap they lose credibility. It has nothing to do with formal education. I am no longer at school but I take the time to inform myself. Surely I have a right to expect someone who will be paid several hundred thousand dollars a year to do likewise since it IS her job.
And that’s the whole point. These people have put their hand up for a very high paying important job where they have our fate in their hands yet they aren’t interested in politics in any way. Glen Lazarus thinks it’s all about bringing back the business lunch FFS.
Terje,
No, I get truly frightened by the potential/probable scenario that an escalating series of reckless actions, based on stupid decisions, rationalised around dogma, may or will cause our own extinction as a species in the near future, taking a huge slab of the other life in the biosphere with it.
Voters deficient in mental curiosity or capacity or desire to improve either, electing intellectual non-entities based on not feeling any level of educational intimidation at their deployment of diction, that merely exacerbates my tendency to depression.
They believe the words of proven liars and choose to elect patent fools to positions of control of decisions, yet they shout as loud as the best and brightest amongst the clever and wise(not me btw).
(sighs)
Gerry, um, Jacquiye don’t seem all that big on science neither.
Kaye Lee,
re the post yesterday at 8:41 pm.
I have pondered for many hours(apologies to my boss for the reduced productivity) and I believe I understand.
You have been bamboozled by a literary koan presented by a learned zen-buddhist of the highest discipline. Stumped, you were, and you a connoisseur of the cryptic.
mary, you ask “who is Kaye Lee?”
I respond,
Where is Andriy and will Petra meet him there?
Why does Lady Kathryn weep?
Whence flew the Snowdens of yesteryear?
And what became of Susan Mison?
The last doesn’t answer the koan, it’s just random curiosity about my first kiddy krush.
Corvus,
You got a tongue prettier than a hundred dollar hooker 🙂
John A
Thank you for the metaphor; cheap and garish, jaded and false, stinking of dubious substances, and having venereal consequences.
You’re a silver tongued smoothie yourself 😉
I may be easy but I am NOT cheap!
She got elected, get over it. Better than those self serving, corrupt lawyers and union staffers that have been ruling us for 100 years.
Shityeah, Travis, enough of the semi-clever but corrupt, let’s give the dumb and dodgy a shot!
In the same way that arsenic is better than cyanide???
Look I do understand the support for Jacqui. People are rightly sick of the “political class” and empathise with Jacqui as dinky di (leaving aside assault charges and allegations of malingering).
But you have to understand, we are not talking about who you want to have a drink with here. Being a Senator is actually an important job and never more so than now with the worst government ever ripping apart the very fabric of our society.
If Jacqui is to make a real contribution she needs to lay down her guns and start doing some research and she also needs to be able to assess the credibility of her sources because she will have a lot of people telling her crap. This job is not a gift, it is a responsibility, and the decisions Jacqui makes will affect the whole world. It is not me that has to get over her being elected, it is her that needs to understand what she has signed up for.
I would not want to have a drink with senator Jacqui Lambie, Kaye Lee.
Many of her views I find to be obnoxious and ignorant, and apparently she’s a punchy drunk.
I doubt Jacqui would want to share a champers with me either cb but she WILL be making decisions that affect us for the next 6 years. We work with what we have got and try to set achievable goals. I would assume that is why ex-staffers for Tony Windsor and Bob Brown are helping them. They MAY have just sold themselves, but I hold the hope they are trying to advise.
I’ll catch and hold the ‘misinformed but well intentioned and in need of sound advice’ lifeline, Kaye Lee, but I reely got bad feeling about dat one, I fink she dum zelot no-goodnik.
Indeed! And in some cases they will ‘effect’ our lives for much longer. When attempting change to ‘common sense’ otherwise known as ‘cultural change’ has been ‘effected’ not just ‘affected’ (just possible given the total war that’s underway), it will be very, very difficult to reverse, particularly when the ‘model’ being advanced is the US cultural norms, which dominates the TV screens of this nation.
The advice they may be providing might be ‘technical’, in the sense that if you want to achieve outcome ‘A’ then you need to do ‘this’. And by the way when those bells ring, you need to enter the chamber. Yes new kids on the block need to be shown where the toilets are and the like. including ‘protocols’ at the most basic level.
Or it could be more at the ‘policy’ level. In which case, you need to understand that … whatever. And by the way, ‘understanding’ might require you to read this or that. In other words, you might need to leave you ill-considered views at the door or risk making a complete fool of yourself.
The roles of ‘advisors’ are (potentially) many and varied. One thing’s for sure, Clive needs no advice. He knows what he wants, and how to get it.
Just noticed that she has more than a bit of the “Sarah Palin” thing going on in that photo. Can you hunt moose in Tasmania?
“I can see Antarctica from my house.”
The carbon tax of “three or four percent” appears to be a couple of numbers plucked out of thin air without any basis in reality.
Throw in a few vague statements about consciption that may mean different things to different people and it also sounds like a kind of solution.
It seems that as long as it sounds good it must be a good idea.
That’s the problem with politics today – all spin and no substance.
Jacqui is off to a good start in that department.
So Abbott is a psychopath but Jacqui admires the politics of Maggie Thatcher. There’s a village in Tasmania that is missing it’s idiot. The media hasn’t had this much fun since Pauline Hanson..
Lee:
I think that’s because Abbott is a “political politician”. Unlike the other kind…
Lambie was a disgrace to the Armed Forces and no doubt she will deliver the same service to the Australian people in the Senate. Along with Mr Muir, the roo poo eater and advocate of underaged street burn outs , Australia is now inflicted with Morons that are not Greens Members…..who said it was a Lucky Country.
@mars08 Bwahahaha!
From Wikipedia :
“Her political involvement began volunteering for Tasmanian Australian Labor Party senator Nick Sherry. In November 2011 she joined the Liberal Party of Australia and later decided to run for preselection for the Division of Braddon”
“After eventually losing the preselection ballot Lambie decided to announce that she would still run in the election as an independent but was later informed that under the party rules she had now voided her membership. ”
“She then turned to the new party Palmer United Party founded by billionaire Clive Palmer”
Does this mean Lambie is a political politician too? Looks like she is for sale for anyone who will have her.
I feel quite ill. This woman is an embarrassment regardless of political viewpoint. Is apathy so widespread that the incompetent, the ill-suited, the crude bogan can all become members of the Australian Senate? There used to be higher standards…what on earth has happened?
Seems ‘merit’ is unknown among the elected. Unless they wish to apply it to someone else.
“Empty vessels make the most noise.”
Clive knows how to pick em.
Trouble is most people who are not equipped for a task don’t appreciate that they’re not equipped for that task precisely because they’re not equipped for the task.
Oh… I’m sure that Clive Palmer thinks that Jacqui is PERFECTLY equipped for the task!!!
Hi Kay,
Brilliant article, I for one am happy when politicians are stupid, it means you can understand what they are doing and therefore limit the damage they inflict. The smart ones are the problem. The ones who have only their own interests at heart.
But I agree with you nevertheless, if this woman is a ‘useful idiot’ then that will be just as damaging as the current crop of professional manipulators that represent us.
Thanks for a great read.
VM
“…you can understand what they are doing and therefore limit the damage they inflict…
Unfortunately others (including the media) sometimes cannot or WILL NOT pay attention to the foolish actions of such politicians.
Well said mars08, what are to do?
Sounds like she has been bitten by an infected Tassie Devil !
When you talk about eliminating stupidity from applied politics, the only direct immediate solution I can offer is mandatory broad spectrum drug and alcohol testing for all sitting members at work. At least the elected defects won’t be drunk and stoned into deeper stupidity, or coked and iced into narcissistic sociopathy.
Less noddies in the house.
I fully support what you said in your interviews Jacqui Lambie. I think it is very true that you must put the needs of Tasmanians first – after all is said and done – they voted for you.
As for you Kaye Lee – I don’t see how your attempted character assassination of Jacqui as a person can possibly be described as good Journalism.
Was your attack so personal because she is a woman? I’m just wondering. As a gay man I always find it interesting to see women attack another so vehemently. As I don’t know the answer I’m going to come right out and ask: “Kaye, are you gay?”
It’s okay if you are. Most of my women friends are.
David,
Since you agree with Jacqui you might be able to explain to me what she means when she says she thinks the carbon tax should be 3 or 4%.
Soooo David… as a gay man do YOU find it interesting that Jacqui opposes gay marriage?
@David
Oh goodie an ad hominem attack! Why do you twist comments you disagree with into homophobia? How is Kaye’s sexual orientation relevant? Kaye has focused entirely on Jacqui Lambie’s statements in MSM and it didn’t come across to me as vehement at all.
So far Jacqui has not been able to communicate a single policy clearly, yet communication is a very important skill for a politician. The only point she can find to attack Tony Abbott is that he paraded his daughters around too much. Really? He has made so many decisions that have a detrimental effect not only on Australians but on asylum seekers too, and told so many lies. Yet the only criticism Jacqui can muster is that he parades his daughters around. The diagnosis of psychopath can only be made following examination by a fully qualified and registered psychiatrist. It’s very unprofessional for someone in Jacqui’s position to call someone else a psychopath in the media without objective evidence to support it. I wouldn’t be surprised if Abbott has grounds for legal action over that.
BTW, don’t expect any support from your hero on the issue of gay marriage. She is dead set against it. Obviously she does not consider your marriage to be in the best interests of Tasmania.
Ms Lambie, your Facebook shows your advocacy for outting bullying in the defence forces. However, you were demoted in the military for assaulting an Officer…. good luck with your stupidity.
Agree, Lee. Ad hominem is the last resort of someone without an argument. Just BTW, Jacquie has said she wants to be Prime Minister. – Actually, on the record of Abbott, she could hardly be worse…. but her remark will give a fair assessment of her intelligence.
Lee,
I wish I could make a chocolate sauce as rich as that …..
Anyone know how to change your name by depol??????
Dunno, Allan.
I once submitted an application for reclassification with the Royal Zoological Society, but they denied my claim that I constituted a new and entirely separate species.
yeah Allan , go directly to births deaths and marriages, get form, pay 94 bucks, pick a name, and Bobs your Uncle, too easy, in the process my self right now 🙂
kaye your clutching straws trying to find excuses rather than face facts, it is a very common syndrome. the typo you mentioned wont affect anyone, just shows she is human as I too do similar occasionally. Your well aware of my state jurisdiction statement and deliberately tried to paint it differently, and you were unable to name Jacqui in your example and your example was not federal jurisdiction but rather federal power of negotiation, the very thing Jacqui will be useful at utilising for your benefit to INFLUENCE state betterments for Tasmanians. One commenter stated Jacqui put her home up for sale to run for Tasmanians, THAT IMPRESSES ME DEEPLY…Look. I’m not going to argue with you and hope you instead look at the realities and her good intentions. Nobody is perfect, our learnings are what give us ability and knowledges so do our failings. My backing of her is not party related it is merit related, I know her and TRUST HER, she is the most honest open politician of today until people like yourself close her up. To me she has put Tasmania back on the map here in Victoria.
“kaye your clutching straws trying to find excuses rather than face facts,”
I am not excusing anything. I am examining what our new Senator has actually said and questioning her understanding of very important legislation that she has taken a firm view on when she patently has no idea of what it’s about. Doesn’t that trouble you? Do you believe we need action on climate change?
My concern is that I doubt Jacqui is up to the task of truly understanding every piece of legislation that comes to the Senate which means that she will be relying on others to explain it to her. She is starting from a long way back in that she has not taken the time to understand things like the carbon pricing scheme before she ran for the Senate. That really worries me.
And as for selling her house to run for Parliament, if that is true, as a mother I find that far from admirable. She has two sons. Sorry boys, I want to play politics so we will have to sell our home? The cynical side of me says she was looking for the pot of gold and she found it. She will now be given several hundred thousand dollars a year to make decisions that will affect the whole world.
You say you know her and trust her…..ok that makes her a good friend perhaps. It most definitely does not allay my fears that she has no idea of the magnitude of the task she has taken on nor does it reassure me that she is capable of doing it. What she has said to date is far from reassuring and her stated aspiration to be given the job as head of our nation scares the crap out of me. Jacqui negotiating with the Chinese and Indonesians? Heaven help us.
Brian Woods,
If you truly care about Tasmania you should read this. And if Jacqui actually took the time to find out the facts she would realise that carbon pricing has put Tasmania at a distinct advantage to the rest of the country, and as the world adopts carbon pricing, it would put Tasmania way out in front due to their hydro capabilities.
http://theconversation.com/jacqui-lambies-carbon-tax-dilemma-what-is-good-for-tasmania-28807
And this….
“Hydro Tasmania has announced it is to cut about 100 jobs, citing the repeal of the carbon tax as a factor.
The state-owned power company attributed the cuts to the scrapping of the carbon tax, doubt over the future of the Renewable Energy Target, and a downturn in the consulting market.”
http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/article/hydro-tasmania-to-cut-about-100-jobs-cites-carbon-tax-repeal-as-factor/
These are the “facts” as opposed to the ill-informed rhetoric.
Brian, respect on backing the apolitical politician Jacqui Lambie based on her learnings and knowledges.
Your a man of you’re principles, and show the wisdom of the days of yaw, just the person to have on deck when the ship starts to yore.
There is a Brian Woods on the ABC news threads constantly, and other threads also, defending the Liberals and insulting everyone who doesn’t. I don’t know if this person is the same, but the command of language does bring him to mind. There are also apparently thousands of bots, set up by the Libs, who spew out mindless stuff for them. I suspect I have been arguing with some of them on the lib pages, until I was banned for quoting from the Budget….
Yes aravis, I too have been banned from basically all Liberal pages, including my local member, for quoting figures from fiscal statements. The champions of free speech apparently are only willing to defend bigotry….it’s ok to be offensive but not to be factual – an attitude often reflected by their supporters.
Sad, isn’t it. I am tempted to say they are willing to defend their own failings only. And to attack every person who tries to defend freedom. Which now begins to frighten me: if they are willing to murder by proxy – the Tamils – if we do not stop them, they will be willing, one day not too far away, to murder their own citizens, for political power.
aravis1,
I think they will continue on their leaning curve, honing the techniques of contributary manslaughter through neglect born of malice, before they feel comfortable instituting deliberate domestic homicide as an open policy.
When does inaction on climate change become a culpable act?
Sometime well after the repeated dissemination of deliberately false information on the subject for the purposes of personal profit or pubic mischief becomes an offense by law.
Or when justice turns primitive and naturalistic.
Made a typo last post. Mentioned a leaning curve. Incorrect. Libs do not lean, nor they lift or learn. They loft and waft.
I think you’re right, corvus boreus, but what worries me is that escalation usually happens quite fast once it begins. If they get away with it. Which brings it back to us -what are we going to do about it?
” One commenter stated Jacqui put her home up for sale to run for Tasmanians, THAT IMPRESSES ME DEEPLY…”
It’s a good deal. At the end of her term Jacqui qualifies for a fantastic superannuation package, and add that to the generous salary she picks up over the next 6 years with no qualifications whatsoever (in what other profession is that possible?) and she will be able to buy herself a better home. There’s a good chance we will be in a recession by then, so she will pick up a bargain. She can’t lose.
aravis1
I think if you lean Labor, you push them to look to their past and remember their ideals.
If you lean Green you push them to widen their policy appeal and continue their evolution to mainsteam acceptance.
If you lean to PUP you ponder “have I really thought this through?”.
If you lean Lib, slap yourself, then shit in a drawer and walk out the door.
And all of us should lobby loudly and persistently for a public and independent inquiry into entrenched corruptions in and around the federal political process.
I see exposure of the problem as the first step to a solution.
There is precedent…
“Six Italian scientists and a government official have been sentenced to six years in prison over statements they made prior to a 2009 earthquake that killed 309 in the town of L’Aquila.”
I think in the above case the scientists were treated harshly. Predicting earthquakes is not an exact science but it makes the point that language is very important.
“The scientists were found guilty of multiple manslaughter.
At the controversial March 31 meeting in L’Aquila, earth scientist Enzo Boschi, a defendant in the case, acknowledged the uncertainty, calling a large earthquake “unlikely,” but saying that the possibility could not be excluded. In a post-meeting press conference, however, Department of Civil Protection official Bernardo De Bernardinis, also a defendant, told citizens there was “no danger.”
It’s been along 10 months libs have been in, seems like 10 years already 🙁
Kaye Lee:
Given her parochial, narrow-minded attitude, I suspect that she wouldn’t even be interested in reading EVERY piece of legislation.
This woman Lambi is a thief, in the mid 80s she did a lot of thieving, scamming, there are records somewhere, but she only knows how to lie and thieve, her intelligence has always been in question her whole life, she is a dangerous shady character, and should not be in politics, she is a power grabber, but as dumb as dog shit,
Having read all comments I hope you will please indulge me just a bit with some of mine.
I must say at this point that I have serious reservations about *anyone* saying disparaging things about anyone else; no one can know another’s mind and if someone says they do then they are deluding themselves, and trying to hoodwink us too.
But it seems that a basic human trait that is so common to us all is missing in all observations people are making in their pretense of knowing what was/is on someone else’s mind whilst commenting – and that trait is compassion.
“If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion.”
I’m sure that Jacqui Lambie means well, just as I am as sure that Kaye Lee means just as well however, calling someone ignorant, or a scammer, or a malingerer, or dumb, or a power-grabber, or a political psychopath, or stupid and so on and so forth is not, IMO, the way forward. Let’s have some honey before the vinegar, eh?
Perhaps it will be the case that these PUP members can and will be able to shine some light and do a bit of good in what I think is, at the moment, a particularly soul-less parliament – we will see, but name calling wont get us good government much less get us good members of parliament.
This has been a wonderful article and my thanks to its author and to the many who have taken the time to reply – it has been very illuminating to read all the responses – may there be many more articles like it.
Chokyi,
I think you’re right about the name calling and pretense to know what’s in another person’s mind. I don’t think the issue with Jacqui Lambi is her motivations; we can’t really know what those are. The problem is she gives every indication, thus far, of a lack of capacity to undertake and meet the serious demands that a position in the Senate imposes. It’s arguably a far more difficult role than being a member of the Lower House where you can pretty much get away with doing little more than voting down Party lines and spending a few days here and there in your electorate.
It’s also a tiny bit disconcerting that she spent her first 48 hours as a Senator engaging in the very sort of behaviour you’re talking about. That’s not an especially auspicious beginning.
Chokyi,
Wise words. I hope I did not call names but I did use a couple of the terms to which you objected.
When I use the term ignorant I mean she is lacking in awareness of the nature of the carbon price and to me, that is just not good enough. It is too important to not understand and as I have pointed out it is actually advantageous to Tasmania to keep it so she really needs to know the facts.
The term malingerer came from the army.
“the department had deemed that she was a malingerer and ceased paying her military pension in addition to the medical costs her condition was incurring. A private investigations firm took five hours of footage of Lambie performing various household tasks and this evidence formed the main basis for the department’s refusal, however they later withdrew this evidence which resulted in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal accepting many of her claims but not those such as cupping therapy and gym memberships.”
My opinion about her selling her house is a personal one. I personally would not sell my family’s home to fund an advertising campaign but it has turned out to be a wise investment for her.
I superficially and conspicuously voice my regret at any offense taken by my directly referring to Senator Lambie(it’s the wool-uf!) as a ‘headkicker’, ‘like a deeper voiced Pauline’ and ‘a punchy drunk’, and inferring that she was ‘dumb and dodgy’, and an ‘íntellectual non-entity’ and ‘patent fool’.
I shall not call her such, or infer she is such, again, bar to repeat such statements in order to reiterate my regret in having previously expressed them.
Hope that cleared the air.
Ps, I did, conversely, also optimistically praise her pragmatism and persistence, in terms prettier, apparently, than a ‘hundred dollar hooker'(shuks).
Yes I am sorry (My fingers are crossed behind my back though) so I am not really sorry
BUT I will not call Ms Lambie, hows your fleece growing, bah bah 🙂 again….
so… about this sharp pain in my knee… Should I see my GP, or that well intentioned drunk just around the corner?
I’d check with the drunk first; orthopedic surgeons like a tipple as much as anyone ….
Mario,
Just tell it to stop whinging or you will cut off it’s entitlements.
My suggestion…stand on one leg for 6 months of the year…for the other 6 months lie down at your parents’ place
Dan, I do hope you’re not using the word “drunk” in a negative way. I don’t think you should be saying disparaging things about anyone else or criticising another’s mind or aptitudes.
I will leave on this note,bye till next time I hit the cyber waves and get my dose of sanity 🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2VCwBzGdPM
ROFLOL! Frankly and seriously, I think we all need a dose of mud-slinging, sadly. If we don’t get some relief from the mayhem we will all go bonkers and the government will be able to write us off, since people in the gutter are there by their own faults. And if some chick who can’t string 3 words together without making an error, gets up and tells us she is going to help sell the country down the drain because she doesn’t believe in climate change, then I will mud-sling with the best. I am so FED-UP I could happily go to jail for the publicity for the cause. And since i’m 74 and white-haired, I might just get some!
I did also once call Jacqui a ‘dum zelot no-goodnik’, but in my defense that was in the context of a private conversation shouted in a public space.
Letter from Jacqui to the Editor prior to the Tasmanian State election
“Time will tell whether my suspicions are accurate – but it would be nice for the people of Tasmania who expect professionalism, accuracy and balance in their papers, if those writing and editing in the media today, could give a guarantee that they haven’t been made well-paid job offers to work for the Liberals after next Saturday.
Sincerely
Senator Elect, Jacqui Lambie”
Would it be too much to expect “professionalism, accuracy and balance” from our politicians? Can you guarantee that you haven’t been made a well-paid job offer to work for Clive?
I detect an unattractive whiff of elitism in the criticisms of Jacqui Lambie above. Others seem to have found indications of character and intelligence in her public statements so far that I have missed. To me she seems unreflective and conservative but I have seen no signs that she is dumb and I have found her quite adroit at dealing with interviewers trying to trip her up with questions about policy. All the Senate newbies apart from the Greens’ Janet Rice are as dumb as dogshit on climate change, Lambie is no different. Fortunately (if Palmer can wrangle his mob) the damage to climate policy for now seems likely to be limited to the loss of the ETS. It is not unusual for independent senators (and PUP senators as I understand it are essentially a loose coalition of independents) to arrive knowing little about what, how and why. They learn on the job. Lambie is typical in this respect. I expect surprises, not all of them bad. One positive aspect of Lambie is that she is plainly contemptuous of Abbott. Of all the colorful characters on the cross benches in our new senate, by far the most worrying to me is David Leyonhjelm who arrives with a fully formed and very toxic political bag of tricks. To the extent that he is able to bargain bits of his agenda into existence in exchange for his vote on other matters, he is trouble. His position on deregulation of childcare is just the beginning.
“I have seen no signs that she is dumb ”
“We probably need to start that carbon tax at maybe three or four per cent”
It is not wise to have very strong publicly stated opinions about something you patently do not understand. And having no idea is just not good enough when it is such an important thing and will be the first thing voted on in the new Senate. It is reasonable to expect her to make the effort to understand it BEFORE she makes public pronouncements about how she will vote.
I agree that David Leyonhjelm is a worry.
“To me she seems unreflective and conservative but I have seen no signs that she is dumb and I have found her quite adroit at dealing with interviewers trying to trip her up with questions about policy. ”
Does this mean you are the person who understands what Jacqui means about a carbon tax at maybe 3 or 4 percent? Please explain it to the rest of us.
Stu’s wry observation of Jacqui’s level of knowledge of foreign affairs.
If she wasn’t earning $200,000 a year to make crucial decisions affecting our lives I could laugh at that video…tell a lie…I DID laugh…until I woke up and it’s still real.
Hi Kaye,
Thanks for your piece. With a new Senate just taking shape, it’s important that we keep the new senators and all our politicians to account. I just wanted to clarify a point about the role of the Senate.
In your article you write:
“You seem very passionate about Tasmania. In an article in the Tasmanian Times you said “If I am elected I will be the first Senator that will be delegated the portfolio of Special Minister for Tasmania”….More recently, you said on the ABC “like I’ve made quite clear, if it’s not going to suit my Tasmania, then I’ll be crossing the floor. That’s just the way it is. I have to put Tasmania first.” May I ask why you ran for Federal Parliament because you actually need to be basing your decisions on what is best for the world when you are running a country.”
In a reply to “Stephen”, July 3, 2014 at 12:19pm you stated,
“Stephen,
I’m not sure where you got the idea that Senators are there to represent only their state. If that was the case it seems hardly fair that Tasmania have the same number of Senators as NSW which has 15 times the population. The Senate is a house of review and a powerful check on the government of the day. If you want to only worry about your state then Federal politics is NOT the place to be.”
Whilst the Senate is a house of review, when our parliament was set up in 1901, the Senate was designated the States’ house whilst the House of Representatives was deemed to be the Peoples’ house. The reason each state has an equal number of Senators (12 per state, 2 each for the territories) was to ensure that legislation passed by the lower house, which would have different numbers elected from each state based on population, would not disadvantage the smaller populated states by giving them an equal voice in the upper house.
Of course with the development of the party system, politicians generally vote now along party lines moreso than in the interests of their states; independents being the exception. Having said that, whilst I’m no fan of Jacqui Lambie nor the PUP, when she wishes to vote in the best interests of Tasmania, she is in fact not doing anything wrong per se and is actually fulfilling one of her roles as a Senator. (It will be interesting to see of course if she is prepared to break ranks with the PUP if legislation does not suit Tasmania). Of course with a situation where senators hold the balance of power, the role of the Senator is more complex than just being a representative of their state. If we don’t like that, I guess we can always argue for a change to the structure and/or voting system used in the Senate. I think it’s important to have an understanding of how our political system works historically especially when it still has relevance today.
Thanks
Oh thanks, Scott.
A bunch of paras and a history lesson to tell us that Lambie is not breaking any laws by saying she will “vote in the best interests of Tasmania” (whatever that means). Well that’s a relief!
Jacqui’s Lambie’s first question. This question could have been phrased with far less offence. How much will she achieve for Tasmania with an attitude like this?
http://media.smh.com.au/national/selections/jacqui-lambies-first-question-5578855.html
Dear oh dear. Aside from Jacqui’s overly passionate performance, I think Penny is going to do a far better job of listening to the crossbenchers than Abetz.
The terrible things one here’s about Jacqui, some people are really nasty – this is what I was emailed.
NEW PUP SENATOR JACQUI LAMBIE – NOT A DISTINGUISHED MILITARY CAREER.
Jacqui Lambie enlisted in the Regular Army in 1989 and served 10 years in RACT and RACMP rising to the rank of CPL. She was subsequently reduced in rank for assaulting a colleague whilst drunk. She was injured on duty and the Army paid for a breast reduction to ease back pain. She deployed to East Timor but was deemed medically unfit for duty and was discharged. After a lengthy dispute with DVA, she was declared a malingerer and her Army pension stopped. The Australian public has been sold a PUP!
I got a powerful Pauline Hanson flashback watching that.
Running with a gut-level assessment of her statements and conduct(subject appropriate approach, I think), she seems to be fighting her battle by deploying a troublingly self-assured, non-contemplative combination of trembling rage with a god-fearing gleam.
I do not think that angry, imprecise hyperbole is going to assist in the quest for competent governance.
I am also an alcoholic who has contemplated self-extinction(both under control, thanks for asking), and although I do not proclaim these facts with shame, nor do I feel they would particularly enhance my suitability as a parliamentary candidate(nor, logic forbid, a prospective national leader).
I would respect and trust Jacquie Lambie a hell of a lot more as a parliamentarian if she learned some introspective humility, self-control, and learned lots more learning.
Perhaps ALP and NLP rejected Jacqui because she says what she thinks.That’s like a breath of fresh air in politics and would not be very popular.Perhaps , as a newcomer, she needs to tone it down a bit until she finds her feet.
I have just seen corvus boreus’ post of 12th July, just above. It should be sent to the woman, Ms.Lambie. It might help, even if it were only a test of her comprehension.
Palmer’s PUPs are no credit to Big Daddy; but you never know. He might be foolish to assume their lasting servitude.
I also noted another incisively phrased observation by our esteemed raven, on the mentality of Abbott and gang: “all interaction as exploitative opportunities, and all setbacks as grudges”.This is very insightful into the cursed species Wild ‘Conservative’. It sums up the authoritarian personalities I’ve dealt with; a vocation created for me by blessed fate.
CB is a peculiarly nice addition to this site; and a compliment to it.
“Oi, Jacqui, whadaya look for in a man?
‘A dick big enough to please me and a wallet fat enough to buy me shit.’
“Double thumbs up, ay Jackie!?”
‘Moi fur-coat. Two down, one to go, then I’m off to find some rich prick.’
From suicidal alcoholic malingerer to trash-talking, divine-inspired prime-ministerial aspirant.
Seated in unbalanced influence in the upper house.
Facepalm (with silently screamed expletive).
Balanced with,
Thank you humbly and profusely(and with attendent peculiarities), randalstella. You pulled me up gently on rash talk once, worded wisely and gently. I heeded.
I feel besmirched by the likes of this woman whom some misguided Tasmanians were inveigled to vote for. We will be paying her for the next 6 years, unless Abbott pulls the switch and calls for a double dissolution – . She is an absolute disgrace with her filth This talk is not acceptable in either a man or woman so don’t use the gender issue. She has obviously no social graces and doesn’t know how to behave in public.
Scary. I think it’s time to elect our Senate to the ratio of I:500 000 regardless of state. Along with this discount any preferences. As long as we continue to elect our representatives on the current system we will never have a system that can truly guide our government and endorse legislation. Currently, we have an elected government who are unable to push through policy for which the Australian people elected them. I have no problem with having elected person from any walk of life. They must, however, have a high degree of understanding of policy in which they are voting; Australias future standing depends on it.
jackee lambee from tassee ……… she makes our pauline (i’m from qld.) look positively charming!
The only hope we have to get this mess sorted is for the Prime Minister to call a double dissolution before the next election & let the voters decide ,hopefully we will get rid of a hung parliament & a few drongos as well
Hi Jacquie, love you, and appreciate your raw honesty, Congradulations on your new party, I have a question, who will be representing you in the seat of Cowper, THANKYOU, go girl power. Margaret Schaar.