Wazzup?

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

Quiet in here today. Did something happen? Is everyone busy buying gold and stocking up on water and tinned food?

[jnrmac 19,949]

Political orthodoxy got thrown in its head.

Oh, and there is a cricket test on somewhere..

[jackaub 1,402]

Still out celebrating the demise of the political insiders and the" draining of the swamp"

[McQueen 17,864]

This is gold.

Simpsons predicted Trump Presidency

 

Edited November 9, 2016 by McQueen

[ManDee 7,124]

4 minutes ago, McQueen said:

This is gold.

Simpsons predicted Trump Presidency

%5BIMG%5Dhttp://i.imgur.com/ikrAqZL.jpg%5B/IMG%5D

So did Michael Moore.

http://www.theage.com.au/world/us-election/michael-moore-meet-the-man-who-got-this-election-right-20161109-gslwmd.html

Brexit, Hanson, Trump, the world has gone mad.

Beam me up Scotty

  They must have a seat on the last plane out.

[jackaub 1,402]

53 minutes ago, McQueen said:

This is gold.

Simpsons predicted Trump Presidency

 

Life follows art

[old dee 23,579]

I heard our coach on SEN.

I smell a change of Captaincy, sounded like Mr. Jones's position is not guaranteed for 2017.

I hope I am imagining it! 

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

11 minutes ago, old dee said:

I heard our coach on SEN.

I smell a change of Captaincy, sounded like Mr. Jones's position is not guaranteed for 2017.

I hope I am imagining it! 

Relax, od. Trump isn't on our list.

[nutbean 8,838]

 

1 hour ago, Ted Fidge said:

Relax, od. Trump isn't on our list.

I wish he was our coach  - played as badly as i have ever seen  a candidate play before, gave away that many free kicks , and if you listen to his claim - the umpires were absolutely against him and the game was rigged. Yet he still won.

("elect me coach of Melbourne - it will great. We will win and we will win. You will be so sick of winning. It will be great") 

Edited November 10, 2016 by nutbean

[hardtack 10,441]

10 hours ago, jackaub said:

Life follows art

Yep, and now we've got Idiocracy.

[Earl Hood 6,067]

22 hours ago, hardtack said:

Yep, and now we've got Idiocracy.

In our era dominated by reality TV, where facts are not important and with the rise of the "celebrity", that is those who are famous for just being famous, I suppose it is envitable that you end up Trumped! 

[hardtack 10,441]

49 minutes ago, Earl Hood said:

In our era dominated by reality TV, where facts are not important and with the rise of the "celebrity", that is those who are famous for just being famous, I suppose it is envitable that you end up Trumped! 

I think they ended up with an open misère.

[nutbean 8,838]

10 hours ago, hardtack said:

I think they ended up with an open misery.

Edited for accuracy

[Guest]

I went quiet for a while but really, what can you say? Irony is dead.

That's not to say that lefties in America are blameless for this. In 2009, Obama had won the presidency in a landslide by harnessing the people's real desire for change after the biggest financial calamity of my lifetime. He had crushing majorities in both houses of congress and yet seemed more interested in running for sainthood than passing anything that came close to a left leaning agenda.

Right wing politicians don't always pursue policies as they are in the national interest or that they are genuine sadists who love hurting minorities (though in some cases that may be true). They pursue them because it remakes the nature of society into a place that suits their narratives. Do you really think John Howard pursued Work Choices because it would free up employees to bring on more staff? Do you really think that the GOP wants a monocultural America to preserve social harmony? They may but don't also discount the fact that if unions and migrants are marginalized, there are less people to vote for the right wing.

Obama had a chance to reshape society along these lines by giving an entire generation health care as a right and not a privilege. He could have fully reinstated a version of Glass-Steagall that would have defanged the banks. He could have pursued genuine campaign finance reform that took money out of politics. This would have weakened the opposition in a structural sense and have made the electoral playing field more favorable to Democrats. Combine this with the fact that he delivered pocket change as opposed to real change and it's understandable why Trump won.

[Mazer Rackham 14,971]

Obama faced two problems early in his presidency.

One, he had this idea of "working together", "hands across the aisle". He did not count on the venal self interest of the Washington diehards who had absolutely no interest in such a Pollyanna concept and in fact were hostile to such lollipops and butterflies.

Two, many of the sitting Democrats -- his supposed political allies -- were against his reform agenda. Reform in Washington? Too many vested interests all around.

Healthcare, banks, campaign finance ... all missed the mark for the above reasons.

By 2010 the makeup of the congress had changed and it was (even more) uphill from there.

Strangely enough, Trump has a better chance of shaking up Washington. But his approach, to burn the joint down, will also fail, for the same reasons.

[Phadraig 760]

What the heck is going on? Where is Obama or Hillary dismissing these riots, I guess it's up to Trump to get rid of this bull and get rid of Soros.

[Dr John Dee 1,057]

From a review of a recently published book on the American revolutionary period: 

By the mid-1790s the political nation was divided between Federalists, led by Washington and Hamilton, and Jeffersonian Republicans. Neither took the high road. Federalists demonised immigrants as a threat to the new republic. In 1798 they pushed through Congress the Alien Act, which sharply increased the waiting period before an immigrant could become a citizen and authorised the president to deport any alien whose presence he believed threatened the nation’s ‘peace and safety’. In the campaign of 1800, Federalists described Jefferson as a dangerous atheist (with a slave paramour to boot), whose election would encourage ‘murder, robbery, rape, adultery and incest’. Republicans, led by wealthy Virginia plantation owners, denounced their opponents as elitists and emphasised their own commitment to political equality and economic opportunity for ordinary white men, while at the same time whipping up the electorate’s feelings of superiority to blacks and Indians. It all seems depressingly familiar. (London Review of Books 6 October 2016)

[DemonFrog 1,347]

On 10/11/2016 at 8:39 AM, old dee said:

I heard our coach on SEN.

I smell a change of Captaincy, sounded like Mr. Jones's position is not guaranteed for 2017.

I hope I am imagining it! 

No OD we need more captain's!

[Biffen 12,940]

 

The left embracing every minority and in social interest group that exists has turned it's rhetoric into bland twaddle.

Unfortunately we see a similar pattern with speech here.

Strong words receive immediate rebuke or censorship.

For instance ,I can't call BBO a fat,lecherous,drunkard completely lacking in any moral fibre whatsoever even though I know it to be true and he will admit as much.

Nor can I point out that Australian crime ( terrorism/ treason) is dominated by one ethnic group named in Parliament yesterday (finally).

The left side of Politics thinks to protect the weak ,you need to be weak in speech.

It has never been thus.

I see politics as bread and circuses , similar to football.

Outside of entertainment , politics will never change a life- it merely reflects how sick society is.

The Donald has held a mirror to society- it says " booo" publicly and votes for him in private.

Edited November 21, 2016 by Biffen

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

Yeah, I'm pretty 'left' myself and even I can see how stifling some activists' use of language and demonisation has been hurting society instead of helping it.

I get the whole 'left censorship' thing, and tbh it's frustrating. It's gotten to this point because there is a lot of inflammatory language from the traditional or conservative right, and a lot of the time they don't understand how inflammatory it really is. But here's the thing, if that's the only way you know how to communicate, of course you'll feel censored if society starts telling you you can't use that language.

That's a huge mistake the left (and I guess by extension, myself as well) has made. To assume that the conversation on various issues can continue after you've completely shut down the language of one side. Then you end up with a mass of seething people with no way to express themselves, ironically something the 'left' was trying to avoid.

This is all easy to say in hindsight, because before the election of Trump I was dismissing this argument as a minor issue only applicable to a small portion of idiotic bigots. But it's not. A whole segment of American (and I guess Australian) society feels shut down by political correctness and leftist language censorship. We have to do better, but I'm not sure what that looks like.

The one advantage we have in Australia is that we've seen this happen already with the UK and America. We've seen the marginalised working class reject politics as usual when those who needed to represent them did not. We've seen the left reject them as racist idiots. The Liberal party have a chance to do much better than our British and American counterparts have done.

How? I don't know. But at least we have the opportunity to attend to this before the [censored] hits the fan as it has elsewhere.

I also think the media needs to get on board with this. The sensationalising of insignificant utterances as major news just makes politics scared to say anything, further stifling speech and political discourse. Using divisive language, exaggerating headlines, insufficient research and inflammatory articles all sell very well, but do little for the public good. The blatant cheerleeding of the HUN last election of behalf of Abbott, and The Age on behalf of Rudd, was absolutely abhorrent. They knew their markets and they played on them, to the detriment of the country.

Is it any wonder people increasingly go to their Facebook feeds for information? Traditional media has let us down for so long that we ascribe more authenticity and authority to a blogger than we do a media institution. In all likelihood, the blogger will have worse and less reliable information than the paper, but the reader doesn't ascribe the same level of distrust to blogger, which results in more cut through.

In an ideal society, we should be able to trust that politicians on the whole will do the best thing for the country. And we should trust that the media should expose them when this is not the case. Neither of these things is happening to any reliable degree, and people are angry.

I don't know if the cause is a worsening education system, career politicians, lobbyists, unions or media partisanship, but I think it's clear we need to lift our game. Whatever the reason, I feel like the issues are far to big for me to change with my puny little vote ballot.

 

TL:DR - I'm left. I'm angry, I'm powerless. I blame lots of factors, left and right.

[nutbean 8,838]

1 hour ago, Choke said:

Yeah, I'm pretty 'left' myself and even I can see how stifling some activists' use of language and demonisation has been hurting society instead of helping it.

I get the whole 'left censorship' thing, and tbh it's frustrating. It's gotten to this point because there is a lot of inflammatory language from the traditional or conservative right, and a lot of the time they don't understand how inflammatory it really is. But here's the thing, if that's the only way you know how to communicate, of course you'll feel censored if society starts telling you you can't use that language.

That's a huge mistake the left (and I guess by extension, myself as well) has made. To assume that the conversation on various issues can continue after you've completely shut down the language of one side. Then you end up with a mass of seething people with no way to express themselves, ironically something the 'left' was trying to avoid.

This is all easy to say in hindsight, because before the election of Trump I was dismissing this argument as a minor issue only applicable to a small portion of idiotic bigots. But it's not. A whole segment of American (and I guess Australian) society feels shut down by political correctness and leftist language censorship. We have to do better, but I'm not sure what that looks like.

The one advantage we have in Australia is that we've seen this happen already with the UK and America. We've seen the marginalised working class reject politics as usual when those who needed to represent them did not. We've seen the left reject them as racist idiots. The Liberal party have a chance to do much better than our British and American counterparts have done.

How? I don't know. But at least we have the opportunity to attend to this before the [censored] hits the fan as it has elsewhere.

I also think the media needs to get on board with this. The sensationalising of insignificant utterances as major news just makes politics scared to say anything, further stifling speech and political discourse. Using divisive language, exaggerating headlines, insufficient research and inflammatory articles all sell very well, but do little for the public good. The blatant cheerleeding of the HUN last election of behalf of Abbott, and The Age on behalf of Rudd, was absolutely abhorrent. They knew their markets and they played on them, to the detriment of the country.

Is it any wonder people increasingly go to their Facebook feeds for information? Traditional media has let us down for so long that we ascribe more authenticity and authority to a blogger than we do a media institution. In all likelihood, the blogger will have worse and less reliable information than the paper, but the reader doesn't ascribe the same level of distrust to blogger, which results in more cut through.

In an ideal society, we should be able to trust that politicians on the whole will do the best thing for the country. And we should trust that the media should expose them when this is not the case. Neither of these things is happening to any reliable degree, and people are angry.

I don't know if the cause is a worsening education system, career politicians, lobbyists, unions or media partisanship, but I think it's clear we need to lift our game. Whatever the reason, I feel like the issues are far to big for me to change with my puny little vote ballot.

 

TL:DR - I'm left. I'm angry, I'm powerless. I blame lots of factors, left and right.

Well posted.

I think both right and left are guilty of being sucked into the world of  issue brinkmanship  - the need to take an issue or an argument to the extreme to get headlines ( or to get noticed at all !). The example of Matthew Guy yesterday. He was interviewed and went on the attack about crime   - which is a conversation worth having. He suggested crime was out of control, penalties weren't harsh enough and made an innocuous comment about non Australian citizens who commit crime should be deported. He broached three issues within the major theme. His arguments were well presented and balanced. Then he went on his facebook page with a link to his interview and all he said was "   Enough is enough. If you commit violent crimes and are not an Australian citizen, then you have worn out your welcome and should be deported. " - google statistics and you will find that non Australian citizens are the least of the problem with crime - but it is the part of the issue that appealed to the mob and succeed in getting them worked up. I read 4 comments on his post and that was more than enough for me.

So many issues are worth discussing and it is necessary to have a rational debate on them. Unfortunately politics has turned into a bad game of who can stretch the truth the further-est or just outright lie and get believed. 

 

[Bitter but optimistic 22,136]

8 hours ago, Biffen said:

 

The left embracing every minority and in social interest group that exists has turned it's rhetoric into bland twaddle.

Unfortunately we see a similar pattern with speech here.

Strong words receive immediate rebuke or censorship.

For instance ,I can't call BBO a fat,lecherous,drunkard completely lacking in any moral fibre whatsoever even though I know it to be true and he will admit as much.

Nor can I point out that Australian crime ( terrorism/ treason) is dominated by one ethnic group named in Parliament yesterday (finally).

The left side of Politics thinks to protect the weak ,you need to be weak in speech.

It has never been thus.

I see politics as bread and circuses , similar to football.

Outside of entertainment , politics will never change a life- it merely reflects how sick society is.

The Donald has held a mirror to society- it says " booo" publicly and votes for him in private.

Thank you for the unwanted (if reasonably accurate) appraisal of my character Biffen.

The spoken and written word seems to be pushed ever further into blandness in its expression and mediocrity in its content. I was once politically of the left but now care little about such matters. Indeed in any matters really beyond simple and selfish pleasures. 

However, on the rare occasion I give consideration to broader issues, I still believe suppression of thoughts, ideas and expression is always to a group or society's detriment.

[daisycutter 29,491]

has someone hijacked bbo's account?

[Dante 2,705]

3 hours ago, Choke said:

Yeah, I'm pretty 'left' myself and even I can see how stifling some activists' use of language and demonisation has been hurting society instead of helping it.

I get the whole 'left censorship' thing, and tbh it's frustrating. It's gotten to this point because there is a lot of inflammatory language from the traditional or conservative right, and a lot of the time they don't understand how inflammatory it really is. But here's the thing, if that's the only way you know how to communicate, of course you'll feel censored if society starts telling you you can't use that language.

That's a huge mistake the left (and I guess by extension, myself as well) has made. To assume that the conversation on various issues can continue after you've completely shut down the language of one side. Then you end up with a mass of seething people with no way to express themselves, ironically something the 'left' was trying to avoid.

This is all easy to say in hindsight, because before the election of Trump I was dismissing this argument as a minor issue only applicable to a small portion of idiotic bigots. But it's not. A whole segment of American (and I guess Australian) society feels shut down by political correctness and leftist language censorship. We have to do better, but I'm not sure what that looks like.

The one advantage we have in Australia is that we've seen this happen already with the UK and America. We've seen the marginalised working class reject politics as usual when those who needed to represent them did not. We've seen the left reject them as racist idiots. The Liberal party have a chance to do much better than our British and American counterparts have done.

How? I don't know. But at least we have the opportunity to attend to this before the [censored] hits the fan as it has elsewhere.

I also think the media needs to get on board with this. The sensationalising of insignificant utterances as major news just makes politics scared to say anything, further stifling speech and political discourse. Using divisive language, exaggerating headlines, insufficient research and inflammatory articles all sell very well, but do little for the public good. The blatant cheerleeding of the HUN last election of behalf of Abbott, and The Age on behalf of Rudd, was absolutely abhorrent. They knew their markets and they played on them, to the detriment of the country.

Is it any wonder people increasingly go to their Facebook feeds for information? Traditional media has let us down for so long that we ascribe more authenticity and authority to a blogger than we do a media institution. In all likelihood, the blogger will have worse and less reliable information than the paper, but the reader doesn't ascribe the same level of distrust to blogger, which results in more cut through.

In an ideal society, we should be able to trust that politicians on the whole will do the best thing for the country. And we should trust that the media should expose them when this is not the case. Neither of these things is happening to any reliable degree, and people are angry.

I don't know if the cause is a worsening education system, career politicians, lobbyists, unions or media partisanship, but I think it's clear we need to lift our game. Whatever the reason, I feel like the issues are far to big for me to change with my puny little vote ballot.

 

TL:DR - I'm left. I'm angry, I'm powerless. I blame lots of factors, left and right.

You do understand that an equal amount of this "inflammatory language" emanates from the left, don't you? I've never been able to understand the Left and their never ending desire to belittle anyone that disagrees with them.  Perhaps you should take off your rose coloured glasses, take a step back and have a closer look.

I'm a conservative voter and at times cringe at some of the comments that are made by my side of politics but it seems that the left just cheer the abuser on. When I read some of the left journos i wonder why there is no condemnation at some of the vile and disgraceful things they put to print. When a conservative female (can you still use that term?) is abused it's sport, when a member on the left receive any criticism, it's misogyny. The Labor Party have always had the reputation as the Great Haters and that stems back over 50 years that I know of.

Who was it that said Rita Panahi and Mira Devine should be taken out and raped and was there any outcry by the sisterhood?

Have a closer look, you might be surprised.

[Bluey's Dad 3,419]

15 hours ago, Dante said:

You do understand that an equal amount of this "inflammatory language" emanates from the left, don't you? I've never been able to understand the Left and their never ending desire to belittle anyone that disagrees with them.  Perhaps you should take off your rose coloured glasses, take a step back and have a closer look.

I'm a conservative voter and at times cringe at some of the comments that are made by my side of politics but it seems that the left just cheer the abuser on. When I read some of the left journos i wonder why there is no condemnation at some of the vile and disgraceful things they put to print. When a conservative female (can you still use that term?) is abused it's sport, when a member on the left receive any criticism, it's misogyny. The Labor Party have always had the reputation as the Great Haters and that stems back over 50 years that I know of.

Who was it that said Rita Panahi and Mira Devine should be taken out and raped and was there any outcry by the sisterhood?

Have a closer look, you might be surprised.

I think my post stands on it's own as an effort to remove my rose coloured glasses.