Rostrum: I Want to Believe Edition

Me…

The Age reports…

The head of the Northern Territory branch of the Labor party has reportedly flown overseas to fight in Syria against terror group Islamic State.

What could possibly go wrong?

…A referendum held on the subject in 1999, which if successful would have seen a president appointed by the Parliament, failed to garner enough support…

But that’s what the problem was, australians didn’t want a prez elected by the parliament – they don’t trust anything connected with powermongering/troughsnouting politicians. They want to choose the leader themselves. Why have yet another unrepresentative figurehead elected by self interested politicians? At the next referendum they should present all options to the voters.

“The next sentence you’re about to read is completely true, even though you might not believe it. There’s a woman who made $4.9 MILLION dollars last year by recording herself opening Disney toys, and then uploading the videos to YouTube. Absolutely crazy, but true.”

YouTube’s highest paid star is a mysterious woman who unwraps Disney toys. For real.

Shorten has stood for nothing so far (other than expert application of cutlery). It’s good to get the republic vs monarchy back on the agenda.

As for Abbott, did I hear correctly? He’s nominated the queen’s husband for an Australian knighthood?!!

What a goose.

I think Phil is probably about to cark it and Abbott wants to have something to say about his special connection to us

Former governor-general Paul Hasluck asserted in 1979 that Australia’s monarch is the country’s head of state.[47] Six years later, however, Professor Colin Howard stated that, as the constitution makes executive power exercisable only by the governor-general, and not the Queen, it is the governor-general who is, “as a matter of law”, the head of state.[48] Howard went so far as to say that Australia is not even a monarchy, but a “governor-generalship”.[49]

Others followed Howard’s view: In 1998, Professor Owen E. Hughes of Monash University stated that the governor-general is the head of state as “the position is one of great formal power, both legal and political”;[50] Sir David Smith, a former Official Secretary to five governors-general, holds that the governor-general is head of state, while the Queen is Australia’s sovereign, since the constitution directs the governor-general, and not the monarch, to carry out the duties of head of state;[51][52] and Professor David Flint, convenor of Australians for Constitutional Monarchy, feels the same way, believing the High Court’s 1907 decision R v Governor resolves the issue as a constitutional description. Professor Flint asserts that the term head of state is a diplomatic one and is governed by international law and insists that, as the governor-general is sent overseas and received as head of state, she is, under international law, a head of state. He says this has only become an issue because the republicans have been unable to raise other reasons to change the constitution, highlighting that it was argued nine times by the republicans in the official Yes/No booklet sent to voters in the referendum.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_head_of_state_dispute

It seems there is argument amongst greater minds than are available here.

be quiet blib, just stand there, shh, don`t say anything

Shorten has stood for nothing so far

Poor old Bill, stuck between a rock and a hard place. Or is it between Tweedledum and Tweedledee?

Yes, Bill stands for nothing, even though I do recall the oz and a few here having a go at him for standing up for Australian jobs, and throwing the old “racist” line at him for good order because he dared to say that our workers could be as good as Japanese workers. The gall. Yea, he stands for nothing. Or who can recall wincypine getting his henchthing to stop the standing ovation Bill Shorten received for outlining his and Labors position in response to the budget. Yet, he should just slink away according to the experts? Or already has? Because him playing nothing will definitely get Labor back in front in a very good position for the next election. 😯

Thanks fellas, that goes down real well for me Aussie ozzie ozzy day recovery , Tweedledum and Tweedledee, offering up such perceptive insights into their perceptions/perceivings ROFL

lol AO, I followed your Quiggin tweet, and found this

Bill Shorten’s call yesterday to reopen the republic debate struck me as uncharacteristically brave. Now, with Abbott’s bizarre decision to confer an Australian knighthood on a foreign prince, it looks prescient, or perhaps well-informed.

http://johnquiggin.com/2015/01/26/shorten-and-abbott-revive-the-republic/

”””Tablecloth Burning Day (yes, I burned another one”””

well done dunny 🙂

(tablecloths burn much better with a zombie wrapped snugly in them, l recommend dutton)

#do you burn tablecloths because you want another tablecloth-design, or is it the team-republic thing.?

“TOSY ignores the simpering of an Australian PM towards an irrelevant, obsolete foreign monarchy, and concentrates on breaches of understanding of protocol from critics.”

It’s not obsolete, yet, in case you haven’t noticed. I’m a rebublican at heart, but the botched attempt by Malcolm and Eddie Everywhere set the cause back a hundred years.

”””bagging the dicks in the LNP but saying stuff that supports them”””

Yes, l have also previously acknowledged teabumpkins are occasionally correct, much in the way a broken clock manages to be correct twice a day. That doesn`t mean my NO-vote is in any way for the same reason/s as theirs. Yes, l also would say that most of the voting would be based on `celeb` style team-cheering for current or `other` hood-ornaments. lt is just not my reason.

+

Our farcical democracy, which gets nearly as hairy-chested on the international stage as teh-usa in clubbing other nations over the head with democa-theory, falls on its dumb-arse at home, fcuks about with womens private medical issue/s (abortion), even when its women of `caliber` and those that can `twirl`. Likewise they also fail on voluntary-euthanasia which has always had 80%-90% public support, and gay-marriage which has held 70%-80% public support for quite some time now. As far as l`m aware, the hood-ornament is not the problem on these issues, it is our own corrupt cnuts in canberra. l also don`t see swapping hood-ornaments as making it easier for these topics, but harder.

”””The Firm visits us “occasionally” these days but it cost the nation (TAXPAYERS)”””

ln the theme of `robber-barrons`, team-stupid has trotted us off to the Afghan/lraq disasters costing us XX dollars over the last 13-years or so. During the same 13-years hosting costs for hood-ornaments have been 1/XXth the cost. ln cost-saving exercises it is much better to hunt sardines and save 1/XXth, not whales and save XX. We can then add the 1/XXth to the misadventure waste spend. #small.fry

Speaking of factual factoids, it looks like the CSIRO won’t stop sciencing against the prevailing weather in canberri

Science agency the CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology predict temperature rises of up to 5.1c in Australia by 2090 in their most comprehensive forecast yet

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/jan/26/climate-change-will-hit-australia-harder-than-rest-of-world-study-shows

“Who actually thinks they can predict events 75 years from now?”

Like i said there is a big difference between intelligence and common sense or knowledge and wisdom.

The “left” may be intelligent, may have lots of knowledge but when it comes to picking policies they usually pick the one that does not work.

Exactly

Swan predicted a $20B surplus for his very first budget and it ended up a $20B deficit. A $40B turn around.

Swan could not even predict 12 months in advance. In fact he never got any predictions even close even with all the scientific advice he was getting.

Well that is my point. Predicting the future is not easy.

But i would trust Hockey more than i would trust Swan. It will be interesting to see how close or far out are the predictions of Hockey.

But predicting the climate in 75 years is madness. Apparently it is all computer modelling. And a computer cannot model the climate.

Economics is not a science neil [although some of them like to think they’re scientists], not sure what it’s classed as – an art? Certainly not one of the ‘hard’ sciences.

Why Economics Is Not A Science
https://robertnielsen21.wordpress.com/2014/08/09/why-economics-is-not-a-science/

Predicting the future is not easy.

Yet you continue to trot out the same old shit

And, the ‘models’ have proven to be worryingly accurate especially when you consider the variabilities involved.

“Economics is not a science neil”

And neither is computer modelling of the climate.

It is a prediction and cannot be falsified. You have to wait until the prediction turns out to be wrong.

Fact is the computer models cannot explain the current pause in temperature increase.

Well around and around the mulberry bush we go. To bad the Met Office does not agree with you

https://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2013/09/27/ipcc-5th-assessment-report-in-the-news/

“Over recent days some commentators have criticised climate models for not predicting the pause. It’s good to see this being addressed, and so begin to clarify the difference between climate model projections and predictions”

The current pause was not predicted. The Met Office says this is because of the difference between short terms predictions which could be wrong and long term projections which will be correct.

I predict that AGW will prove to be the biggest fraud in scientific history. But the first comment on the Met Office blog got it right.

I am not cherry picking anything. I quoted the Met Office which has more authority than anything TomR or AO posted.

The Met Office said climate models did not predict the pause. They gave an explanation. Short term predictions may be wrong but long term projections will be right.

Whatever.

What is their grievance?

We are here to edimicate youse yomm 😉

https://theguttertrash.com/2015/01/23/rostrum-i-want-to-believe-edition/#comment-92827

People are talking about removing penalty rates for casual workers on the weekend.

but the changes will apply to

full time workers doing overtime or for shiftworkers.

workchoice obfuscation 101

Mind you, penalty rates should be applied to casual workers on the weekend too. It is still a weekend.

The shops wanted to open all weekend, now comes stage two.

It is all workchoices by stealth. cutting workers conditions.

“Mind you, penalty rates should be applied to casual workers on the weekend too. It is still a weekend”

I can see an argument for only giving penalty rates only for people working overtime or doing shiftwork.

The argument is that giving penalty rates for casual workers on weekends keeps business closed and reduces employment.

And, penalty rates is not all they are after. The minimum wage is on the hitlist too

Another review has set its sights on the minimum wage. Hopefully it realises that by keeping people out of the labour market, the minimum wage is creating the very poverty trap it is supposed to alleviate, writes Chris Berg.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-01-27/berg-minimum-wages-and-the-path-to-poverty/6048126

I remain agnostic … yet accept the part of the projections that have come to fruition and can no longer be denied, but reject everything else those same scientists who warned of it years ago because ….. “because I support free markets or because I receive income indirectly from the mining of coal in Northumberland”

A highly predictable read from another Denier just trying on a different angle but with the same base problem as every other Denier. Getting it wrong, and getting it wrong very often

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2015/jan/21/matt-ridley-wants-to-gamble-earths-future-because-wont-learn-from-past

Sorry, I’d love to be a ‘lukewarmer’, but every ‘argument’ I have read against AGW as the scientists predicts have that one trait in common. Inaccuracy.

or even most causes.

I’d settle for “lots” 😉

But, in scientists defence, I wasn’t relying on their expertise in those cases 😆

But, then again, I might have been right a few times too 😯

The polemic nature of the argument makes me view the overstatements made by both sides with extreme cynicism.

Is why I like to stick with scientists. It is when the media get hold of their “worst case” scenarios, and start treating it like an absolute. The recent non existent snow storm in New York is a prime example.

And (some) Iron Maiden is good!

And (some) Iron Maiden is bad!

Fixed it for ya 😉

I’ll leave ya with some more “facts” (imo 🙂 ) to mull over for now

https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/how-rudds-pink-batts-saved-australia,5625

If I join in will that make three of us?

You working on some kind of weird Human Centipede reb 😉

You two cheering each other on is quite pathetic.

I think splatterbottom nailed it with his description of Peter Garrett as a Celebrity Arsonist.

yaaays 😯 ROFL

what are you relying on, TR?

The scientific method TB. It has got us this far. It is others, yourself included it appears, who appear to be relying on faith (“Earth seems to have fended for itself “)? Lets hope so hey, even though the scientists point out that it hasn’t (you know, the climate has changed before, but much to the detriment of life on earth at those times).

I do not understand the finer details of all there is to understand. All I know is, the vast majority of scientists, who are constantly looking, refining, accepting their mistakes (yes, they are made) and going back again to look at it from fresh angels, are consistently coming to the same conclusion.

On the other hand, that tiny band of scientists who are not convinced (along with a huge coterie of “like minded” individuals) suffer an appalling legacy of mistakes (which they refuse to acknowledge) and outright lies. As I mentioned above, I am yet to have come across a convincing argument against the science that is not full of lies and/or mistakes.

So I’ll stick with facts, as I did with Pink Batts and School Halls.

Unfortunately, I do sometimes go with my gut, like I did with rudd. The facts in that case showed my gut to be wrong 😦

But, I also went with my gut with Gillard. My gut turned out to be right there, much to the chagrin of the newscorpse empire and other random haterz of rangas and Union “collaborators”

I’m going with my gut with Shorten. I guess you see a pattern forming 😉

I can live with that though 😉

Trains are so crowded in India, sometimes you just have to ride on the roof.

Middle Eastern Muslims blame the economic backwardness of the region on external factors

You don’t think that they have a case to argue?

The difference in degree is so vast as to make your comment laughable.

No need to go into the issue, I just wanted to point out that the hatred goes both ways. It is not a one way street although, at the current stage in history, I am sure the hatred towards Jews is higher than the Jews hatred.

Colonialism is much more than a Western phenomenon.

Which is why I (think) I have started using ‘external’ forces rather than ‘Western’, although, in the 20th century (where imo the ‘root’ cause of the present situation lies) western influence is the key.

Perhaps I should also clarify what I mean by ‘root’. As you have pointed out, there are many factors that could/can be placed as ‘root’. Too me, in the current historical framework, the ‘root’ cause is a cause we have some kind of control over. We can ‘blame’ the Ottomans, the Crusaders or the Mongols till the sun goes down, but, they are long gone, and their influence is all that remains. But, we have the power now to stop (or help heal) the interference and divisiveness that current (or recent 20th century) Western Imperialism has inflicted on the region. To my mind, a lot of the divisiveness that is manifesting is the result of these external factors playing already divided (eg Sunni and Shiite) factions of against each other.

I recently listened to pod where it was argued that the War on Terror was a defensive war, in the respect that it is a reactionary action, and that was why it would ultimately fail. The argument was that the War should take on the role of the aggressor, but not through military action, but with dialogue. The starting point would be to get ALL sides together to put their grievances, and from there… that was the point, get everyone together. And that would include the radicals such as daesh.

I don’t know if this approach will produce a different outcome, but, in my mind, is far better than a continuation of the current cycle. At least it tackles it from another direction.

And again, I will re-iterate, the various faiths, the Moslem one most importantly, need to play their part also in this dialogue

MONSTER sharks are prowling the north coast unrestricted with marine parks, whale migration, schools of bait fish and a lack of shark nets luring them closer to shore.

They just can’t help themselves, can they.

I can just see those non existent shark nets flashing their non existent legs and coaxing the sharks in. Add to that the allure of a Marine Park and all it’s free rides …….

Or it could be simply the result of more sharks and more people, which the article finally gets to?

Like all bad things shark attacks are caused by global warming.

I’m surprised they didn’t work that into their blame game actually sb.

I’m not sure how Marine Parks get in there, because, as we know, Marine Parks have killed fishing, and fishing lures sharks in. Logic bomb there. After the ‘lure’ of non existent nets ROFL

Unless the shark has Wifi

Jonah of Melbourne (or vicinities)

I think the beach and water is our territory too.

Yes, but we are “supposedly” the smart ones. Time for you to develop a shark repellent that actually works 😉

Most surfers would probably prefer to be eaten

Stupidity does have it’s role to play also

…and I note Evan Walker died today. He was another ALP politician who wouldn’t get anywhere near preselection these days.

He was an intelligent, worldly architect, interested in all the factional crap.

Maybe that’s because they’re such detestable unemployable fkn cnuts in the first place…!

Actually, they seem to be the ones we end up voting for 😦

and an excellent weight loss program.

crystal what? I might have to look into this wonder cure.