Thread: Barnaby Joyce

Along the same lines as what Damien just said.

Many years ago I became involved in a political discussion with my grandmother. Her statement was that she had voted for Bob Hawke and yadda yadda yadda.

I tried to tell her that she hadn't voted for Bob, but in fact had voted for the local labor candidate in our electorate, and that he had been defeated. In reality, her vote had had no effect at all in placing Bob Hawke in power whatsoever.

Gran could not grasp the concept that she hadn't voted for Bob, She was adamant that that was who she voted for. Nothing could persuade her differently.

Just another example of how little most people know of how our electoral system works.

If people voted for the individual then the parties wouldn't have the clout to bring down the government.

The confusion you mention your grandmother had is common. Have a look at both commentry in the press and the "blogosphere" after Rudd was rolled. Remarkably widespread outrage that "they" had voted for "him" and how dare the party oust him without an election.

Our electoral system is not ideal. I was an advocate for preferential voting many years ago but in truth it just entrenches the 2 party system. Optional preferential is IMO a big step in the right direction.

Mandatory voting drags the outcome to the socialist end of the spectrum, which is why the coalition would like to get rid of it nd labor never will

If you want your head to explode read how senate votes are counted.

Unfortunately to fix our system we first need to improve education, that's the big issue.

Afterwards perhaps some tweaking of the system itself. I advocate disolving the states but only if the councils are suitably empowered and ideally the shires become aligned to federal seats and the elections combined. I don't know how much support such a radical change would have in the community. I truely believe local high reslution government is our only hope to save community in Australia, and ultimately our country and culture.

My word! We do take many twists and turns in these discussins, don't we??

Just getting back to the the subject of BJ

Why did he single out Cate?? I sometimes wonder if he shoots his mouth of just gete a reaction. Well he certainly achieved that.

It is also woth noting that th Great Vandal has taken the ball and run with it too.

The whole scenario smacks of hypocrisy, point scoring and downright ignorance.

Sorry, here I depart company from this. We all have issues. For example I can not differentiate between two things. Left Right, North South ets. People say its easy Look at the letter L it points the opposite way. They dont understand, Give me a choice of two things I dont make it.
Have I a low IQ. Well it depends on the IQ test. Add this in and yes my IQ Is low, Remove this and Im OK thak you.
Now If you wish to go through every human on this earth, you will find issues. Einstein was a dill at school and for some reason hated socks, does hating socks make you genius?
No no no, lets not look at others and think they are dumb, jumping to conclusions on scant evvidence is not for me. My skills oughtweighed my weaknesses and I was average. Einstein had a sock fettish but managed E=MCsq and probably was hen toed. Please consider at a glance you have no idea as to the substance of a person.
As to the origins of the thread, For one I was pleased it had gone as it had. If you wish to spawn crap the other forum has a thread as long as your arm and leg. It goes round in circles, like the song " On a never ending reel". Please let this thead live its life and fade a in a dignified way, dont try to breath a foul odour breath into its corpse.

rrobor,

My intention was not to question the worth of those people. The point I was trying to make is they may not understand the system and that many, not just low IQ but many people generally, are disengaged. For our democracy to be strong people need to understand the system and to care, to pay attention. I actually don't care what position they take, but I would very much prefer it to be well informed and thought out.

Artme,

I think she was singled out because she's a big target. Also you can argue she isn't a "normal" person. When a police officer or a judge is empowered by society beyond a normal citizen that comes with responsibilities, that's why they are often penalized more harshly when they are found guilty of unlawful behavior. KB wasn't paid to do that ad because she looks pretty in trousers, we was hired because of who she is. Her celebrity carries with it sway over some portion of viewers and it gets attention. Society has made her famous, and wealthy, and embracing that role she also accepts the consequences. She is a smart woman and should have expected to be singled out. The other actor would also, but since he's the lesser target he's copped less of it.

Now I'm not arguing that personal attacks on them are right nor relevant, just that they were likely.

Meowing at Penny Wong is stupid, childish and diminishes the parliament, but so does calling Christopher Pine a mincing whatever she said, or Julia Gillard a Ranger. They truly behave, well I can't remember behaving like that when I was 5, maybe I did...But then is the ultimate conclusion of the worth of this discourse the fact that people are watching and talking about it ? Maybe it says as much about us (as a community) as them.

It would be nice if Sen Joyce and all his fellow parliamentarians could be honest and complete and behave in a manner that makes us look up to them, but as I say, we hired them and when the 30 second soundbite gets dull we reach for the remote....

Damian. I wonder if Michael Caton didn't get so much flak because of (here it comes again) the perception that somehow he is a battler just because his most famous part was in The Castle?
Politics has been absolutely debased both by our representatives in Parliament and by the ones who are behind the scenes and selling their party through advertisements at election time.
If you sell a candidate on the same level as cornflakes surely they end up being thought of in the same way.
Do any representatives give their electorates regular updates on what has been happening in Parliament explaining why they voted how they did? So much has been left to the media to explain and on the whole they're after a quick, snappy story with an eye-catching headline.
Cheers,
Jim

Originally Posted by jimbur

Damian. I wonder if Michael Caton didn't get so much flak because of (here it comes again) the perception that somehow he is a battler just because his most famous part was in The Castle?
Politics has been absolutely debased both by our representatives in Parliament and by the ones who are behind the scenes and selling their party through advertisements at election time.
If you sell a candidate on the same level as cornflakes surely they end up being thought of in the same way.
Do any representatives give their electorates regular updates on what has been happening in Parliament explaining why they voted how they did? So much has been left to the media to explain and on the whole they're after a quick, snappy story with an eye-catching headline.
Cheers,
Jim

Neil Breen openly admitted that Cate Blanchet was the headliner because in a hypothetical movie with both her and Michael Caton, then she would get first billing. there's his logic...

The media's job is NOT to inform you. Many people misunderstand this. The job of the media is to keep you watching so they can sell advertising.

I don't know about Caton/Blanchet. I just suppose she's a bigger target. Perhaps your right and she is percieved as more elitist. She hasn't had a particularly easy life, but she has enjoyed sucess, is well educated and makes a point of using her position to advertise her views. I don't know.

As I say in a perfect world we'd debate the issue not the person, people would be honest and forthcomming with relevent information and the electorate would be well informed engaged and well educated enough to understand what's being discussed. Obviously we aren't in that position.

It's all bad. I don't think singling out the media nor the politicians is right. The blame should be spread right round for the situation we are in.

Sorry I dont get it. Fred Smith says the sky is falling in, Who the hell cares. Some actors states an opinion, Is that opinion better than yours or mine. You bet its not. So why is everybody getting their knickers in a knot. for the sake of the wee man lets get real. Please think your thoughts and stand by them. Is Cate correct, I probably am on her side, Or is she on my side?.

I am not supporting or justifying the personal attacks, i am trying to explain them. Not all opinions are created equal. A person who is prominent in the media can inflict their view far better on more people than you or me.

A police officer or judge have special powers, if they do the wrong thing they can potentially do more harm than you or me, and it can be harder to bring them to justice.

As you say in an ideal world we're all equal, but we don't live in an ideal world. People pay more attention to the views of celebrities, and of "scientists" for that matter. having a PhD in astronomy doesn't make you a climate expert, but people don't differentiate. That person is a scientist, they must know...and scientists themselves think this way. I know from personal experience that they are never short of an opinion even if they know no more than a lay person about a subject.

You could accuse me of the same

Did we all see Swanie crowing about the report that "proves" the government is correct?

It seem to me if comparisons with other coutries are made then we should be comparing like with like. "Our major trading partners" seems to be the bench mark he wants to use, Trouble is our major trading partners are highly developed industrial economies, we basically earn our keep by digging bloody great holes in the round.

Not saying the tax, or Barnaby, or Cate is right or wrong. Just think if we want to point the finger at other good examples of the case being put , then it ought to be a case of apples and apples.

Originally Posted by artme

Did we all see Swanie crowing about the report that "proves" the government is correct?

Just think if we want to point the finger at other good examples of the case being put , then it ought to be a case of apples and apples.

And that's the big problem, Dillard is applying a tax across the whole economy, while the Yanks for an example in California only, are applying it to electricity.

Dillard with her Dumb and Dumber mob have not got an argument.

What I'd like to hear is a politician saying, "I don't give a #### for the rest of the world, we're going to do what we think is right".
I'd much rather see action from honest belief than tinkering with an eye to the next ballot box.
cheers,
Jim

Thats a pretty interesting view of democracy Jim. I believed we put politicians in to take note of the general consensus of opinion and run with that. Its not about their view, its about a majority view.
Politicians are also given a term to serve to enable the humps and hollows of popular opinion to be smoothed out. You always hear one side saying " Call an Election " if numbers stack for them, and scream at the waste of money if an election is called early, when not in their favour.
Gillard is not my choice, but she is prime minister of this country and deserves the respect shown to the that position. Waldo, to my mind disrespects the office, and as such disrespects the country. To Waldo I say your vote is your way of removing those you dont like, but when our system selects a government, the office should be respected. What you do is insult the majority of the population of this country.