The Media, Ted Baillieu And Curry Recipes For Scotty
Even if you don’t follow sport, you’re probably aware that fans tend to see decisions by umpires and referees differently. Part of this is because the supporters don’t always fully understand the rules, but often it’s a perception thing. I mention this in the light of various journalists complaining that the public doesn’t understand their role and that any criticism is vastly unfair and, anyway, Twitter is a sewer full of rats.
If we continue the sporting analogy for a moment, it’s common for both sides to be critical of umpiring decisions. It’s also true that there may be a lopsided free-kick count from time to time. However, while it’s not common that officials will take to the media to justify themselves, it does happen. However, I’m yet to hear an AFL umpire get on social media and say something like: “My decisions shouldn’t have led to the vitriol and abuse. In fact, I’m even upset that someone said that I missed a crucial free in the dying minutes, but Carlton fans are a mob of pathetic whingers who lack basic good manners and breeding. They don’t have the intelligence to see what a great job I did and any criticism of me just shows how ignorant they are!”
To me, democracy is a fairly simple thing: People put forward ideas, either as a member of a party or as an individual, and everyone else votes for the person whose ideas they think are best, so it’s a matter of some concern when the media aren’t discussing these ideas but instead resemble football commentators speculating on which team is best placed to win and what last week’s result suggests about the upcoming finals.
The fact that the media can switch from: “But we’re just reporting what the PM said; it’s not our job to filter it!” to “There’s no basis for Labor’s scare campaign.” without seeing an inherent contradiction baffles me no end. And it also baffles me that they can say that Bill Shorten’s agenda was too scary and complicated in 2019, so it’s really outrageous that Labor have dumped nearly all of it and are trying to adopt a small target while overlooking the fact that the Liberals haven’t put forward a single element of any of their so-called plans for net-zero or the economy.
So with my rather simple view of democracy, I found Ted Baillieu’s opinion piece in the Nine papers rather perplexing. Ted Baillieu was a Liberal Premier of Victoria for two years before deciding to stand down after one of his MPs quit the party leaving it in a rather precarious position, so as someone who seems to understand the nature of needing a majority of votes in a democracy, his views on the independents challenging Liberals seemed a little confused. Apparently, their decision to stand was somehow wrong because they were challenging the next generation of Liberals and – if they won – we’d be missing out on a truckload of talent.
Now, I would have thought that it’s up to the voters to decide on whether these MPs deserve another term, but not according to Ted, who went on to list the many attributes of Josh Frydenberg, before adding how well respected Dave Sharma was internationally and following with something that made his praise of these two seem like sarcasm when he praised Tim Wilson for his “extraordinary diverse experience in public policy, community and human rights”. But no, it’s really naughty of these women to stand in what should be safe Liberal seats where we’ve but the best of the next generation to ensure that they don’t have to waste time with things like putting forward a case for why they think that a Coalition with the likes of Barnaby Joyce and Matt Canavan is in the best interests of the country.
When one of the big talking points of the election is Albanese’s mental lapse where he failed to recall some numbers, while ignoring Morrison’s mental lapses where he said, “Mr Speaker” on three occasions in a week instead of a day, you’ve got to wonder when we’ll talk about the big ideas and not play some silly games. I mean, I’ll bet nobody in the media asks Scott Morrison for a curry recipe and says that he’s not fit to be PM when he can’t recall all the ingredients!
We need to hear about what the actual plans are to ensure net-zero and an effective economy. Parroting the idea that we have lots and lots of jobs isn’t really an indication of the economy running smoothly. The fact that businesses are claiming that they can’t get workers is just as much a sign that the government is mismanaging the economy as higher unemployment.
While there’s every chance that the election will be tighter than the polls suggested a few weeks ago, there’s also a strong tendency to overlook the difficulty the Morrison government will have in holding on. Of course, it doesn’t help when the media keep asking Labor how much things will cost, while never asking the same question of the Liberals.
According to the framing, Labor spends money on things like infrastructure and education, while the Liberals invest in infrastructure and education.
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!
24 comments
Login here Register here-
Kerri -
A Commentator -
New England Cocky -
A Commentator -
Canguro -
A Commentator -
Michael Taylor -
Kaye Lee -
A Commentator -
Michael Taylor -
Michael Taylor -
Kaye Lee -
pierre wilkinson -
margcal -
A Commentator -
Michael Taylor -
A Commentator -
Phil Pryor -
A Commentator -
Phil Pryor -
Michael Taylor -
A Commentator -
Consume Less -
Stan
Return to home pageThis would be the same Ted Baillieau whose son has abandoned the Liberal Party??
The “independents” running for the Voices for Party, are a policy free zone.
Zero policies on economic development, taxation, education, foreign relations
A gaggle of opportunists
@ A Commentator: Independents are ”a gaggle of opportunists”?? I suggests this accurately describes current members of the Nazional$ ….. Beetrooter with his dams for coal, Gassie Taylor with his fear of alternative energy generation, Brigid McKenzie with her gun club ….. and that ios only three.
As for ”Independents ….. [as] a policy free zone”: you have to be kidding!! Representing the best interests of their respective electorates is hardly a policy free zone. In most cases their main policy is to rid their electorates of the damaging incumbent COALition incumbent best known for pursuing their personal pecuniary interests.
You obviously haven’t asked any of them for details of their policies. Or looked at their websites.
People should choose a political party.
re. the comment that “[people] should choose a political party”, the American psychologist Albert Ellis, the founder of Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy, famously coined the term musturbation, designed to illustrate the potentially dangerous use of modal verbs in one’s thinking and behaviour; words & phrases like ‘must’, ‘should’, ‘have to’, ‘ought to’, amongst others.
He was the first therapist to illustrate the capacity for people to seriously jeopardise their mental & emotional health through the incautious use of language; modal verbs & adverbs offering a prime example of language usage that can lead into psychological difficulties.
In regard to the above comment, the Wiki page on Voices groups in Australia offers this endorsement from Malcolm Turnbull…
“Indi and Warringah are not ‘special cases’ but templates for further change if the Coalition cannot deliver on climate.”
[He] …also called the growth of these groups as a “very very healthy development” that allows people to vote for candidates who align with their views.
And as for Independents being a policy free zone; zero policies on economic development, taxation, education, foreign relations, a gaggle of opportunists… hahaha!… as if the bunch of clowns representing the LNP are ‘better’… you gotta be kidding! A bunch of incompetent & brainless chooks running around the yard, squawking & screeching.
Albert Einstein famously noted that you don’t get improvements in any of life’s arenas through association with group-think; that it takes outliers and independently thinking individuals to observe and reflect and come to the correct conclusions as to which moves to take, which directions are necessary for change.
Thank you. There are political parties that cover the various points on the political spectrum.
And you’re welcome to be critical of the LNP. But you know what you’re getting. The Voices for Party are policy free in areas interest. I asked the candidate in my electorate whether she has an option on Ukraine. She deleted the question. I thought something might have gone wrong with the system, so I asked again. She blocked me. That’s how sensitive and unresponsive they are.
AC, it is disappointing to hear of her response.
Politicians aren’t doing themselves any favours by shutting down the channels of communication with their constituents.
Matthew Guy did that to me. I had never responded to any of his tweets, yet he went ahead and blocked me on Twitter. 🤷🏻♂️
Fortunately my local member, Helen Haines, is nothing like the independent for your electorate. Our electorate knows what Helen stands for.
Firstly, the Voices for/of groups are not a political party and the candidates they select are not a collective group.
They will never form government so will never have the opportunity to do anything more than vote on taxation legislation so asking an individual to publish a comprehensive tax policy platform is unreasonable and pointless. Likewise, they will not be dictating foreign policy. But they will be free to vote on legislation based on its merits and what their constituents want rather than on what a party whip tells them to do. They were chosen by their communities to represent their communities.
They can also give the major parties the nudge to do what must be done if they hold the balance of power. Tony Windsor was a great loss to parliament. To replace him with Barnaby Joyce is a cruel joke.
In the current circumstances, it is reasonable to ask a political candidate about their attitude regarding Ukraine. That war has the greatest potential for nuclear war in 40+ years.
It is a reason that I’d prefer a stable, mainstream party in office, without the need to rely on some opportunists that are going to make up their position as they go.
It is reasonable to get a starting point attitude from an independent on economic development and taxation
Are they concerned about public debt? Or are they an adherent to MMT? I want to know that about any political candidate.
My suburb has the world’s highest density of independent schools. A minority ALP government that relies on the support of Greens and independents may come under pressure to review the funding. It is a reasonable issue to address to a candidate, particularly in my locality.
I could go on and justify why an independent can be expected to publish a starting point, but I won’t.
I consider the Voices for…a party because-
1. They all have the same basic reason for their candidacy
2. They all use the same marketing, branding and colour
3. They a have the same major donor
4. They are all selected via the same co-ordinating organisation.
However they lack the leadership and coherent policy framework that makes political parties useful
Kaye, that’s exactly what Helen stands for: what her electorate wants. Her community wants more done to mitigate the dangers of climate change, and local businesses and households want a better NBN, among other important community issues.
She could teach a thing or two to the candidates from the major parties about community consultation.
Come to think of it, I haven’t heard a peep from the Labor, Liberals, Greens or Nationals candidates. They will never know the needs of the electorate because they don’t speak to us. Helen, on the other hand, is a veritable chatterbox when it comes to keeping her electorate informed on what she’s been doing.
AC, aren’t you being a bit subjective?
I don’t think that is true. Voices of isn’t confined to the teal candidates.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voices_groups_in_Australia#cite_note-30
I think the thing that many of the candidates have in common is that they are Liberals who feel the party has moved too far to the right. The moderates have lost out to religious nutters, climate change deniers, xenophobic nationalists, bigots, and greedy ambitious drone apparatchiks. They want action on climate change and corruption. No wonder they are attracting a concerted hit campaign from the Coalition. Those are their two worst things but arguably the two most important things for the country – probably more important than Ukraine which I very much doubt you believe will result in nuclear war.
” Labor spends money on things like infrastructure and education, while the Liberals invest in infrastructure and education.”
True observation of the nuanced use of words, but didn’t scotty concede that Labor builds and Libs pay for it all?
A Commentator has a completely mistaken idea about the role and value of independents.
Kaye Lee pretty much sums it up.
I have been a swinging, non-Liberal voter for many years.
In 2022 I am actively supporting my local “teal” candidate because I’m sick of the incompetence, unfairness, dishonesty and corruption that is the LNP.
It is rare for independents to introduce legislation so I don’t expect her to have a raft of fully nuanced policies and set-to-go legislation in her kit.
I support action being taken on both climate change and corruption.
On all other legislation, I expect a certain set of guiding values and principles. My candidate’s attitudes to the various broad-based categories of interests in her platform indicate how she will vote when the major party in power puts up legislation in these various areas.
I “do” expect, especially in a hung parliament, that in line with her values and principles, my candidate will give a thumbs down to bad legislation, a thumbs up to good legislation, and a cautious ” come back with some improvements” to legislation that is heading in the right direction but isn’t there yet. Herein lies the major value (to me) of independents.
Liberals and Labor are so wedged that they have nowhere to manoeuvre, the first to do so, if they dared, being shot down in flames by the other party.
I see the value of independents in forcing change on both parties by influencing the legislation that is put before parliament, one bill at a time.
If we hope to see the desperately needed improvements in parliament …. vote for a credible independent (teal or otherwise) if one is standing in your electorate, and in all circumstances Vote Liberals Last.
** Do you think it’s reasonable to establish the starting point for an independent on a few issues?
** If they are an adherent to MMT, and you’re not (or vice versa,) does that matter to you? It does to me. One of the “Independents” sites that is supporting the candidate in my electorate is ardent in its support of MMT. I’m not.
I doubt whether most voters in my electorate know what MMT is.
** If they’re sympathetic to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and you’re not, do you think that matters?
I note that a number of her supporters are sceptical about the motives of those supporting Ukraine.
I see that issue as important.
…we aren’t electing an empty vessel, to be filled with ideas from their cheer club, I hope. Because a lot of her supporters have very marginal ideas.
margcal, that’s a common feature across all threads.
Yes, it is fortunate that seeking popularity and acclamation has never been my forte
The comediantator attempts levity, but would not qualify for the heats.It’s not his forte, or fifte, or even naughte. The comments are fair and acceptable, so carry on being positive, less fixated, as we all have a go; otherwise the bone headed obsessions reduce this site’s value.
It is also fortunate that I’ve never been interested in entertaining dull, humourless types
Looking in the mirror, again? Autoperversion…
I’d dispute that. 😁
There are a small number of exceptions, eg, present company
I emailed my UAP candidate about their policy on climate change, no reply, not surprising.
Doesn’t take long these days to tune out the talking heads from Lib-Lab, they are both equally disingenuous. The term ‘net zero’ gets bandied about in the same breath as talk about the Cruise ship industry restarting – with its massive carbon footprint, great. We are told carbon-capture tech will save the day, even though it is not proven feasible anywhere in the world. We are told electric cars are carbon neutral – even if Aust were 100pc powered by hydro it would still not be true. The Aust economy has been a casualty of poor govt decision-making and not a virus with a 99.8% average chance of survival. One prime example is nursing where nurses worked for a year through the ‘pandemic’ without getting jabbed and then when the gene-editing trial was given the green light by the TGA and ATAGI (famous for its “opportunistic sedation” advice April 2022), those who refused to join in the experiment were shown the door. The health system idiots who mandated this event then went on to complain about lack of nursing staff resulting in ambulance ramping. If Aust had followed the lead of Sweden our debt would be a fraction of what it now is. Sweden has increased national debt by about 2pc since 2020, Aust by about 100pc. Meanwhile back in Shanghai, looks like the turf-war for control of power in China is being played out as ‘here is how you do it’ invitation to Western nations. Smash the locals with the yellow, green, red virus pass to keep them in check. Lucky the CCP is good buddies (I won’t say bribers of) with the WHO, as it will the WHO that tells our govt what to do. Taking marching orders from WHO looks less bad doesn’t it?