Ten Interesting Questions That Somebody Should Have Asked Going Back 100 Years or So
Rossleigh
When the prostitute revealed that Craig Thompppson (yes, I know the “p”s are silent and absent except when he signs his credit card) was one of her clients, why didn’t someone ask if she had any other interesting clients whose names she’d like to reveal?
Why do people keep saying that the Anzacs fought under the Australian flag to keep us free, when they were fighting under the Union Jack and their first assignment was to invade another country?
Why has nobody ever done an interview with Khemlani since the loans affair? You know, one of those where are they now and how do they feel about bringing down an Australian government?
Why on earth did Fairfax report about some “poor” people missing out on the ballot for Heston’s “Fat Duck”, when clearly anyone who can pay the $525 plus drinks to eat there has made their money by exploiting the financial system in the same that the scalpers are doing?
When you click on hyperlink inside an online article you’re reading, do you risk getting distracted and never coming back to the thing that you started reading in the first place?
Why are headlines so much more interesting on other people’s newspapers, and twice as interesting when you’re too far away to read over their shoulders?
Why aren’t I in charge of the world when the first thing I’d do is tell everyone is: “Take the rest of the day off, unless you feel that you’re really necessary today. By tomorrow, we’ll have worked out what are the jobs that really need to be done if we’ve noticed you missing. Then we’ll call you to come in. And we’ll keep doing that until we only have people coming to work because they’re needed not because they’re being paid. Until then, we’ll keep paying you so that the economy doesn’t grind to a halt because of the unemployment problem. If you can work out something useful to do while you’re waiting for us to call you back, let us know and we’ll keep paying you anyway and get someone else to do your old job..”
In Victoria, we are being treated to Liberal Party ads that suggest that voting Labor will be electing an “Andrews/CFMEU government”. Why do I suspect that if Labor are elected, they won’t accept the idea that the CFMEU have a clear mandate to govern in conjunction with Daniel Andrews?
Why – considering politicians seem much more intelligent after they’ve left office – do the articles by Amanda Vanstone, Peter Costello and Peter Reith make me think that they must actually believe the dribble that they’re writing? (Actually, in Costello’s case, I think it’s loyalty to the Liberal Party. Many thought that when Howard was accused of “dog-whistling” it was about racism; it was actually just his was of telling Peter to stop counting numbers and sit. Then Howard would tell him to roll over and say, “Who’s a good boy then.” Peter used to be terribly disappointed that he never got his tummy tickled and he’s still waiting)
Why do we have so many lists that stop at ten?
Why do people presume that I’m a Labor supporter or a lefty, just because I happen to think that rational thought, educated people and examining all possibilities is preferable to strange “Tea Party” concepts like “Jesus never had a deficit”, “If God liked scientists he’s have made us all intelligent” or “Having sex standing up is wrong because it may lead to dancing!”?
