Give the Prime Minister Respect

[medicowallet]

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

This is true. Perhaps said journalists are not competent enough to pressure a PM without getting aggressive.

Unfortunately the shock jocks get paid millions to behave like fools for their listeners. However, if Juliar did not go back on her word, then perhaps the shock jocks would not have so much ammunition to misbehave with.

 

[GumbyLearner]

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

No mate. I'm not talking about driving rigs. I'm talking about loading 50 kilogram bags of sugar on your head all day and stacked into 90 foot containers.

Save your bows for your friends!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

No mate. I'm not talking about driving rigs. I'm talking about loading 50 kilogram bags of sugar on your head all day and stacked into 90 foot containers.

Save your bows for your friends!

Sweet.

gg

 

[wayneL]

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 .

No.

As one prone to the occasional (ok frequent) rant, I recognize a rant when I see one.

Rants are fine BTW... in the right place.

 

[Sean K]

Wow, it's like question time in here!

In the military, you respect the rank, not the person. It's one of the few institutions that it's appropriate and very well justified. Respect and loyalty up and down the chain of command.

In a democracy, I'm not so sure.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

Ladies and Gents

Ego

Id

Superego

Lest we forget.

gg

 

[IFocus]

The likes of Jones and co are simply dogs chasing dollars and their inflated egos. Unfortunately they are surrounded by the usually howling pack helping them to achieve both.

They care little about public standards, they reinforce bad behavior and bigoted standards in the community as being OK.

I don't mind anyone having a shot at any politician on any subject and good luck if they trap them but the crude rudeness that's been displayed along with the hate message has not historically been a part of the Australian media and nor should it be.

Its interesting reading the bias claims, being socially left of the communist party I fail to see basis of the claims. I think that most of the commentary is actually fairly central with very few who are genuinely left.

 

[drsmith]

Respect should be given where respect is due.

If Ross Garnaut's latest suggestion gets up, 1/2 of what gets taken from our wallets we will get back as tax cuts (net of social redistribution of course) and only the other half will be flushed down the toilet.

 

[Julia]

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

Mofra, my point was not at all about comparing Q & A with any other programs or any other media. It was purely about the balance on one television program which purports to offer balanced political views. Unless both the audience and the questions display such a 50/50 balance, the program is biased and unbalanced in my view, especially with Tony Jones's clear bias to the Left.

It is disingenuous of you (and not worthy of you as the reasonable person you are) to turn this into a comparison with the right wing media.

Duckman has more than adequately addressed this in his well thought out post.

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

Good demonstration of the point, Duckman. You'd never have seen John Howard or Paul Keating clowning around on a media bus.

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

Oh, Knobby, how about a little objectivity? What about all the bullying that goes on all the time from the climate change enthusiasts toward anyone who dares to raise a question about it? Where they are scornfully labelled in the most derisive tones 'climate change deniers' in a tone reminiscent of the "holocaust deniers".

This is bullying of the worst order.

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.

Might be good to let gg speak for himself, don't you think?

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.

Why do you feel the need to label anyone on this forum who happens to have an opinion different from your own, and who happens to agree with some other members, with pejorative and critical terminology?

Why not just accept that not everyone will share your point of view and be gracious enough to refrain from slurring those who disagree.

I don't agree with you, Knobby, on many issues. But I don't find it necessary to personalise my disagreement and make pejorative comments about you.

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.

Basilio, your own politics are well known on this forum, particularly with regard to climate. I agree with Wayne that it's disappointing that you have turned the discussion on respect for the PM to your own hobby horse.

And hopefully you might consider my remarks to Knobby above re bullying.
You climate change devotees have been taking the moral high ground over any one who raises any questions, who even claims an agnostic position, as "deniers" for a long time now. Imo that is not being prepared to engage in any debate. It is rather the adoption of the view that anyone who fails to wholeheartedly agree with you is bad, unreasonable, unthinking, and amoral.

Since you have brought the whole subject up again, in this relatively unrelated thread, perhaps you would be good enough to answer the question to which I've been seeking an answer for some time, i.e. what exactly will be the result on the climate of Australia's adopting a carbon tax, especially in the face of most of the rest of the world, including the greatest emitters, failing to do?

And just on the subject of respect for the Prime Minister, why did she say on Q & A that China are closing down a coal fired power station every week, without adding that they are replacing these with more coal fired power stations in even greater number which have better technology?

Isn't that her own form of bullying and misrepresentation?

Why would I respect her for such manipulative comments?

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.

No, Basilio, I don't think you can reasonably claim only one side was trying to have a debate just because not everyone agreed with you.

We are all entitled to hold the views we do. I respect that you believe what you do.
Why can you not respect that - in the absence of a personal capacity to make informed judgements about the science on either side - I take an agnostic view, and resent being criticised for this?

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.

The 'ramblings of some million idiot celebrities and relentless consumer pump priming", yet you talk of 'bullying' by others when you use language like this???
Just think about it.
You sound like a member of a cult with all the uncritical devotion this implies.

 

[sails]

...I don't mind anyone having a shot at any politician on any subject and good luck if they trap them but the crude rudeness that's been displayed along with the hate message has not historically been a part of the Australian media and nor should it be.

Its interesting reading the bias claims, being socially left of the communist party I fail to see basis of the claims. I think that most of the commentary is actually fairly central with very few who are genuinely left.

Now, if Abbott had got in as PM, I would imagine the lefties would be slinging insults left, right and centre. Howard copped a lot of ribbing and name calling too. So why should it be any different to a feminist PM? Feminists want to be seen as equal to men, so why would Ms Gillard want to be treated differently?

And wasn't Ms Gillard herself a member of the communist party? We understand she has links to fabian and her methods of ruling the people does seem to fit in with fabian ideals.

There is nothing democratic that I can see about the labor party when the PM can make unilateral decisions and the rest of the party members don't necessarily have a say.

 

[Calliope]

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.

Poor old Knobby thinks I was bullying him. Apparently anyone who disagrees with him is a bully. I am at a loss to see what this has do do with this thread. And basillo your posts are mainly nagging and preaching. Neither you nor Knobby have advanced any reason why Ms Gillard should be treated with respect.

It is difficult to be respectful of the office of PM when Gillard only holds the office by betraying the previous PM and with the support of self-serving independents who have betrayed their electorates.

I suggest you both read and digest Julia's post (two back). You might learn some manners.

 

[GumbyLearner]

This thread is so scary.

I'm off to my 50kg on the back deal, with Hughie Williams approval!

In the past I just wanted to graduate. But now that I realize that cats-bum-mouth dudes like Kevin Rudd couldn't give a ****, and Julia Gillard couldn't care less either.

Bring it? We are here for the taking.

 

[Logique]

...Now, if Abbott had got in as PM, I would imagine the lefties would be slinging insults left, right and centre. Howard copped a lot of ribbing and name calling too. So why should it be any different to a feminist PM? Feminists want to be seen as equal to men, so why would Ms Gillard want to be treated differentlly?...

It's a little bit - what goes around comes around. The far Left had a visceral and unrelenting hatred of John Howard, and paid out on him mercilessly. Sure, two wrongs don't make a right, but if you step up to the plate in federal politics, that's how it goes down.

Gillard can sob into her air travel Gold Pass and lifelong pension.

 

[noco]

The likes of Jones and co are simply dogs chasing dollars and their inflated egos. Unfortunately they are surrounded by the usually howling pack helping them to achieve both.

They care little about public standards, they reinforce bad behavior and bigoted standards in the community as being OK.

I don't mind anyone having a shot at any politician on any subject and good luck if they trap them but the crude rudeness that's been displayed along with the hate message has not historically been a part of the Australian media and nor should it be.

Its interesting reading the bias claims, being socially left of the communist party I fail to see basis of the claims. I think that most of the commentary is actually fairly central with very few who are genuinely left.

Which Jones are you talking about? Tony Jones is so biased towards the sociaist left, he would leave Alan Jones for dead.

 

[noco]

Respect should be given where respect is due.

If Ross Garnaut's latest suggestion gets up, 1/2 of what gets taken from our wallets we will get back as tax cuts (net of social redistribution of course) and only the other half will be flushed down the toilet.

And what about all the extra bureaucrats who will be required to administer such a system. We need less not more.

 

[Calliope]

Annabel Crabbe said in The Drum on Feb 8;

Why do we usually forgive new prime ministers so much? Because we chose them, generally, and just as a proud new car owner steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the slight heaviness of the vehicle's steering or the idiotic tininess of its glovebox, so do we tend to give our new PMs the benefit of the doubt, for the first year or two.

But Julia Gillard is in a different position. First appointed to the prime ministership by Caucus and then reappointed, post-election, by a misshapen committee of independents, she does not enjoy the subtle protection of a sentimental bond with her electors.

She is a new prime minister, without that "New Prime Minister" smell.

(my bolds)

She became PM under false pretences and lies, and is fair game.

 

[IFocus]

It's a little bit - what goes around comes around. The far Left had a visceral and unrelenting hatred of John Howard, and paid out on him mercilessly. Sure, two wrongs don't make a right, but if you step up to the plate in federal politics, that's how it goes down.

Gillard can sob into her air travel Gold Pass and lifelong pension.

Howard was never ever as I recall treated with the sheer arrogance and contempt by any sections of the media that the RW shock jocks do to Gillard.

Fact is they perpetrate haft truths and lies

 

[sails]

Howard was never ever as I recall treated with the sheer arrogance and contempt by any sections of the media that the RW shock jocks do to Gillard.

Fact is they perpetrate haft truths and lies

IMO, Ms Gillard has asked for it to a large degree with her seeming contempt of the Australian people. Nobody likes to being lied to so arrogantly. And that's not a half truth - Ms Gillard has admitted that she lied to the people.

Carbon tax may well have a huge ripple effect, IMO. It's not a little promise she has broken, it's potentially a big one which could hurt the working people and families of Australia.

IMO, the only way she can redeem even a little credibility would be to honour Swan's promise of "not in this term" and let the people decide. Surely, that is the decent thing to do.

 

[drsmith]

IMO, the only way she can redeem even a little credibility would be to honour Swan's promise of "not in this term" and let the people decide. Surely, that is the decent thing to do.

It may be the decent thing to do, but decency is beyond the Greens that Labor is in bed with.

 

[Calliope]

Fact is they perpetrate haft truths and lies

Nobody has to perpetrate haft truths and lies about Gillard, She does that all by herself.