I can fell the anger rising within me
"the left-leaning Labor Party (are there any others?) sees younger voters as a natural constituency"
Yoof and the Left. Two derelicts out for government dripfeed. Made for each other.
Australia's Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, has declared the "Mayan calendar was true," and told her nation to expect the end. "My dear fellow remaining Australians," Gillard says in the video below, "the end of the world is coming." The Y2K bug was not to blame, Gillard says, fingering the Mayans, zombies and even Korean pop …
"the left-leaning Labor Party (are there any others?) sees younger voters as a natural constituency"
Yoof and the Left. Two derelicts out for government dripfeed. Made for each other.
Was it a spoof or is it a double bluff?
Except they've mostly abandoned them to chase the ageing religious right. The yoof have all gone to the Greens.
"We'll only have gay marriage over my dead body ... and I'm taking everyone with me".
Except that the Labour Party are currently to the right of centre. Just look at their policies on immigration, gay marriage, environment, information... all to the right.
I can grudgingly accept the tendency of young people to be enticed by the grandiose sentiments that the institutionalised left likes to project as a facade.
You need a certain level of experience to see that it is all based on fantasies and lies.
The ones I can't understand are the people who are luvvies for life in the face of all evidence that rampant leftism is the root cause of a significant amount of the worlds evils.
Julia Gillard is the embodiment of every thing that is wrong with leftism.
I'm glad it makes people like you angry.
It shows that we're doing something right.
@Destroy All Monsters
Some of those "Yoof" are the "Destroy All Monsters" of the future.
Unless my understanding of time, ageing, biology etc are all up the swanee, "Destroy All Monsters" was a "Yoof" at one time too. People who were "Yoofs" developed everything around you. People who are and who will be "Yoofs" will develop everything in the future.
You sound like the type of guy that'd stick a needle in my kid's football just 'cos it rolled across your grass.
"He who is not a socialist at 19, has no heart. He who is still a socialist at 30, has no brain."
Variously attributed to Churchill, Bismark and Clemenceau
For years I thought it was my pa, but I think you're right, it probably wasn't.
"The ones I can't understand are the people who are luvvies for life in the face of all evidence that rampant leftism is the root cause of a significant amount of the worlds evils."
The technical term is "idiots". Or "useful idiots" if your name is Joe Stalin.
Would that be the "rampant leftism" that caused the "global financial crisis"?
Or two unending wars in the middle east?
Or the fact that in many countries it is still dangerous to be homosexual, or female?
Or which is tearing down the education system in the developed world?
Or which has been ceaselessly eroding personal freedoms and privacy in the developed world for decades?
Or, to break out the dog whistle, the issues we currently face with the world's climate?
Do we have many other problems at the moment? Pisspot cult-of-personality "communist" dictatorships don't really count as leftist I'm afraid, even if they are rampant, and those that remain generally don't pose much of a threat to anyone outside their own borders.
Right... that "rampant leftism". And in the end you're talking about what is effectively a centre-right political party anyway. It's revealing; that you believe it's either "leftist" or "rampant."
Julia Gillard is also not responsible for any of it.
@Sorry that handle is already taken.
Well said that man.
>the left-leaning Labor Party (are there any others?)
Are you reading theregister.co.>>>UK<<< ?
"Except that the Labour Party are currently to the right of centre. Just look at their policies on immigration, gay marriage, environment, information... all to the right."
Left, right, centre, terms that have no meaning outside of the French revolution, something which has preoccupied me for a few days now (due to the vacuous witterings of various empty headed Labour MPs)and reminds me of my academic training in the subject:
They're cliches, deployed mostly by the Labour party to heap opprobrium on the heads of coalition members
Compliments of the seasons to you.
Congratulations on dirtying the water a bit more.
Its usually been attributed to Lenin, but there's no record of him ever actually using it; so, like most people who mistakenly thinkthat North Korea is a communist country (you do, don't you?) you're spouting off on something you know sod all about.
Whoever said it, it's drivel.
>Variously attributed to Churchill, Bismark and Clemenceau
All servants of fascism. They would say that wouldn't they, Mandy.
Before reading this, remember that there are a LOT of retarded people right along the scale- and that racism or self-loathing are both pretty apolitical and just used as tools to get people riled up. Also, there's a massive difference between Capitalism and uncontrolled greed. So the below isn't a defence for the BNP or any other party with extra shit added on to a philosophy they don't really agree with. Annnnd with that in mind, read on- if you do downvote, please say why.
The roots of the Global Financial Crisis were in debt; most of this debt was for housing etc; banks were allowed- even encouraged- to lend massively more to people than they were sensibly able to repay thanks to a push (mainly from the Left) to 'make it fairer' for the poorer bits of society, to make it cheaper for them to own their own homes and live a more consumerist life without having to save or wait. Which isn't much of a right-wing sort of idea ("An honest man is one who knows he can't consume more than he produces", or words to that effect). Neither is the idea of 'too big to fail' which lead to Bailouts; you only get that in a controlled economy.
In a purely right wing world the financial crisis wouldn't have happenned because the loans would never have been given out to those who likely couldn't repay them. If it DID happen and if the gov't DID believe something was too big to fail, and failing because of surrounding conditions rather than their own failures, they /might/ be tempted to buy/buy shares in the failing company to help prop it up (meaning more employed people so more taxes in the long-term- throw in dividends, resale value, etc and it essentially pays for itself). But not to just chuck money at it as we saw in the UK with the last (Labour) government.
Whatever you political affiliation, I'll grant you that Bankers getting bonuses for failure is utterly indefensible.
Two unending wars in the middle east aren't because of any political side. The problem there was a total lack of planning or preparation or thought and the major player being a side who's got a history of getting bogged down in unwinnable wars.
Being Homosexual or Female is an apolitical problem, it's more a religious one. And sexism of all sorts will die off in a few generations if current trends continue- you just need to be patient. There's a lot of entrenched feeling in these areas that you can't un-educate from people. Fear of being called Sexist or a Homophobe for not actively supporting it doesn't help, though (current Stonewall adverts being a prime example- "Some People are Gay, Get Over It" is just designed to antagonise people. Seriously- I know gay people who are pissed off with it's combative tone).
Tearing down of education systems in the developed world IS a left-wing-derived issue. There's now so much paperwork, so many checks, so much restriction in the name of 'somebody PLEEEASE think of the children!" that it's a system that's become economically unviable. In the UK we either have or are about to introduce laws essentially punishing people for going to succesful schools- simply because the worse-off schools are in areas described as 'worse off'. One of the markers of worse-off school on the news yesterday was that spelling was frequently worse (e.g. dropping the "C" in acquired). That is a fucked-up education system and one derived from some half-baked left-wing 'class war'; it shouldn't matter WHERE you went to school- the push should be to prevent geography or educational placements from /ever/ being known to the recruiters rather than legislation against good schools.
The erosion of privacy is much the same; look at the roots of right-wing philosophy and they're pushing for a smaller and less controlling State and more and more personal responsibility. Only when you have an overly strong State will you get them spying on you too much so they can help consolidate their power.
Climate Change could be said to be driven by the Left or the Right; the hard-right would let those living in places that can't support them die (so you get wars, slavery, and the destruction of their natural world so the country can buy food to survive), the hard-left would send them all centrally-heated/air-conned Priuses and ship them food. But the basic problem is that we have too many people living too long in too small a place and living too well.
The only non-genocidal solution long-term is to find more space to live- and here the Left is stopping us colonising Space ("Think of all the baby incubators that could have been bought for that money", Massive protests at anything nuclear going into space- problem is anything non-nuclear-powered being a bit useless for the money, etc). The commercial world is only just making it possible now to get stuff up into orbit cheap enough for it to start making sense.
It's also generally the Left who are against building subsea habitats (in case you squash a sea slug), thought once you're in deep sea these wouldn't be much cheaper than a more flexible spacelaunch anyway.
So it's not just the Evil Right who are at fault for the wrongs in the world. The Left pushing for a better life for those who haven't earned it didn't help- they got people used to a life of unearned luxury on credit- and neither did the twats at the top who didn't think to clamp down on it sooner. Making money from selling debt to the poor as a virtue isn't Capitalist, it's just pure and simple theft and greed.
"rampant leftism is the root cause of a significant amount of the worlds evils"
and there was me thinking a lot of it was to do with famine, disease, religion, greed and despots - maybe your world!
"Julia Gillard is the embodiment of every thing that is wrong with leftism"
and Goat Jam is the embodiment of inane twattery
pp ix (it's still there ) by Ross Garnaut ( Economist and Mining Company Director)
" But then I said something that brought back the prime minister’s attention. ‘If we used the share market’s discount rate to value the lives of future Australians’, I said, ‘and if we knew that doing something would give lots of benefits now but would cause the extinction of our species in half a century, the calculations would tell us to do it.’
The beginnings of a smile on her face became a hearty laugh. ‘You’ve got us there, Ross’, she said, as the others were infected by the lift in spirits and joined the laughter. ‘That’s a unanimous decision of the committee. We’re all against the extinction of the human species.’ "
Or not ?
Ever since the Queen jumped out of a helicopter, world leaders are trying to find a way to be as relevant and funny to the youth of today as an 86 year old woman. What better way than playing up to the end of the world! Next up, Obama appearing on Celebrity Big Brother.
Don't be stupid
Obama is already on Big Brother
He lives in a public house filled with camera and when people get sick of him, he gets voted out ( except he won the elimination round this time and is the winner of this season).
Sounds like Big Brother to me
Deyyyyyy 382 and the inmates have to produce a working health service.....
If you had the US election by phone in votes you could make a profit
Julia has such a wonderful sense of humour and timing that only fools wouldn't appreciate.
In case those outside Australia don't get it, the man that wants to take her job (and that uninformed and lazy Australian voters may vote for) had predicted that the introduction of a "price on carbon" would be extremely disastrous for Australia. The legislation came into effect on 1 July 2012 and nothing has happened, and all the negative predictions came to a big fat naught (probably equal to Abbott's IQ!)
Well done Julia, we all need a laugh and relax a bit.
I certainly agree that she was obviously speaking in jest, and not telling anyone that there was a legitimate concern with respect to the coming of a new baktun.
There's such a fine line between "clever leader" and "pathological liar" isn't there?
In the eyes of a lefty, a 400% in power bills over 5 years (10-15% directly atrributable to the carbon tax) is "nothing".
Let me guess, you are one of the 20% of people who think Dear Leader has nothing to answer for over her criminal activities regarding the AWU, right?
Glad you are happy with Julia's performance though.
I'm sure she appreciates your support while she and Swannee are figuring out new and better ways to send Australia even deeper into debt so that even your grandkids won't be able to pay it off.
It takes all sorts apparently.
So let's look at your arguement, i take it you mean that electrcity has gone up by 400% in the last four years and of that 10 15% is due to carbon tax? Can you prove that the electricty cost has gone up that fast in the first place, secondly the rate of the carbon is in 400% been 15% is actually rather low. What were the other factors pushing the price up that is what you should be asking yourself?
On the politics of debt, you are in the relhms of kynes, Freidman and Marx and that is a discussion for another day.
Yes, it does take all sorts, and we are happy it does otherwise everyone would be very bored, wouldn't they.
Here is the logical sequence that we are meant to accept.
1) The world is going to fry due to "carbon emmissions" [sic].
2) Put in place a "carbon tax" to make electricity more expensive so people use less of it thereby saving the planet from certain doom.
3) Go around claiming that the carbon tax has made no difference to electricity prices. This is either a lie, or a tacit admission that it hasn't worked. You can't have it both ways.
WTF is "unreconstructed"? Un = Not. Re = basically, again. So don't these two prefixes cancel out? That would make it simply "constructed"?
Wow! I luvs mi sum English!
I think "unreconstructed" would mean constructed, broken, constructed again ( = reconstructed), then taken apart. Maybe.
Unreconstructed; constructed, broken and then deliberately not put back together again. Atleast that's what I'd assume. It's an Americanism though which means its true meaning bears little resemblance to what common sense would tell you.
From the dictionary:
stubbornly maintaining earlier positions, beliefs, etc.; not adjusted to new or current situations: an unreconstructed conservative.
The term comes from a specific use of the word 'reconstruction' related to the U.S. Civil War:
"The process by which the Confederate states which had seceded during the Civil War were reorganized and restored to the Federal system of government."
So 'unreconstructed' becomes:
"not reconciled or converted to the current political orthodoxy; unreformed; die-hard."
(quotes from OED)
Those who are unreconstructed shall be sent to the gulag for re-education.
If they fail their re-education, they shall remain in the pit, as they are not fit to be part of society.
They already live in Australia - where the fsck could you exile them to ?
perhaps they could ship them to England and have them a lap behind?
Pfft, hardly. They are just not AS far to the right as the Coalition, is all.
This would be the Australian Labor party, nothing to do with Nu Labour and certainly not the opposition to the Coalition.
Your failure to read the article amuses me.
The Australian Labor Party is currently run by a woman who was an active communist until recently. Since she entered mainstream politics she has attempted to obfuscate that fact by doing what she does best, telling pork pies.
They are as left as left can be without going full circle.
Being Australian myself, I know exactly which Labor party the article is about and I stand by my comment. They are not "left" in the slightest. historically they might have been once upon a time, but this has not been the case since the days of Bob Hawke, and the march to the right was cemented by Paul Keating. These days they are just marginally to the left of the Coalition, and certainly to the right of centre.
Incidentally, the Coaltion I refer to is the coalition of the Australian Liberal Party and the Australian National Party, who have been the opposition to the Labor Party for decades. And if I had been referring to Britain's Labour Party, I would have spelled it "Labour", since our Labor Party inexplicable drops the "U". I think the fail is yours, my friend.
Citation required, please. Are you simply confusing the colour of her hair with the colour of her politics? Labour is to the right of centre and has been for a long long time, ever since the Right Faction within it gained the upper hand. The Prime Minister is in fact a member of Labor's Left Faction, but the Right power-brokers are still very much in charge of the party.
"features a 15-minute excoriation of opposition leader Tony Abbott, whom Gillard accuses of being an unreconstructed sexist."
Its how she defends herself - anyone who criticises her deceitful, spin laden and generally appalling performance as PM is accused of being sexist.
She even accused an MP of sexism when he pointed out that she had presided over the 4 biggest budget deficits in Australia's history!
And the GFC had nothing to do with it I expect?
There could be another reason why Gillard called Abbott sexist: because he's sexist.
Read the post you're replying to. The GFC doesn't make the statement wrong, and doesn't make someone a sexist for mentioning it.
Of course not, it's because someone who has been a nurse or a teacher for 40 years gets a pension.
"There could be another reason why Gillard called Abbott sexist: because he's sexist."
On the one hand we have a person who;
Is married and has raised two girls to adulthood. A person whose wife and children all came out to publicly defend him after baseless accusations of mysogony were leveled against him. This same person has regularly done charity work for a local womens shelter where he lives.
On the other hand we have a person who has;
Had a string of affairs with the husbands of married women. She seems to get off on that. This same person has gone out of her way to defend a proven sexist (Slipper) and also another man who is accused of being a serial brothel customer using stolen money while he was also married with children (Thomson) because it suited her political aspirations.
And you call the first person a "sexist".
I ask you, which of those two has shown more disrespect towards women?
Please provide one example of how Tony Abbott is a sexist. And, no, looking at his watch is not an example.
I was appalled at the way her colleagues stole her line [voices off: he needs a mirror, he needs a mirror]. Then again, they are all politicians and so are self-serving.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017