I guess we’re not getting a Morgan poll tomorrow, so a stand-alone post is required to note recent developments. To wit:
• Antony Green has crunched the numbers from the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ latest state and territory population figures and concluded that yet another new seat will need to be created in Queensland next year, again at the expense of New South Wales. Queensland will thus have boomed from 26 seats to 30 in little over a decade, having earlier gained Blair in 1998, Bonner in 2004 and Flynn in 2007. New South Wales lost Gwydir in 2007.
• The Australian Electoral Commission has announced that the finalised new federal boundaries for Western Australia will be gazetted on December 18, and maps published henceforth.
• Possum reckons “it’s time to rethink political demographics”, and explains why across a two-part epic here and here.
• A constitutional crisis is brewing in Canada that has some excited observers invoking the example of Australia in 1975. The election on October 14 saw Stephen Harper’s Conservative minority government re-elected, but again requiring the support of Bloc Québécois. However, Bloc Québécois has now signed an accord with the Liberal Party and leftist New Democrats due to dissatisfaction with the government’s handling of the financial crisis. Harper reportedly plans to ask that Governor-General Michaëlle Jean prorogue the parliament so it will not sit until the budget is presented in January. This would avert a sitting on December 8 at which Harper’s government would likely be defeated on a no-confidence motion, and allow him time to pick apart the Liberal-Bloc-NDP deal. This raises the question of whether Jean ought to grant a prorogation to a Prime Minister who might not have the confidence of the House.
UPDATE (5/12/08): Jean agrees to prorogue parliament until January 26. Ben Raue at The Tally Room expresses his displeasure, and proposes reforms to the appointment of prime ministers (citing the practice in the Australian Capital Territory), the scheduling of parliament and the timing elections. I am a little more sympathetic to Jean’s decision, on account of the Liberals’ evident state of disarray – although I can buy the idea that it’s not the Governor-General’s role to make such judgements.
1,278 Comments
Pages: « 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 22 … 26 » Show All
Further to my post of 950. It would be a very sad day if ever they were (commiting a crime), although it is something the wowsers would push for.
Diogenes I don’t know much about XXX DVD laws, but I agree.
From the head cheese himself ….
Dio @ 907
Wasn’t having a go at you, just thought your comments seemed a bit snippy or something and actually wondered if you were having a bad day.
I see from 907 it was, thats a tough gig you do and I don’t envy it, in fact I take my hat of to you
Under the Hoarding Act 2008, pensioners who have not spent all their bonus by Xmas will be clapped in irons.
I think the Government should’ve handed charities say an extra $100 million.
I can’t image they would hang on to it for very long.
Adam
Did you manage to stop the pensioners in WA getting their Xmas bonus for voting in the first Liberal State Government in eight years? I thought you were being very reasonable. It was the least they deserved.
i think i’ll use my bonus to do a bunk away from here for a while, bugga the bills or the new ‘puter to replace “darth vador”, actually i’d love to get away but i cant, such is life.
I’m using some of the $1,400 to buy a wheelbarrow load of Zimbabwean $200 million notes so I have more billions than Gates. Not sure what I’ll do with the remaining $1,399
Actually, I’ve already spent it building a low energy computer. Only draws 77watts, monitor included, on idle compared to the 230w of my previous machine and it’s considerably more powerful. Though I doubt it has helped the local economy much as not a single component was made here.
I don’t anywhere near the majority of stuff that gets bought with this $10 billion, given its proximity to Christmas and the nature of the crappy things people buy, will be Australian made.
*I don’t think.
What CPU did you use?
Oz, I wouldn’t admit that if I were you.
I knew someone was going to say that as soon as I clicked “Post Comment”.
I also knew it was going to be you.
Hi all, a lurker here with another 2 cents on the censorship issue (sorry, Bushfire Bill).
A communal blogging site, “LiveJournal” recently tried censoring journals with content relating in some way to child porn. I believe they found journals using both trigger words and referrals from the ‘community’. Among other things, they ended up deleting things such as:
- a literary journal dedicated to the analysis of the novel Lolita;
- fiction/non-fiction involving teens exploring issues of sexuality; and
- support groups for victims of child abuse.
In that case, the results of the censorship were highly visible and complaints were able to be made. But it serves as a good example, I think, of two problems with Conroy’s planned system: one, that a lot of things can get caught up in a censorship net which have important and legitimate uses in the community — and are not anything illegal or distasteful, and two, that there is no recourse or forum for debate.
the police have started doing publicity interviews again and i’m hosting them and ch9 on wednesday, the kids are going to do this one for the first time and i’m stepping back, i’ll hole up in the computor den so the kids wont be nervous with the old fossal in the background watching, it’s hard on them but gee i’m tired, it’s a relief for me and about time they stepped in, i keep telling them the old dear isnt going to last forever but they dont seem to believe me, one thing i’ll say is we have the best police force in Australia, dunno if sending them a few slabs with my money would constitute a bribe– hmmm i’ll have to ask Steve my legal eagle mate.
Intel E8200, though I’ve since tried a E8400 and on power consumption any difference was with the MOE of the meter. But even the E8200 easy outperforms the P4 2.4G it replaced. For example, Ghost now images a 340Gig partition in about 1h 20m compared to over 5 hours on the old machine.
Oops my 966 meant for ShowsOn
is there a newspoll out tomorrow night? i cant remember if they come out when parliament isnt sitting.
ADAM
“I think he is saying that libertarians support the right of paedophiles to watch child pornography in their homes. That is also incorrect, but not the same thing.”
No , I am saying some (laissez faire) libertarians support that any person may watch whatever they choose to (including child pornography) in there own homes
paedophiles were never mentioned by me at all either in watching nor in libertarians suporting them …..its people , any person may watch whatever they choose to (including child pornogrophy) in there own homes is there view , a view I feel is sick ….. unlike those who hav tech/legislative slopiness problams with internet child porn censorship Your post was unhelpful
I reckon we should just make up a poll
The ALP 55% – Liberal Party 45%
Gee nothing new with that poll!
A most un-Canadian caper
THERE are no tanks in the streets or protesters occupying the airport, but Canada is in the midst of political turmoil the like of which this normally placid country has rarely seen
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12747607&source=most_commented
These people are called CRIMINALS not LIBERTARIANS.
Stop trolling.
Diogenes
Posted today
“I get sick and tired of people who can’t win a rational argument, and so resort to calling people…”
then later today at 9:18 pm
“I’m more accustomed to reading Ronsperanto than most and he’s not saying that us libertarians are paedophiles. We’re just paedophile-protectors.”
Seeing th 2nd allegation of yours is blantantley false and you reely know it , why don’t you admit to yourself that ” you get sick of and tired of yourself who can’t win a rational argument, and so resort to calling people…”
Whether you or ShowsOn belong to th laissez faire branch of Libertarianism that suports that any person may watch whatever they choose to (including child pornography) in there own homes is for yous to work out , its not criminal to hav that belief but not one I hav
ShowsOn, I place a pretty high bar on the circumstances in which I allow use of the word “troll”, and Ron’s comment doesn’t clear it.
It might not be trolling, but it’s nonsense anyway.
Which branch of libertarianism is this, and who exactly espouses it? Or are you just making things up again?
Name one belief that is illegal to have? Laws control ACTIONS not beliefs. Liberalism implies that anyone can THINK anything they like. Acting on those beliefs can be illegal.
You mean his repeated comments equating libertarianism with criminal behavior, without referring to any evidence?
Yeah you’re right, it’s not trolling, it’s Ronning!
ShowsOn, I’ll admit that I haven’t gone through this debate with a fine tooth comb, but the bit you cite in #972 has Ron saying that some libertarians believe people should be able to view child pornography in their homes – which strikes me as being an arguable proposition at worst. Your response, that people who hold this belief “are called CRIMINALS not LIBERTARIANS”, strikes me as being a ridiculous proposition at best. Nevertheless, your subsequent rhetorical question, “Name one belief that is illegal to have?”, seems to contradict it, so perhaps I have misunderstood.
A tad off topic, but relevant in light of the recent WA State Election.
Ahh, how the mighty have fallen, from one of Carps “Rising Stars” to one of the 3 Wise Men
, Reece Whitby, the one of the former Premier’s “Handpicked” candidates is now reduced to appearing in the Christmas Pagaent.
http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6387796,00.jpg
What’s wrong with whitby pretending to br one of the three wise men, Frank?
After all, Troy Buswell is pretending to be state treasurer …
Speaking of Troy, did you se Van Pencil case in the Crimes – talk about polishing faecal matter
In the immortal words of Pauline, Frank, please explain?
He has spent parts of this thread implying that some members here are using the internet filter debate as a front to defend the rights of child pornographers.
Of course he has refused to name a single person – on this forum or otherwise – who has espoused the view that child pornography should be legal. Instead, he has just repeatedly hidden behind this assertion that certain libertarians hold this view, and has implied that some posters here adhere to such an ideology.
Who cares if that isn’t a textbook definition of trolling, but I am certain that it is a perfect example of Ronning.
Dead Tree version News Extra, he’s comparing Troy to Alexander Downer from being a crap leader to good Minister, and quietly standing down to allow Barnett to leader, comparing it to Downer handing over to Howard etc.
It was very cringeworthy, pehaps William can post a summary
And how he has redeemed himself by transforming himself from a “Goon” (his words) to one of Barnett’s top performers.
Adam @ 923
‘Its jobs are to provide support for Caucus members and staff, do research on issues, circulate media releases and train new staffers, both APH and EO.’
I accept that it is not doing some of the nasty things you listed, but which its predecessor did do under the Howard Government. However, using that Government as a benchmark for probity would be ill-advised.
Ronaldson asked the question on notice (?) on the topic.
What are APH and EO?
Does this unit support both labor and non-labor staff? If it only supports labor party institutions and staff, why should the taxpayer be funding party-political activities?
ShowsON
“He has spent parts of this thread implying that some members here are using the internet filter debate as a front to defend the rights of child pornographers.”
ADAM in my absence tonite said he “thought” I may be saying libertarians support pedaphiles watching child porn That is false I thought he could hav been more generous & asked me first to clarify what I was actualy saying …but he did say only that he “thought” I was saying
I’ve SINCE replied to Adam in YOUR presence (but in his absence) in my #969 dispelling his thought , and he may care to reply or not
DIOGENES in my absence tonite said I was saying “us libertarians were just paedophile-protectors.” and said so without qualification That is false , and Diogenes post was ordinary to say least , particularley from an admitted libertarian
I’ve SINCE replied to Diogenes in YOUR presence (but in his absense) in my #973 dispelling his incorrct allegation , and he may care to reply or not
William in his #977 in YOUR presence corectly extracted my words :”Ron saying that some libertarians believe people should be able to view child pornography in their homes – which strikes me as being an arguable proposition at worst.”
ShowsOn you hav now posted a false post and a false allegation , despite being present and seeing both my replies to Adam , my replies to Diogenes , and Williams’s correct extraction of my words
I also note seeing williams #977 where he commented your earlier reply to my post saying quote “our response…..strikes me as being a ridiculous proposition at best”….to which your latest blog is your lame next rediculous claim
What you appear to reely not handle ShowsOn is my total objection to some libertarians believing any person should be able to view child pornography in their homes You could of course agree with me , and I wonder why you haven’t
If as I hope th govt blocks such stuff from th internet successfuly (with adequate govenance) , then such opposing views will be (thankfuly) then irrelevant
We’re getting a bit self-referential here, so I’ll be pleased if this argument doesn’t resume in the morning.
What I would like to know is how the filtering plan is likely to play out in the Senate. It seems to me that the Liberals are likely to oppose it, and the Greens certainly will. It would thus need the support of the Nationals, Xenophon and Fielding. I gather Labor could take Fielding for granted, but Xenophon is keeping his options open. But does anyone know how likely the Nats would be to break ranks with the Libs?
Grattan reports:
“Senator Macdonald said he was “at a loss” to understand what the Senate Nationals were doing and described the situation as “bizarre”. But Mr Tanner said that Senator Joyce and his Senate colleagues were “standing up for those issues important to the Nationals — particularly the regional communication issue. I don’t have a problem with their action last week.”
I am sure that ‘Tanner’ would not have a problem with what the Nationals were up to last week. It looks like a typo. I think Grattan probably meant ‘Turnbull’. If it is Turnbull, then the situation has taken a very curious turn. Not only did the Nationals defy him by crossing the floor, they followed that up with a bit of badmouthing of him as well. And Turnbull (?) does not have a problem with it?
Also, lol, not what McDonald said. What the Nats were up to last week is not ‘bizarre’. It was self-serving as always, but not ‘bizarre’. McDonald has served up another Chrissie present to the Rudd Government.
http://www.theage.com.au/national/tension-in-coalition-as-joyce-rejects-turnbulls-frontbench-offer-20081207-6t8u.html?page=2
#987 assumes Nigel Scullion would vote with the Nationals (or at least abstain) – otherwise it would be voted down in any case.
The Rudd Government is sticking to all its election promises, good and bad. This includes Conroy’s internet initiative which, despite the various criticisms of Conroy, should properly be called a Rudd Government initiative. The discussions on the topic in this blog have been variously very informative, interesting, confusing and repetitive. It is an area of public discourse where reason can quite quickly fly out the window. From my perspective, the various contributions have been very useful in trying to sort out the issues. So, thanks, guys.
The proof will have to be in the pudding, because this particular pudding will definitely arrive.
The unfortunate but inescapable thing about the initiative is that oppositions will have to go along with it, more or less, or risk being smeared by association of being ‘for’ paedophiles or ‘for’ child porn peddlers. We all know that they are not. There is just not a whole lot of space for them to debate the initiative sensibly. Once the initiative is in place, the reverse difficulty sets in. Any Government which wishes to adjust or remove the initiative will find it difficult to do so, for the same general reason. I hope that the Rudd Government gets it right the first time.
Boerwar the Government did not commit to a mandatory filter which you could not opt out of. Conroy has every right to be criticised because he has brought the ridiculous argument that if you don’t support the filter then you support child paedophiles into the debate. It is embarrassing to see a frontbencher resort to such infantile debating points and nothing would make me happier than seeing the clown booted off of the front bench.
William I think there’s a high likelihood the Nationals minus Scullion would vote with the Government for the filter. Xenophon has said he’d like to explore the option of using the filter to ban gambling websites. Again, this demonstrates the slippery slope we’re in for. If we allow gambling websites to be banned, what next? The number of categories of sites that are banned will continue to increase, there will likely be no way of knowing what is being banned or stopping things from being banned.
Of course Conroy has been very tight on the details of the scheme, because he knows that whatever scheme he puts in place will have severe problems and holes you can drive a truck through. The Government are onto a loser with this one.
William @ 987
The Liberals have the difficulty I was alluding to in post 990. I read Minchin as leaning towards opposing it for reasonably sound rational reasons, but wanting to keep the options open because the issues are delicate and could blow up in their faces. The reference to the trial keeps the options open. The reference to Conroy’s bullying tactics will largely be ignored by punters – if not by the industry. If the Liberals end up opposing it and it goes down then:
(a) they will be open to the general charge that they opposed it for the sake of opposition and have stopped the Government from doing what it was elected to do. The technical fors and againsts will immediately become irrelevant.
(b) Anything that happens to an individual child in relation to the net can thereafter be brought to the doorstep of the Liberals. ‘Shock’ ‘horror’ ‘personal’, ‘Whose fault is this?’ is how the tabloids mostly sort out what policy really means.
(c) the Liberals will be seen to be against ‘law and order’, probably one of their traditional strengths.
Nick Xenophon is not going to leave himself high and dry on this one. I reckon he will fold without being able to get gambling blocks in.
I am curious about the reference to Scullion? Has indicated a willingness to cross the floor on this issue?
It is also very difficult for the Liberals right now because they need to be able to show some cohesian within themselves and their coalition partners. Leaving policy options open to the last minute for parliamentary tactical reasons was a major reason why the wheels fell off in the Senate, last time round.
So, they have an option to support it. All they have to say is that the trial looked OK but the Government has not taken these issues into account. It would not supprize me if the Liberals supported the policy, with some publicly stated reservations which enable them to say, as the stuffups start, ‘Well we told you all that there would be stuffups and sure enough, here they are’.
Judy
Only constitutes a bribe if the slabs are cold.
On the internet filtering, the third largest provider in Australia is currently being sued by music and film companies re file sharing downloads and there have been a couple of individual prosecutions.
If they can monitor film and music downloads they should be able to do likewise with content they wish to block.
Well Adam
After Conroy’s little effort, this is our future, that is the whole system breaking up because alternate net addresses are being used all over the place to avoid the nonsense, I won’t be so rude as to call in “Labors net mess”, yet.
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/08/12/07/1253228.shtml
And isn’t it a sad indictment of where we are at when something that was published in 1970s ” the LP cover art of the Scorpions’ ‘Virgin Killer’ album” gets caught up in this little frenzy.
The old media, print, radio and TV, are dying because of changing life style and the “mobile” generations, young and old. The “mobile” generations want to see and do things where they are not where they have to be. The high traffic is fine but it does not guarantee revenue as per usual on the Web. People are accustomed to not wanting to pay. The next big thing is the mobile computer on your right hand, and what do you do with the left hand?
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/markday/index.php/theaustralian/comments/debt_and_dumbing_down/
Frank Calabrese @ 983
Dead Tree version News Extra, he’s comparing Troy to Alexander Downer from being a crap leader to good Minister,
They’re letting a version of Downer handle money?? Gulp. WA will soon be another Zimbabwe!
One of the very few good articles I’ve ever seen come off of the pen of Malcolm Farr …..
castle, i’m lucky the police over the years have been good to me, actually some have formed life long friendships, when my husband was dying they even run a money raising dinner to send him overseas for alternative treatment which unfortunately didnt work, they’ve laughed with us and cried with us, just as i’ve laughed and cried with them over their life events, people seem to forget they’re real people behind the badges, i just wish people knew some of the things they do above the call of duty, whether they break our case or not they’ll be my heroes, if the case does break there’ll be rough times ahead for us and i’m cringing just thinking about it, but i know they’ll be there to be our backbone again.
sorry William to be off topic.
Ron
I hope this isn’t too nuanced for you but people who enjoy watching child porn are paedophiles by definition. Your distinction between the two is false. I hope that clears the matter up.
Has anyone considered that the filter could be abused to close down sites you hate? For example, you could go to Andrew Bolt’s site and blog “I think Conroy would be doing a great job if he banned sites that said ‘Best child porn on the net for sale’. ” The filter would pick it up and close down Bolt. Perhaps the cloud has a silver lining!
bugga i’m getting maudlin in my old age, does anyone know if a newspoll will be out tonight? if so will it reflect the implosion fiasco from thursday night? i know it’s bitchy but i’m hoping it pays back to the libs for playing their little games, this next year is going to be interesting with the economical crisis hotting up and that could impact on Rudd and then the libs having their internal problems, ive put $10 on Turnbull lasting till the election but i’ll be happy to lose it.
Pages: « 1 … 18 19 [20] 21 22 … 26 » Show All