Lately the pond has been doing a lot of surfing of climate change porn. It's deeply disturbing but strangely compelling, and there's a lot of it about on the full to overflowing intertubes this past week, what with fires in Greece, and supercharged heat everywhere, unless it happens to be supercharged rain and floods.
Just this morning the pond looked at the Graudian and was reminded yet again 'We are damned fools' ...
Meanwhile, the entire concept has been buried in the cornfield by the reptiles, unless it involves nuking the country or dire warnings about the price of electricity, while an ominous summer looms.
As usual, the warnings are accompanied by snaps of the beloved - coal-fired power stations - and wicked wind farms, this way coming, as noted in the business section of the lizard Oz this morning ...
The pond only mentions all this by way of preamble, because for once the pond decided to stray into petulant Peta turf, understanding that this might well trigger both unsuspecting and suspecting stray readers.
But it's such a dinosaur doozy and speaking of damned fools, there's something to be learned from it, because if ever there was a damned fool incapable of learning anything, it's petulant Peta and her underlord, that wretched climate science denying, deeply submissive clown, the onion muncher ...
What's most telling in all this guff?
The pond proposes it's the entrenched, deeply backward desire to live, neigh immerse oneself, in some nostalgic past, where petulant Peta ruled the roost, and the onion muncher, and thereby the country ... and never mind that it was a time when the onion muncher carried on in such a deeply luddite way that it quickly saw him kicked to the bleachers, or if you will, to the outer reaches, keeping company with Jordan Peterson and carrying on like all twittering, deeply irrelevant twits ..
The pond isn't going to link to the onion muncher on parade in the UK version of the Terror, but this sample will serve ...
Eek, sapping our societies of precious bodily fluids ... where will it end? Well, at least petulant Peta will end with this gobbet, though likely the pond will be traumatised for the rest of the week at the spectre yet again invoked of the long march through the institutions, while blathering about "supposedly imminent" problems arising from climate change ...
Meanwhile, the reptiles seem to have given up on the games, there's the usual newsletter from kiwi land bemoaning the quality of the fush and chups, a serve of doddering Dodd, and the standard offering from simplistic "here no conflict of interest" Simon ... together with a moan from the craven Craven...
Thus far there's been no other takers for the games, despite the lures and temptations ...
... and that just leaves the pond with the craven Craven.
Unfortunately ... because the pond never likes to spend time with the craven Craven, but if the pond had the stomach to serve up a dose of petulant Peta, why not?
At least the infallible Pope could serve as an introduction to the topic ...
The pond is never sure whether to think of the craven Craven as wretched, or pathetic, or perhaps both ...
Back in January the craven Craven had a hissy fit ... and naturally Sky News seized on it, with Patrick Hannaford whipping up a story headed Greg Craven expects Australians to reject the Indigenous Voice to Parliament 'in droves' - despite his support for it - due to a lack of detail.
The lede was just as damning: A director of the pro-Voice organisation Uphold and Recognise has revealed he expects Australians to reject the referendum "in droves" due to a lack of detail from the Albanese Government.
The pond doesn't like to link to News Corp outfits or yarns, so here's a sampling ...
...His remarks were met with shock and disgust among Indigenous leaders contacted on Sunday. One member of the referendum working group said Professor Craven was angry that his colleagues did not share the intensity of his views about how the constitutional amendment for the voice should be worded.
Professor Craven has concerns over the provision for the voice to advise the bureaucracy – executive government – and not just parliament.
Speaking on the condition of anonymity, the working group member questioned how Professor Craven could continue to provide advice to the Indigenous leaders on the referendum working group after what would be viewed as an attack on them.
“Unfortunately cry-baby Craven has compromised himself,” one member of the working group said. “I don’t see how this has become such a big issue for the voice to advise government when the former government commissioned exactly that – a voice to government.”
In his essay in The Australian on Monday, Professor Craven said: “Most in the voice’s inner circle simply want a good model supporting a vital cause. They have views, but would never risk the referendum. Then there are others. Admittedly, some are honourable protagonists who genuinely cannot support a version of the voice they believe will short-change Indigenous people. They may be wrong, but cannot be blamed.
“Others are more complex. They would rather the referendum founder than not reflect their own wide raft of policy or even their preferred wording. This position ranges from misplaced intransigence to egotism.
“Then there are those who would not just watch the referendum fail but actively blow it up if they could not absolutely control the outcome. They would walk away, blaming the government for the debacle.
“They are the ‘All or nothing’ faction. Their exact motives are unclear but they assume a grave moral responsibility.
“The problem with all or nothing is you often get nothing.”
Cry-baby Craven! That has a ring to it, and the cry-baby fuss was still going on in February, as in the Graudian's Greg Craven criticised for comments about voice referendum working group...
A senior barrister advising the Albanese government on the Indigenous voice to parliament referendum has blasted the constitutional lawyer Greg Craven for claiming members of the referendum working group were willing to “blow it up” if they couldn’t control the outcome.
Working group member Tony McAvoy SC said Prof Craven had stepped “way outside his remit” by incorrectly labelling the views of some in the group as “misplaced intransigence” and “egotism”.
“The fact that he has chosen to discuss the internal workings of the referendum working group in a way that’s incorrect discloses a failure on his part to appreciate his role, and tends to paint him as a political fanatic who intends on having his own way, when he understands fully that his remit is that of a constitutional law expert,” McAvoy said.
And now here we are ...
It's called projection, but it meant that the craven Craven turned up in the latest immortal Rowe ...
Details, it's always in the details ... but of course the craven Craven has made it all about him, because that's what narcissists with giant egos are inclined to do ...
Why is that Sky News link a different colour?
Well the pond went there, so others wouldn't have to bother ...
...the inclusion in the No material of excerpts from Professor Craven’s evidence to the Senate inquiry on the constitutional amendment has led him to claim the campaign had misrepresented his views.
Quotes from the academic and Voice advocate were used on the official No pamphlet to demonstrate how broad a remit the Voice would have.
“I think it’s fatally flawed because what it does is retain the full range of review of executive action,” the pamphlet reads, attributing the quote to Professor Craven.
“This means the Voice can comment on everything from submarines to parking tickets… We will have regular judicial interventions.”
Speaking to Sky News Australia’s Political Editor Andrew Clennell on Tuesday, Professor Craven described the No pamphlet as “misleading” and revealed he would report the incident to the AEC.
However, when asked if he still stood by the quote, Professor Craven did not correct his original comments.
“I think the Voice potentially has a great width on what it would comment, I think there are going to be two constraining things, one would be if the Voice starts commenting on everything from parking tickets to whatever, it would waste its own credibility,” Professor Craven said.
“And that would put it in a difficult position and gradually it would lose its confidence, it will lose the confidence of the Australian people and parliament.
“The second thing is it is possible to legislate within the envelope of what the constitutional amendment says.
“I have never shied away from the fact that it’s going to have to be very very careful legislation to make sure that the voice does not exceed its position.”...
More meat for the reptiles and the 'no' mob from the pompous whining prof ...
And then for the closer a lesson in pompous whining futility...
...Professor Craven has also indicated he would file a complaint with the Australian Electoral Commission over the No campaign’s inclusion of his quote, but conceded there was likely nothing the body could do.
“I think as a matter of principle that I should complain to the AEC that the pamphlet is misleading and to that extent it has the potential to deceive about the arguments,” he said.
“Do I think the AEC will be capable of doing anything I doubt it, but I believe that these things should be placed on record.”
The AEC however has said it has no power to change any information in either of the campaigns’ pamphlets.
“We are a post box and we will be publishing the information that we were provided by the deadline,” AEC Commissioner Tom Rogers told Sky News Australia on Tuesday.
“There’s no legislative way for us change that and that’s exactly what we’ll be doing.”
So here we are yet again, and with friends like these, who needs enemies?
But what to do with craven, lily livered white anters, underminers and mindless server of fodder for the hounds?
Oh yes, there are slavering, slobbering hounds and for months, the narcissistic, self-serving, attention-seeking prof has been serving them red meat ...
Details, it's always the details and yet has anyone single-handedly managed to do more of a disservice to the 'yes' campaign than this purported supporter, who always tries to make it about him and his narcissist ego?
What a loser, what a drop kick, always willing to create confusion and chaos, provided he's at the centre of it, and always willing to run up the white flag ... and now to put those aforementioned details into context with the full, closing immortal Rowe ...
Petulant Peta tells us that the liberals are seen as the better financial managers only because her mob have hoodwink everyone into believing this falsehood.
ReplyDeleteUnder pig iron Bob interest rates went 23% in the 50s and we had a severe recession in the 60s and under little Johnny it was not all bells and whistles either.
Anonymous - Coalition 'management' of the economy in the early 60s should have destroyed any reputation they still carried even for being able to promote business with their economic policies. During the 'credit squeeze' - which came so close to seeing Menzies removed from office (well, except for some famous Communist preferences, and the strictures on voting rights for the member for the Northern Territory) - the official interest rate was of little interest to small businesses - money simply was not available. Then, with wonderful timing, they proceeded with Barwick's Simon-pure Trade Practices Legislation. Well - I use 'Simon-pure' carefully, because much of its application was highly selective. Tied newsagencies, with their delivery territories, were excused (guess which rising newspaper proprietor organised that?). Likewise, milk runs and other restricted trade arrangements within statutory marketing systems (Country Party). The point was, there was no systematic sorting of various trade arrangements - exemptions were in response to simple, direct, political thuggery. But Barwick had to problem seeing agent's districts for all sorts of vehicles, machinery and rural services abolished virtually overnight, and, with that, the basis for funding floor stock for those businesses.
DeleteI have never been able to work out what the Libs had against manufacturing motor vehicles in Australia. They certainly put it to the death of a thousand cuts - but, in an attempt at fairness, I would say they had little idea of what they were doing, as they took each downwards step to destroying that industry.
'But Barwick had no problem seeing agent's districts etc.' Chadwick. on the other hand (the right hand, at that) had trouble with the key for 'n' and for 't'.
DeleteI dunno about the Lib destruction of the motor industry either, Chad; maybe it was just trying to provoke the Big Three (GM, Ford, Toyota - our motor industry remainders) into becoming major funders for the Libs, which they really hadn't been for a while and which newsagents couldn't be expected to be. But it took quite a time to wind down the local industry - I still recall doing ADP servicing for Mitsubishi (which took over from Chrysler) up until fairly near 2008 - the year Mitsubishi stopped manufacturing and simply became an importer from Japan.
DeleteI still recall the General Motors railway station on the Packenham line - not sure whether we ever had any other business specific 'suburban line' stations in Australia.
So, um, Peta, if Liberal voters didn't 'go teal' at the last election, then just where did they go? A lot of them certainly didn't vote Liberal.
ReplyDeleteGot to hand it to Peta - for somebody who appears as thick as two short planks, she did an excellent job in convincing many of us that she was some sort of political mastermind, back when she was the Onion Muncher’s chief string-puller. No sooner does she stress the importance of “learning from defeat… informed by empirical fact” than she lays out the usual set of lazy cliches - “Neo- Marxist Left”, “struggle street”, an absurd quote from a dead US President, a few swipes on gender issues - as well as parading the standard denials of reality - the Libs don’t have a women problem, the Party doesn’t need to moderate it’s policies, the Teals are a passing aberration, and so on. Not a spark of originality in the whole rant. She’s just another manifestation of the Liberal Party echo chamber, without a single original thought, and more power to her as she assists her Party down the road to oblivion.
ReplyDeleteStill, gotta chuckle at the Petulant One’s reverence for ”empirical fact”, when she headed up the most relentlessly fact-free political campaign in the country’s history.
Credlin!!!! Aaargh!!! Well, because she got a guernsey, it was a quick read today . Peta is particularly not welcome in this household. The others are just not welcome.
ReplyDeleteCredlin downplays the last election results. Take Goldstein in Victoria.
ReplyDeleteTo begin, look at the results in 2019.
First preferences:
Liberals: 52.67%
The Greens: 14.04%
ALP: 28.31%
Two-party preferred result was: Liberals 62.68% ALP: 57.32%
Now some of the Greens preferential votes clearly ended up going to Wilson, not the ALP.
That’s the first thing that Credlin has failed to acknowledge. So some of those Greens voters were not actually ideologically aligned to the ALP. Perhaps their vote was a protest vote in 2019 against Liberal party policies, who knows.
In 2022 the results were:-
First preferences:
Liberals: 40.38%
ALP: 11.01%
Greens: 7.83%
Independent: 34.47%
Two party preferred:
Liberals: 54.80%
ALP: 45.20%
Two candidate preferred result:
Independent (Teal) was elected: 52.87% Liberal: 47.13%
Certainly ALP and Greens voters voted strategically and some Greens voters whose preferences went to the Liberals previously may have changed preferences, but that doesn’t alter the fact that a sizeable number - 12% from the Liberal primary vote in 2019 – that is, normally dyed-in-the wool Liberal voters - voted against the incumbent for a moderate candidate, as against the Liberal incumbent (Credlin ignores the advantages of incumbency, too).
Credlin mentions Victoria, but look at NSW’s Zali Steggall, who has won twice in Tony Abbott’s old electorate. Perhaps best not to mention that.
"The pond proposes it's the entrenched, deeply backward desire to live, neigh immerse oneself, in some nostalgic past...". Mebbe, DP, but I kinda think it's really all about living in an imaginary present: one in which Petty Peta et al are always right, and if they don't win it's just because those gormless voters have been conned into not voting for Peta's lot but for - ooops - those intolerable teals.
ReplyDeleteWhat's entertaining is Peta's belief that the "almost one in five" who previously voted Liberal instead went for teals this time. Now who, apart from Peta, would attempt to convey that a virtually 20% fall in your primary vote was really of no concern. Now who, pray tell, has survived a 20% bailout in votes ? Certainly none of those who elected teals anyway.
Is Peta a member of the 100% club ? If you're not fully for me then you must be against me ? So hey, 20% in and of itself won't make any difference, will it ?
Oh goodness:
ReplyDeleteUnemployment rate falls to 3.5% as the economy adds 32,600 jobs in June on latest ABS figures
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/jul/20/unemployment-rate-falls-to-35-as-the-economy-adds-32600-jobs-in-june-on-latest-abs-figures
Now just watch inflation rocket skywards. Who is doing this awful undermining of Australia ?
But, but there's this ironclad relationship between unemployment and inflation: we've been told that over and over. So as unemployment goes down, inflation just goes up and up. We've been told that, over and over. So how come unemployment is going down in various places, but inflation is going down too !
DeleteI mean we wouldn't like to know that the RBA (and Phil and ...) don't really have any effing idea what the effect of unemployment on inflation really is.
Ooops:
DeleteInflation is falling in Australia and New Zealand — but how do we stack up against the rest of the world?
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-07-21/inflation-rates-cpi-new-zealand-australia-us-uk-germany-japan/102620210
A point that the ANU study seems to ignore is that not everyone who votes has the same view of the world as perhaps the members of political parties do, so many voters may vote according to policies offered at the time or simply their own interests or views on the political situation, which may not be ideological at all. It may be a protest vote against a specific incumbent or an issue related to themselves. Not everyone who votes Green, ALP, Liberal or National is necessarily ideologically aligned to that party, but the study assumes that they are. Even if I vote Liberal regularly, it may be because I feel the incumbent ALP candidate is doing nothing for me on a regular basis or that a particular party does not offer anything for the electorate in which I live.
ReplyDeleteIt seems sometimes that the whole operational method of the far right is simply to wear everyone out. Put a fact in front of them and they will just deny it and keep on keeping on. It’s almost admirable!
ReplyDeleteThere’s phoney Tony still ranting against Marxists. For him, Marxism is government control. Perhaps Tony is unaware (but I doubt it) that government controls and regulates essential services, public infra-structure, hospitals, etc., mainly to protect people and perhaps because that's the job of government, but Abbott apparently wants it all abolished. One can only assume phoney Tony wants anarchy or perhaps only that he and his ilk control our lives.
Government is not controlling how electricity is produced. Hazelwood, for example was closed by the decision of the company, Engie, to decommission it. So far no government, either at state or federal level, has had a say in how I warm my house, nor in how I feed myself and I move around how I like, but if the phoney somehow has had his PM pension entitlements to travel around curtailed ... not my problem.
Abbott suggests that we should abandon "climate and identity obsessions" because China, Russia and Iran pay only lip service to these values and they are our competitors, so in order to beat them, we should become like them and drop climate and identity policies. Say what? We should be like the Marxist Putin and Xi or the fundamentalist Islamic Iran? Gosh, the Marxists have even got to Tony!
ReplyDeleteI hate to say this, Anony, but I think you'll find that Putin isn't even a nominal 'Marxist' - I'm not sure that there's any 'Marxists' in Russia these days at all. No, Putin is what he always wanted to be: the Tsar of All the Russias. Xi is at least a nominal 'marxist' but really he too is what he's always wanted to be: Tianzi (Son of Heaven).
DeleteYou can decide for yourself whether "Rahbar-e Moazam-e Irân" (Supreme Leader of Iran) is accurate.