Give the Prime Minister Respect

Sorry GG,

In my book, respect is not determined by birthright or by station, it is earned.

I thought a lady may have had greater conviction, instead of hiding behind little white lies and deception, but unfortunately politics even turns ladies into devils.

She has lost the respect of many people who voted for her on a promise, and I think she may have done the Labor party as much damage as Mr Keating (whom I still regard as the best politician I have ever seen)

She is an embarassement to be honest, seriously.

Julia said:

That was my post. I don't think 60/40 is balanced. In a political program, which it is, why should the audience not be 50/50 with the questions and guests balanced similarly?

Plus you have the added factor of the presenter being absolutely clearly pro government and anti liberal. He sets the tone.

Click to expand...

I think you have misinterpreted.
60/40 (presuming those figures are correct) would make it possibly the most balanced outlet of political discussion in Australia.
Given the prevalence of right wing tabloid media outlets & talkback radio, anything that presents anything less that a large bias to one side balances the equation should be encouraged.

Comments about Tony Jones are, again, subjective Julia

I find myself amazed at this thread

First GG putting up the proposition that the Prime Minister Julia Gillard show be shown respect as commensurate with the office of PM. I think that makes perfectly reasonable sense and I'm delighted if a bit surprised that the motion comes from GG.

And then we get this torrent of "hate" mail that appears to put Julia somewhere between Attila the Hun and Adolf Hitler. (okay just a little exaggeration) Somehow the point was lost that a degree of respect to the position of PM should also extend to the person who holds that position.

Anyway I suppose on such a topsy turvy day the only thing that would be more startling would be seeing some totally out there greenie advocating nuclear power as still an appropriate way of generating power.

Oops there go the flying pigs with George Monbiot in formation.

Japan nuclear crisis should not carry weight in atomic energy debate Chinese nuclear power plant

George Monbiot: Nuclear power remains far safer than coal. The awful events in Fukushima must not spook governments considering atomic energy

Click to expand...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/16/japan-fukushima-lessons-chernobyl

basilio said:

Anyway I suppose on such a topsy turvy day the only thing that would be more startling would be seeing some totally out there greenie advocating nuclear power as still an appropriate way of generating power.

Oops there go the flying pigs with George Monbiot in formation.

Click to expand...

It must be embarrassing coming from your hero, and in your favourite newspaper.

However it is still very safe. Three thousand people are killed daily in road accidents. How many are killed daily by nuclear radiation?

Mofra said:

I think you have misinterpreted.
60/40 (presuming those figures are correct) would make it possibly the most balanced outlet of political discussion in Australia.
Given the prevalence of right wing tabloid media outlets & talkback radio, anything that presents anything less that a large bias to one side balances the equation should be encouraged.

Comments about Tony Jones are, again, subjective Julia

Click to expand...

Given the prevalence of right wing tabloid media???

Firstly, let's have a look at the print media. The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age do a fine job of keeping the left heavily involved in reporting and shaping public opinion. Even The Australian announced Kevin Rudd as its Person of the Year in 2009!!! Then to top it off they announced Labor buddy Ken Henry as the Man of the Year in 2010!!! (This is probably worthy of another thread - but what were they thinking - and who will it be next year?? Bob Brown?? I'm betting on Rob Oakshott)

As for the ABC - where do we start?

Let's look at Insiders. Barry Cassidy, Malcolm Farr, Lenore Taylor, and let's not forget David Marr do a good job of stamping out the dissenting voice of the usually lone Andrew Bolt or Piers Ackermann. Hardly skewing on the conservative side of politics!

The there is the 7:30 Report - "Red" Kerry rarely went into bat for the Coalition. At least we have some imput from Chris Uhlmann now (perhaps the only conservative journo at the ABC - even if he doesn't fly the flag very high).

At least when Tony Jones was on Lateline he kept his views in check somewhat. Now that he is fronting Q&A his bias towards climate changing, pro-refugee lefties is now well and truely out in the open.

ABC Radio provides a wonderful forum for Phillip Adams and Fran Kelly to publicly voice their not so hidden agendas. Even Sunday night programming is now being used as a commercial for the Government. Last week this was being aired as a "special"......"What will Carbon Pricing mean for Australia? Europe has had a Carbon Pricing for 6 years. Find out why business not only likes it.... but demanded it. Join us tonight, 9:00 on your ABC". With stories like this who needs paid political advertising? Now I don't mind having a story about this ...but are we really going to see the corresponding story highlighting the dangers/problems of carbon pricing??

As for the commercial networks, we can hardly count Channel 10, as it has an audience of 132 people, 15 chooks, 3 dairy cows and a scarecrow, but let's say we do...George Negus has never been mistaken for being on the conservative side of politics.

Over at Channel 9, Laurie Oakes is being more blinkered with age, perhaps morphing back into his old position of Labor staffer.

As for Channel 7, the chief political reporter, is none other than Mark "Riles" Riley whose sole contribution to political debate this year has been ...."**** happens". Hmmmm. Let's think about about that for a moment. Over the past 3 months we've had Abbott/Bishop infighting, No Carbon Tax/Lies/Carbon Tax, Resource tax, flood levy/no flood levy, Rudd/Gillard conflict, Oakshott/Windsor pressure, Bob Brown and the spread of the Green Agenda etc etc etc and Riley's big report was ..........."**** happens".

Which brings me back to gg's original question? Should we give the Prime Minister respect? In my opinion we should...definately, but the fault lies not with the general public but front and centre with the media and the political parties themselves. One of the most enduring (and embarrassing) images of the last election campaign was of Julia Gillard climbing aboard the media bus, laughing and flirting with Mark Riley, passing out lollies to Malcolm Farr and generally watching a bunch of journos acting like kids on a school excursion.

Stunts like that are demeaning to the position of Prime Minister and like-wise the journalists lose credibility. I remember at the time that both the Labour party and the media promoted the story saying that ..."it shows that Julia Gillard is a real person..... her personality came out today". Well you can't have it both ways.......you are either an ordinary person or you are the Prime Minister. The inherent respect that comes with the position of Prime Minister won't stick if the behaviour of the Prime Minster is not worthy of it.

Duckman

You can understand how school bullying occurs when you read this thread.

Knobby22 said:

You can understand how school bullying occurs when you read this thread.

Click to expand...

No. Perhaps you can explain the connection.

Calliope said:

It must be embarrassing coming from your hero, and in your favourite newspaper.

However it is still very safe. Three thousand people are killed daily in road accidents. How many are killed daily by nuclear radiation?

Click to expand...

What was the death count for the "nuclear radiation" when the bombs went off in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? What was the death count in Russia when Chernobyl had its melt down?

I guess it is a question of scale. Nuclear Power can be a safe as houses until there is one accident, 3 mile island, chernobyl and now Japan. However when the accident occurs it is a bloody disaster. When a coal power station blows up, or a windmill generator falls over, they don't continue to be a disaster for 24 thousand years.

Alan Jones bullies the prime minister.

GG says that it is wrong, I think he is also hinting for some members here to act more honourably.

Certain people set the tone here say it is right to treat the Prime Minister badly and then others do their dirty work and do worse than Allan Jones. In other word pack behaviour.

I generally vote Liberal but have found some of the threads deplorable lately and am thinking of quitting Aussie Stock Forums to which I am a founding member. I have lost a lot of respect for some members, even trainspotter, whom I like, is now saying carbon dioxide is a cooling gas - look at dry ice as an example. I hope he was drunk when he wrote that.

You probably notice some of our moderates have shut up and probably left.
either don't talk issues or have left. I admire Basilio who keeps trying and even cracks jokes.

You Calliope are one of the worst.

One experience I have had with you was when you got your facts wrong about what Bob Brown said.

I said you are wrong which you acknowledged and then stated that is what you know he is really thinking and then accuse me of a hidden agenda.

You do this to everyone who doesn't agree with you. I wouldn't want to be in a schoolground with you.

nulla nulla said:

What was the death count in Russia when Chernobyl had its melt down?

Click to expand...

According to Associated Professor David Wigg (Director of Clinical Radiobiology at the Royal Adelaide Hospital) as at 2004 there was a total of 56 deaths as a result of Chernobyl.

nulla nulla said:

When a coal power station blows up, or a windmill generator falls over, they don't continue to be a disaster for 24 thousand years.

Click to expand...

With all due respect Nulla Nulla - why don't you goggle present day images of Hiroshima. A vibrant, modern city that you would expect to see in any Western country. Statements like ...."a disaster for 24 thousand years" is scaremongering at its best.

Interesting comments from Knobby22 on this issue and the broader questions it raises.

GG raised the issue of disrespect for the office of PM as shown by disrespect for the incumbent. The issue also encompasses how we as a democratic community explore the alternative directions we can go as a country and resolve the inevitable differences.

The theory of a parliamentary democracy is that different political views are put up by parties, that through strong discussion/debate, perhaps an independent press and some (relatively) impartial input from public servants and accepted authorities - respected scientists perhaps, the public can make some sort of informed choice. (I agree I have put a squillion qualifiers here but even as I state them I feel uncomfortable looking at the current reality)

What will degrade the final outcome will be argument based on single line responses (BIG NEW TAX) ; denigration of the opposing parties rather than discussing the policy proposals; overdue influence of any one particular group that attempts to dominate the final outcome; and finally the destruction of the credibility and therefore input of quality, disinterested specialists.

Knobby22 is quite right.( IMO) to point out that current political debate has been reduced to bullying tactics. And this behavior has become part of the social/political discussion in Australia as well as USA. This forum is too often a microcosm of that behaviour.

Knobby is accurate too in pointing out that I and many other members don't waste our time any more trying to have thoughtful discussions on many big issues. I did put in a considerable effort earlier on but came to the conclusion only one side was trying to have a debate.

With regard to the big issues of climate change and the urgent need to create a more sustainable lifestyle before we irrevocably trash the only home we have..

If anyone actually reads what historians, environmental scientists, climate scientists, geographers and many other experts have to say it becomes abundantly clear that the way we are currently living cannot continue. It is unsustainable. It will fail the way scores of other civilizations failed when they destroyed the resource base they were living in. Except this time of course we are trashing the whole house not just one room. And yet the issue is lost under the ramblings of some million idiot celebrities and relentless consumer pump priming. And of course the derision that is now routinely heaped on pointy headed scientists who want to spoil the party and just don't understand how fantastic and all powerful free enterprise and the market place really is.

I have been particularly amazed at how how the painstaking work of climate scientists over the past 30 years has been trashed by people who don't want to accept the results. The understandings of scientists grow as more eyes, brain power and technology is focused on an issue. So for the last 30-40 years a once small area of science has become far larger when questions started to arise as to whether our climate was rapidly changing and if humans were in part or largely responsible.

Science now understands far better than ever before the magnitude of what is happening to our climate and thus environment. What was once a strong theory has through painstaking research and the actual observable increases in temperature and weather swings become very, very solid. But that hasn't stopped the interests who would be affected by the necessary changes from deliberately creating mythical counter arguments and a litany of lies to obfuscate the obvious.

In fact it is almost identical to the successful campaign waged by the tobacco industry against health authorities for 60 years. Which makes sense of course because it was run by the same amoral tacticians who ran that little dupe.

It's what happens when we allow the free market and free enterprise free rein..

_________________________________________________________
Anyway there are still excellent qualities and value in ASF. I find the discussion on the stock issues quite invaluable and appreciate the effort many members make to bring forth quality information and tease out the sense from the nonsense with thought and grace. And there are certainly some general discussion topics with similar input.

Cheers

You should stop caller her a liar in the Labor Carbon Tax Lies thread GG.

But I will call her a liar in this thread if that's ok with you.

GumbyLearner said:

You should stop caller her a liar in the Labor Carbon Tax Lies thread GG.

But I will call her a liar in this thread if that's ok with you.

Click to expand...

Lol, GL , you are a thread nazi.

I can see you there with a bank of monitors, open on all threads, like a jesuitical monitor.

I, am allowed in my position as an ordinary Joe Blow ( scuse me Joe ) to call her a liar online, when in my opinion, and it is just opinion, I believe so.

The main stream media MSM have a duty to report under the ethics of journalism, and this is what I believe has been broached.

gg

Garpal Gumnut said:

Lol, GL , you are a thread nazi.

Click to expand...

Yes, I do observe your postings GG. But I'm not that critical mate.

I only don the Nazi gear when partying-on in shady establishments with
Formula One boss Max Mosley or going to parties with certain royals in the UK.

Usually, that's how I pre-occupy my time. ASF is just a hobby!

P.S. Never been to the UK in my life.

And it is good to know that you finally had that banana removed from your ear.:bananasmi

basilio takes the issue of respect for the office of PM (for what it's worth) and turns it to a rant of his/her personal take on climate science and the socialist-capitalist divide.

Nice OT rant exposing a raging bias.

Let's keep it on topic eh? (i.e. the office of PM)

Take your climate and political arguments to the appropriate thread please.

GumbyLearner said:

Yes, I do observe your postings GG. But I'm not that critical mate.

I only don the Nazi gear when partying-on in shady establishments with
Formula One boss Max Mosley or going to parties with certain royals.
And it is good to know that you finally had that banana removed from your ear.:bananasmi

Click to expand...

I knew we had met before. Are you B1, B2, or B3.?

I do like Max and Windsor/Battenberg parties.

Let's not take Julia or Tony.

gg

Garpal Gumnut said:

I knew we had met before. Are you B1, B2, or B3.?

Click to expand...

I'm not a political lobbyist from North Queensland but have moved plenty of truckloads of North Queensland Sugar in my time. Does that count?

GumbyLearner said:

I'm not a political lobbyist from North Queensland but have moved plenty of truckloads of North Queensland Sugar in my time. Does that count?

Click to expand...

I bow before thee, anyone who can drag a doubleB and a dog, has my respeck.

Now back to Julia's problems with the meeja.

Sometimes small dicks like the 2 jones' get above themselves and threads like these bring them back to earth.

Do not underestimate the power of the ordinary person to rein in loose cannons of the right and left.

She is our PM, and for publications and broadcasts that may be read or seen by overseas interests, there needs to be an element of respect for our Prime Minister.

gg

wayneL said:

basilio takes the issue of respect for the office of PM (for what it's worth) and turns it to a rant of his/her personal take on climate science and the socialist-capitalist divide.

Nice OT rant exposing a raging bias.

Let's keep it on topic eh? (i.e. the office of PM)

Take your climate and political arguments to the appropriate thread please.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the direction Wayne. I'll give it the respect it deserves.
Much of my response was directed to the issue of how we do discussion and debates of ideas. Knobby was highlighting the fact that currently too many discussion on this forum have disintegrated into simplistic bullying. I was expanding that into looking at how our society in general is going in that direction and used a couple of examples.

By the way I don't accept my discussions were a "rant" and if we are trying to keep this civil can you please retract that comment. It was unnecessary and belittling .