The day the Premier resigned

NSW Premier Barry O’Farrell has been found to have received a $3,000 bottle of 1959 Penfolds Grange as a gift, which he failed to declare, and failed to admit to ICAC, conveniently suffering from memory failure, and has accordingly resigned this morning.

Before all thoughts move to who will move on up into the top spot, our anti-lockout friends at I’m Not The Problem Barry – No Lockouts NSW have been taking advantage of this scintillating story to have a bit of a laugh. The full gallery is here, but some of my favourites are below!

alcoholrelatedcorruption

iguessivehadmylastcabernetmeeting

whinesforlockoutslockedoutbywine

chrisnewman

 

 

 

When hatred blinds its sufferers

C

haucer—not the great one born in 1343—writes more about the Indonesia/Australia spying revelation that is no revelation to the worldly. The resultant mistrust, however, and deep resentment toward the ABC and its director Mark Scott, is put into a perspective by exposing further collateral damage caused by those who seek to punish the Abbott government for a decisive victory at the polls.

Patriotic and decent Australians can only hope that the damage done to international reputations was an oversight by the zealots and was not a future template of a mind devouring hatred seemingly beyond reclamation.

GC.Ed.@L.

“Pathetic”, describes the rabble of Neanderthals burning cheap computer printouts of the Australian flag outside our Embassy in Jakarta recently.
Equally pathetic was Indonesia’s blackmail attempt to subdue Australia into bootlicking servility—again.

The UK Guardian, the Australian Guardian, Fairfax media, the ABC and SBS, all comrades in lockstep from the dedicated Left, deemed it clever to publish stolen and untested information from an American traitor whose motive, ideology and psychological condition is unknown. Well known, however, is that every mature person on earth understands the need for collecting intelligence in today’s world of terrorism—except the above-mentioned media and ABC director Mark Scott, it seems.

Read on

 

Rebelling Against A Red Media

Front

Keith Topolski looks at how Rob Ford can admit to drug use, yet retain steady approval as Toronto Mayor.

Basic human psychology tells us that people don’t like to be wrong. They don’t like to be told they’re wrong, either.

In 2010, the city of Toronto was a basketcase because it was being used to create a socialist utopia. As Kelly McParland in the National Post writes:

Voters were fed up with eight years of financial profligacy by a left-wing council that treated the city like a cookie jar they could use to finance personal fantasy projects. Grass roofs, bike lanes, taxpayer-financed self-glorifying retirement  parties, legal crusades on the public dime to defend the wounded feelings of oversensitive councillors, an arrogant union environment in which labour bosses assumed they could have their way if they simply issued enough threats.

 Consequently, the mainstream residents of Toronto (that is, anyone whose politics are to the right of Karl Marx) elected Rob Ford as Mayor.

It is worth remembering that, when he was elected in 2010, Rob Ford’s rather questionable personal behaviour was put out for all to see and, yet, he still pulled 47% of the vote, ahead of the preferred candidate of the progressive establishment, who had a spotty record when it came to spending public money.

I raise this because it goes to the heart of why Ford was elected and why progressives despise him with a hatred rivalled only by the intensity with which Fairfax loathes Tony Abbott.

See, Rob Ford is a fiscal liberal in every true sense of the word. He went after the union movement and pulled them in to line. He repealed a $60 car registration tax implemented by the left. He subcontracted out half the city’s garbage collection. He declared Toronto’s transit an essential service, which, under local laws, transit workers were banned from going on strike.

It’s enough to make any conservative shed a tear of joy. And, of course, enough to make any genuine progressive apoplectic.

Which explains why the progressive media (Sorry for the tautology) have made such a big deal out of going after Ford, and why the rest of the media just don’t get the whole debacle.

To properly understand where the concept of Ford Nation comes from, all we have to do is simply look at the electoral map from Rob Ford’s 2010 victory.

As you can see, The pre-1997 edition of Toronto was Marrickville on steroids. However, in 1997 the old Toronto City Council merged with surrounding councils to form a megacouncil which takes in almost all of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA).

Since then, it has been the progressive Marrickville type issues which very few people have time to worry about (And which they wouldn’t care about even if they had the time) dominating inner Toronto, and more mainstream issues, like roads, rubbish, childcare and taxes, which dominate Ford Nation in the suburbs.

This divide has motivated the inner city to try and take back ‘their’ city, and their media arm has pursued Rob Ford to hell and back. I can’t put it any better, so I’ll let Michael Coren of the Toronto Sun say it:

It says a great deal, however, that a mayor of Toronto with more hidden skeletons than Hannibal Lecter can still run the city most efficiently and far more economically than a leftist predecessor who was a squeaky clean gentleman. It’s that, of course, that so irritates the grimy coalition so enraged at Ford.

Contrast this with the rather softer reception Justin Trudeau has had since he admitted, almost proudly, that, as a serving Member of Parliament who is sworn to discharge his duties in accordance with the law,  to puffing on a joint in breach of the law.

No, Justin gets off easy because he’s part of the progressive love-in. Speaking of love-ins, Justin’s old man, Pierre, Canada’s most famous ex-PM, was no slouch in that department, but everyone thought that was adorable for some reason.

No, judging from the coverage of other scandals, it seems Rob Ford’s real crime has been to be a politician who preaches the virtues of small government, and also delivering on a smaller government.

This is where Ford Nation’s loyalty should end, though.

Ford has delivered what he said he would. Surely, now, is the time to let him go.

Well, actually, no. This is simply the Pauline Hanson phenomenon repeating itself.

When Hanson first came onto the scene, she outlined a philosophical framework which was, save for one or two observations about affirmative action, overwhelmingly out there.

Instead of go after the policies, Labor went after the person. And conservative Australians, who had some sympathy for Hanson’s arguments but not enough to vote for her, were pushed into her corner in order to defend her from the bullying of the big bad leftie.

This is exactly the reaction that Ford Nation is having in defending a man who has, really, behaved in an indefensible manner.

The political apparatus working against Rob Ford even includes the Toronto police chief, who made comments which, if were made about any private citizen, would immediately create grounds for mistrials until the apocalypse.

Federal Opposition Leader Thomas Mulcair is even trying to link Ford to Stephen Harper over this episode, simply because all conservatives must now be crack smokers if one of them is. Can’t see why that argument wouldn’t stand up.

So it has come to pass that Rob Ford, a man who should now be in rehab and addressing his considerable personal problems, will continue as Mayor, in a diminished capacity, while the leftist media use him for target practice.

I have always believed that voters can forgive most things in politicians, but never hypocrisy.

However, Rob Ford continues as Mayor with the blessing of, what should be, the very type of conservative voters who would hound a drug addicted hypocrite from office.

This is what happens when a broad movement, in this case the Toronto leftie elite, treat average people with contempt.

If the anti-Ford brigade are to have any chance of stopping Rob Ford, incredulously, being returned as Mayor next year, they must ask themselves, in the manner of Michael Sheen’s portrayal of Tony Blair, “How much Why must do they hate us if they like this lot guy more?”

Keith Topolski is a regular contributor to Menzies House, with a particular focus on Canadian politics.

LABOR 2013: THE AFTERMATH

After what can be aptly described as the most self-destructive episode in the history of the Australian Labor Party – and yes, I say this even considering the splits of 1917, the 1930s, and 1950s – Labor is now electing its new parliamentary leader writes Michael Smyth  

However for the first time in its history it is allowing its rank-and-file members a direct vote. 50% of the vote will be comprised of the caucus, and the other 50% will be comprised of rank-and-file members. The reforms that led to this may be referred to as a parting shot at the ALP, or mischief, by a nihilistic Kevin Rudd, intent on making them pay for his humiliation at the hands of Julia Gillard.

This may also be cynically called for what it is; window dressing designed to shield the fact that the ALP rank-and-file do not have direct preselections, and are still beholden to the factions. It does provide the ALP with a rare chance to return to its roots and begin being a party that stands for something other than professional hacks with little or no real life experience outside a staffer’s office, or the union movement.

For too long, many would say since the 1990s, the rank-and-file have been neglected, and that Labor had turned its back on its values after the 1996 federal election.  Some might even say that they did so at an earlier juncture, but whatever the case, the fact stands that the ALP is no longer a party of mass appeal, but a catch-all machine designed to win at all costs.

To promise whatever it needs to promise in order to win power, and then maintain it, without letting those promises get in the way of governing.  However, it seems that despite Rudd’s mischief, the bloodletting in the aftermath of the 2013 federal election has been relatively civilised.  

Rudd stepped down with a grace that was absent after his removal by Gillard, albeit after gloating that the ALP had not been utterly destroyed in a Coalition landslide. The men most likely to contest, duly put their hands up to nominate for the leadership.

What is relatively civilised about this is that neither of the men has attacked the other, although the same cannot be said about certain supporters of each nominee, both inside caucus and among the community at large.  Let’s look at each of the nominees for the ALP leadership.

Bill Shorten, a former Secretary of the AWU holds a BA/LLB, came to prominence during the Beaconsfield mine collapse and upon election to Parliament in 2007, was immediately appointed as a Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children’s Services and subsequently pushed for a National Disability Insurance Scheme.  

In 2010, he urged Julia Gillard to replace Rudd as Prime Minister, and shortly after he was promoted to the Ministry, further cementing his power base within the caucus and the ALP at large.

Anthony Albanese, a former staffer to Tom Uren (a one-time deputy leader of the ALP), who holds an Economics degree from Sydney University, professed a devout commitment to progressivism in his maiden speech. He has enjoyed a gradual rise to prominence, eventually becoming Leader of the House after Labor’s victory in 2007.  

Due to his relentless attacks on Tony Abbott, and his admission in 2012 that he likes “… fighting Tories.  That’s what I do”, he became popular within the ALP as a headkicker.

There is plenty more written about these two nominees elsewhere online and in print, but what is important to note is that both of these nominees are strong performers, and whoever wins the leadership will probably provide a strong challenge to the Coalition government.  However, the dangers for each are as follows.

If Shorten is elected as Leader, he will have to overcome the perception that he is dishonest, untrustworthy, and – in the words of a Left-wing friend – “poison”.  If Albanese is elected as Leader, he could face the same relentless negativity that he directed towards Abbott, ironically while referring to Abbott as nothing but negative.

Shorten has the ALP establishment behind him, but Albanese has the rank-and-file backing him.  For this reason, some on the Right have dismissed Albanese as a credible leader for the ALP, but they forget that Abbott was also once dismissed as ever being a potential party leader. This was despite the fact he was appointed by John Howard as Leader of the House.  

Albanese and Abbott are, in a perverse way, similar in terms of their pugilism in regards to political opposition, and in a mature way, similar in terms of their passion and beliefs.  The differences between the two are about values first, ideology second.  Were they outside politics they’d probably be good friends, but politics is a battle of ideas that leaves no quarter in terms of its engagement.

Shorten is a machine man, lacking the passion to invigorate a demoralised and dysfunctional Labor Party, but he knows how to manipulate the media.  Albanese is a vulgar man, who prefers brawl to brainstorm, but he has a passion and genuine belief in his causes, and should be noted and respected as a credible threat to the prospective hegemony of the Centre-Right in Australia for the next decade.  

If Shorten wins, and in the first term that is highly unlikely, barring a Great Depression style event, he will be burned by defeat at the next federal election, and forced to step down.  If Albanese wins, however, he could end up going the same way as Beazley in 1998; winning the popular vote, but not enough seats in the House of Representatives.  

Who will win the contest for the leadership? The prize of which is to drink from Labor’s cup of sorrows, a poisoned chalice the likes of which are rarely seen in the democratic world. It must be noted that neither of the nominees should be underestimated, whoever wins.

For the Coalition to take for granted the idea that they have at least six years in power would be extremely unwise. Labor did that in 2007, and they failed to win the election in their own right in 2010. The following three years of minority government were amongst the most polarising in living memory and looked back on with bitterness by the majority of Australians.  

The next three years, for both Labor and the Coalition, must be years of healing, but the task for Labor is much greater, as they are yet to start.

Michael F Smyth writes from Brisbane, Queensland 

Agenda 31: First, castrate all the Conservatives

New MH2

Hatched in the social laboratories and classrooms of our tax-funded learning institutions comes the new Politically Correct, Agenda 31—the neutering of common sense.

The fungoid do-gooders have re-branded as Correctionalists and their mission is to neuter the minds of sane people—social conformity. Last week the Labor inspired Agenda 31 had its trial run.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott attributed the Coalition candidate Fiona Scott with “feistiness” and “sex appeal.” Although the nation is poised to decide what may be the most important federal election in a generation, the Correctioalist choristers crowed in high “C”, “Henny Penny the sky is falling.”

Leading that barnyard charge of cloned battery birds was a brain-dead editor at Fairfax who herded writers like Jonathan Swan and Judith Ireland like Christmas chooks to the chopping block. With fingers removed from their readership pulse it’s no wonder Fairfax newspapers are failing with corporate shares at a shameful 55 cents. People have wearied of uniform bias pushed by boring, socialist dunderheads.

Apart from dole bludgers, Centrelink fraudsters and other social dross who believe the taxpayer owes them a living, the halcyon days of correctionalists’ are numbered. With a change of government likely, perhaps we can dispose of the pests that lead us into this cul-de-sac of gormless souls where uniformity is rewarded and enterprise is sabotaged.

Abbott’s remark set a politically desperate prime minister to suggest court action. It was not the foul retort, “get f****d”. The Correctionalists chose to pervert the incident and batter the notion of natural logic from the brains of those who refuse to be controlled by leftist morons pushing long failed Marxist doctrine.

If “Sex appeal” were to become a social sin what do you suppose would happen? What would become of the kindly compliment, words of praise, and acknowledgement of the obvious? Is that what the correctionalists would outlaw?

Here lies another tenet of social control, further nonsense that seeks to ignore how the world functions. Expression, like love, and freedom to choose has always been the subject of personal approval, that’s what makes us different and interesting.

Fairfax Media may have taken a bit of flack from their advertisers who might view an attack upon Tony Abbott as bad for business in a climate of tough times. And why is that you might ask? Well, billions of dollars are spent every day in every country on earth for goods that ameliorate in one way or another that dreadful “sex appeal.”

High heel shoes, designed to make ladies lower legs look sexy. Jeans to show off a bare belly and curvy bottom. Gowns, blouses, and tight jackets accentuate a bust not to mention cleavage. Hairstyles, perfumes, makeup, soaps, and even fake suntans are used for sex appeal. And so it goes.

Then you have the merchants of quality wines, gourmet foods and fine dining, all of which are enjoyed in pursuit of sexually appealing moments—as a rule. The truth is, just about every person on earth appreciates being told they are attractive regardless of gender and sexual proclivity. 

So why would Fairfax run with a story so silly? Perhaps the editor responsible was blinded by dislike of Tony Abbott? Maybe unanimous applause was expected by again exposing the misogynist Abbott? Well, it backfired. Only the Correctionalists cheered the side.

As the election nears, supporters of the left are panicking. Rudd the saviour is not delivering as hoped. Voters are now smarter having been swindled for six years watching policy after policy bite the dust. They are aware of accumulated massive debt. They remember the promises not kept, and many lies told. Labor has created a gun-shy electorate that craves honesty in politics.

Before that happens, however, we must suffer mud slinging and personal insults that cause cringe. Australian voters like never before stand upon the cusp of changing the behaviour of those who seek to govern us. September 7 presents opportunity for us to get even with those who have betrayed our trust.

Even some of the Henny-Pennys in the many leftwing barnyards might see a bright blue firmament, rather than a falling grey sky. It matters little whether they do or not because a Coalition victory will humiliate the Correctionalists dream of an Agenda 31.

Socialism is pie-in-the-sky ideology never worked and never will while individuality prevails. And thus, the Correctionalists will have neutered themselves.

To my furtive imagination that prospect is appealing—a kind of sex appeal. Not for some I suppose – Is it?

Labor’s just a bit rich moment

It appears Labor's election ad cycle has hit a snag with the interesting revelation that its key advertisement attacking Tony Abbott and the Coaltion is driven by an actress who apparently refused to pay $15 dollars to a family operated small business for delivery of expensive hand made spanish tiles.

It has been confirmed that Labor used actors for their most recent ad. However it would be useful if the goverments small business minister would explain whether he endorses the position of the actress in this ad, who refused to pay $15 delivery for expensive hand made spanish tiles.

In a time when small business is expected to tighten their belts under the odious regulation and increased taxation imposed on them by this government, it seems a bit rich that an eastern suburbs housewife would be considered by "ALP Strategists" as representative of the broader Australian community.

Perhaps Labor instead of trying to run teflon coated television campaigns whose actors don't truly reflect real Australia, should do a bit of their own 'renovating' in relation to their communications strategy.

Apparently all that keeps the 'actress' going is the thought that

"Somewhere in a factory in Sydney is a dishwasher with my name on it. A stylish stainless steel dishwasher that only makes 42 decibels of noise".

Just a bit rich Labor, Just a bit rich!

 

UPDATE:

Andrew Bolt's blog has more:

New Face of the Working Class

Timothy W. Humphries is Assistant Managing Editor of Menzies House

The Thing About Kevin & The Shitsville Express

The last few months have been a hellish roller coaster ride, writes Assistant Managing Editor Timothy W. Humphries

Funnily enough, I remember during the 1980s a particularly colourful roller coaster ride at Dreamworld. Its gone now. However It used to slide in and out of view as our family barreled down the Pacific Highway to visit relatives on the Gold Coast.

I would argue we have entered a Dreamworld type era of twists and turns in Australian politics. Both sides of politics are setting themselves up as the answer in a political climate best described as 'disillusioned'. 

While I cannot vote Labor, I struggle to find justification to vote Liberal. Even against my own loyalty and trust, Tony Abbott agrees with Climate Alarmism and wants a direct action plan that will plunder the taxpayer "a bit less" then the other mob. This "a bit less then the other mob" paradigm has dominated every policy response.

Meanwhile Kevin Rudd in his newly incarnated form wants to punch forward with a dubious NBN, Health Reforms and a band-aid Asylum Seeker policy that doesn't account for long term requirements.  

In a politically unstable environment, there is no clarion call to achievable freedom and small government. It remains incredible to me that a man derided and replaced by a marxist radical can be reinstalled and yet still find favour with the Australian electorate.

If the narrative is correct and Kevin Rudd's leaking against Julia Gillard is the primary reason for his return to the leadership, there is something seriously wrong with how political narrative is communicated in this country.

The obsession seems to extend to the occasional nattering of the media class about whether or not Malcolm Turnbull would be an appropriate replacement for the Leader of the Opposition, in the obvious unfortunate circumstance that he loses the next election.This media dynamic is crazy!

Malcolm Turnbull, if the media's dreams are realised essentially sits in the same position that Kevin Rudd sits regarding climate change and many other issues. The sort of differentiation that is equal to naught.

One only has to mention the words "market mechanism" and somehow sliding from a disagreeable Carbon Tax to a disagreeable Emissions Trading Scam Scheme is bipartisan.

So here we are again. Lurching from one perceptual crisis to another, all the while assaulted by the visage of litugical charlatanism.

In such a parlous state the mind wanders to the future and who might be around the corner on Australia's political landscape.  

Whilst there are a mixture of views on Joe Hilderbrand and his brand of "journalism", his recent ABC program the "Shitsville Express" is a remarkably informative take on the supposed leaders of tommorow.

I do have allot of respect for what Mr Hilderbrand is trying to achieve with this program. Clearly the premise points to the future of the country through Gen Y and Millenial eyes. I liked this element.

However what our "future leaders" fail to realise is the nuance and guile required to achieve real reform. The sort of March of the Patriots reform that has been lacking in the polity since the end of the Hawke-Keating, Howard-Costello era. 

We have entered a Dreamworld scenario, where revolving door leadership and zany 24 hour news cycle explosions have replaced the considered creation and management of political narrative, that is comprehensible to those of us outside the beltway.

I remember being asked to jump on the old Dreamworld roller coaster by someone who had pumped themselves up on hot dogs, lemonade and fairy floss. After successfully declining, I watched their demeanour change after the ride ended.

Unfortunately Australian Politics and the Shitsville Express appear to be mirroring each other in that they reflect a process whereby politics itself is turning into a metaphorical disembarkation and search for a brown paper bag.

Timothy W Humphries is Assistant Managing Editor of Menzies House

Selective Censorship

EXCLUSIVE: by Jim McCrudden

Two years ago ex-pm Gillard introduced the Frankenstein Lowenstein Enquiry.

The Party had been getting twisted knickers knowing that there were blogs everywhere, which could not be silenced because they had not committed defamation.

Shutting up the press is the very first thing governments like to do. Free speech is a handicap to government.

But free speech of sorts Australia has and Australian politicians are forced to adopt the lick-arse approach. Selected journos get inside briefings, made favourites of. Others – well their emails and phone calls are routinely binned.

It works up to a point. It’s Obama’s favourite ploy.

Then, like manna from heaven, it was revealed, in England, that naughty journos were hacking celebrities’ emails, and even bugging their phones.

This was a crime worse than murder. Worse than treason. Worse than Income Tax evasion.

It was INVASION OF PRIVACY. Sapristi! The eighth deadly sin!

Worse, a PC crime!!!!!

Certainly, there were some shocking headlines about tabloid reporters listening to messages left on a mobile phone belonging to a murdered schoolgirl, Milly Dowler.

But they were extreme and scarcely worse than the paparazzi.

And the information was not used to blackmail or coerce anyone.

Never mind all that.

Egged on by opportunist Pommie politicians smarting over the revelation of their systemic expense fraud, aggrieved celebrities and Toytown University academics were allowed to frame a narrative that was been swallowed whole by the Leveson Enquiry – must shut journos up. One of Leveson’s team was actually sleeping with a barrister who represented some of these celebrities.

“That’s it, ” said the ALP, “We will have an enquiry too. And he can make all sorts of jolly recommendations that mean you don’t have to defame anyone to be punished, you just have to upset them.  And,” they continued, splashing the parquetry with the pee running down their legs in excitement, “We don’t want a court to handle these things, we will have a special Tribunal to hand out the lolly for injured feelings. And we will pick who sits on the Tribunal.”

Done.

But.

Now it is coming out.

Who were the worst of the phonebuggers?

Not the Press.

No??

No. His Lud’ship was handed a dossier by the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), which showed that hacking phones and computers was rife, and that the worst offenders were not reporters but Britain’s most ‘respectable’ companies.

Banks, Insurance Companies, Law Firms were obtaining information; investigators were routinely obtaining everything from bank and credit card statements to itemised mobile phone bills.

And for their economic value, to use in blackmail negotiations, not for a spicy story in the papers.
He ignored it. The press was to be victim.

The ALP knew this was happening in England, that there were much worse villains than reporters, and that is why they restricted the Frankenstein Lowenstein enquiry to press only.

They don’t want the bugging to stop. They just don’t want the results published in the press. Fairfax and the ABC can be counted to smother unwanted stories but not blogs and other media.
In a related story, scientists have announced the possibility of head transplants. Lib insiders are looking at the possibility of switching Julian Assange’s nut with Tony Abbott’s. It’s win win. Assange gets brains, and everything that Abbott says will be grovel-praised by the ABC and Fairfax.