Home > Regular Features > Weekend reflections

Weekend reflections

December 5th, 2009

It’s time again for weekend reflections, which makes space for longer than usual comments on any topic. Civilised discussion and no coarse language please.

Categories: Regular Features Tags:
  1. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 11:23 | #1

    @Fran Barlow
    Plant Fran. Noxious weed like plant. Green handing out for a skeptic?. Expulsion.

  2. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 11:27 | #2

    @Donald Oats
    LOL Don – even Cheech and Chong called them “joints”. Abbot is just trying to pretend he doesnt know anything about it calling it a “reefer” (circa 1936) as in the below link… but Abbott really doesnt need the reefer!

  3. December 6th, 2009 at 11:32 | #3

    Economic Democracy in Spain – an analysis by Race Mathews…

    Dear friends,

    This week’s post at the Left Focus blog is unusual as it is an expansive essay (approx 5000 words) – treating the development of the Mondragon co-operative in Spain in great detail. While there’s a lot of reading here, Mathews demonstrates that a different kind of world is possible – with Mondragon as a case in point. We won’t be publishing as expansive material as this often – but for those interested in economic democracy this makes compelling reading… At the blog your comments are welcome!




    nb: If you enjoy this article pls also join our Facebook group – to link up with other readers, and to receive regular updates on new material.

    see: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=58243419565


    Tristan Ewins

  4. paul walter
    December 6th, 2009 at 11:44 | #4

    Well, all I can say is that all this has got very confusing.
    If Abbott is told to “eat the roach”, is this bad news for Julie Bishop?

  5. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 12:16 | #5

    ha ha big LOL…that is a good one Paul!

  6. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 12:18 | #6

    The roach survives all Paul…we know that. She will survive climate change and nuclear accidents and even survive the LP!

  7. December 6th, 2009 at 12:47 | #7

    “Sensible suburbia is not taken up with the ETS madness and we’re quite happy if Mr Rudd wants to go down the path of an election over the ETS,” he said.

    “.”We will be saying, it’s a massive new tax and if you want one in your life, vote for Kevin

    Bring it on.

  8. paul walter
    December 6th, 2009 at 12:50 | #8

    Not sure if Abbott used the term “reefer” himself, that was just me, being helpful. Got to “be with it, trendsetters”, y’know.
    Watching Virgin Queen Julie, onto her third leader in two years, am put in mind however, of the courtships of various and sundry during the Elizabethan “Gloriana” era.
    But who will play Essex, as this period soapie unfolds?

  9. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 13:15 | #9

    @paul walter
    ha ha Paul…I can see him using the term “reefer” even if he didnt! Next Tony will deny it and say he really “spluttered water at long reefer”.
    Oh dear – we have woken up one of zombie skeptic living deads.

  10. Donald Oats
    December 6th, 2009 at 13:34 | #10

    Coughed on a hookah with “special” tobacco, maybe?

  11. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 15:57 | #11

    @Donald Oats
    What kinda hookah you talking about Don? He is supposed to be catholic. No sex outside of marriage!

  12. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 17:17 | #12

    @Donald Oats
    Don – I dont believe Abbott is quite as innocent as he makes out. He did apparently expose himself to a female in the opposing debating team and indulge in appropriate behaviour at a students debate way back when at Kuringgai Campus Lindfield….when he was, of course, speaking for the right…
    However, I can forgive the indiscretions, experiments and odd biases of youth…but when they extend into middle age that is when we really need to worry..

  13. sdfc
    December 6th, 2009 at 18:24 | #13

    Charles says @ 33

    “Esky warming!

    And that is my point; every one is going on about the temperature while the ice is melting; the real fun starts when it is all melted.”

    I know that was your point Charles, I thought that as someone who constantly leaves the esky unemptied for days after we have people over I was in the perfect position to complete your little parable.

  14. paul walter
    December 6th, 2009 at 18:52 | #14

    Sdfc, exactly the point made on SBS news tonight, with a spectacular story complete with photo timeline, concerning the disappearance of of a High Andes glacier that used to service Caracas, the teeming capital of Bolivia.
    And not just the one glacier is disappearing, either.

  15. Alice
    December 6th, 2009 at 18:58 | #15

    @paul walter
    No Paul – even the snows of Kilimanjaro are disappearing. Now thats sad – a great Hemingway novel with no snow on Kilimanjaro. The story of a man facaing death who regrets mamy of the choices he made in life…how apt for those who currently act for us, making choices on our behalf. Will they live to regret also?

  16. Glenn Tamblyn
    December 6th, 2009 at 20:48 | #16

    @paul walter
    Small point Paul

    The capital of Bolivia is La Paz. Caracas is the capital of Venezuala

    But yes, with melting glaciers, including what was once the highest sky run in the world on the Chacaltaya Glacier at over 5000 m high and dry since Chacaltaya vanished, Bolivia, particularly La Paz,is in deep sh!t as far as water supply goes.

  17. paul walter
    December 6th, 2009 at 21:04 | #17

    hmmm…good point Glenn!
    Caracas for oil and barrios, La Paz for water, or the lack of it.
    Now, back to “Mills and Boon” story on ABC.

  18. TerjeP (say tay-a)
    December 7th, 2009 at 05:01 | #18

    For the greens to collect 35.3% of the primary vote is a vote for climate change policies in my opinion. Or its a vote of disgust with recent Federal liberal antics.

    Alice – Given that in Higgins there was a small swing towards the Liberal party I don’t see either of your conclusions as having much support.


  19. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 06:58 | #19

    @TerjeP (say tay-a)
    A swing to only after preferences were distributed Terje? And only after no labor candidate runs? Thats a laugh.
    Id say thats really swing away wouldnt you? You arent really fooling anyone on this. In Lib terms it was a bad result given the huge 23% swing to the Greens.

    I dont really want to burst your “Potzdamer” victory balloon on Higgins but someone has to do it.

    Oh and Terje – ABC this morning – preferred prime minister Abbot 23% – Rudd 60% according to most recent poll. Id say thats a poll result for climate change policies or a poll result for disgust at fed liberal antics. Wouldnt you. Didnt Rees even poll better than that?

  20. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 07:14 | #20

    @TerjeP (say tay-a)
    Terje – Ive just had a really good look at your link. In fact Higgins is a massive vote for decent climate change policies.
    Its a massive vote for the Greens from a bluer than blue seat Terje. Greens score 20,000 odd votes to 32,000 odd liberal votes.
    This is a kick to the posterior from your traditional liberal voters Terje….is the party listening or is it still dancing in delusion fairyland???

  21. rog
    December 7th, 2009 at 07:18 | #21

    The recent by-elections confirm that the Libs had to work hard in their safest seats just to maintain their 2007 vote.

    Hardly a victory

    The latest Newspoll suggests that the coalition vote has fallen by since 2007 whilst the ALP have improved by a corresponding amount over the same period.

    Using Antony Green’s on line calculator an election held now would have resulted in another 3 seats falling to the ALP.

    Even blind freddy can see that the ALP is currently the national party of choice.

  22. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 07:18 | #22

    Ignore comment at 18 – these were first preferences (you link). Two party preferred candidate Hamilton only 6000 behind the lib!. That in Higgins?? Costellos old haunt?
    Its a green swing Terje – a massive green swing in lib heartland.

  23. Paul Williams
    December 7th, 2009 at 08:05 | #23


    Two candidate preferred currently O’Dwyer 36,194, Hamilton 24,565.

    (That’s nearly 12,000 Alice)

  24. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 09:20 | #24

    @Paul Williams
    Paul (Williams) – its a virtual tally room. It changes with updates. Or didnt you notice that?

    you cant ignore the fact that the greens polled 24,565 as you said above, and the nearest competitor to the libs is the Australian Sex Party with approx 1950 votes. With a massive 22.4% swing to the Greens and a mere 0.34% swing to liberals and given Labor didnt run a candidate its easy to see who got the votes. The Greens got them.

    We are talking thousands of green votes in a traditionally blue long standing liberal seat.

    Make of what you will Paul. The electorate voted and they voted clearly. Even you cant ignore those results with a massive 40% swing to the greens.

  25. Donald Oats
    December 7th, 2009 at 09:33 | #25


    Ahhh, that’s referred to as “Clayton’s Sex”, you know, the old Clayton’s advert with Jack Thompson in it: “It’s the drink sex I have when I’m not having a drink sex.”

    It’s the type of sex that lands a certain opposition leader in the position of not even knowing that he might have a son outside of marriage or not. I believe it is called the withdrawal method, and by some Catholics as the “confessional method”, meaning a few “Hail Maries” are said immediately afterwards, and again at confession. The Catholic comedian Dave Allen used to do a good job sending this sort of thing up.

  26. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 10:01 | #26

    @Donald Oats
    In ancient script (catholic) Don, it was called quaintly called “buying a ticket to the city but getting off at redfern.” Never mind…all sins are vanquished in the confession box, but whether you say two or three or six hail marys depends, to be sure, to be sure… on whether the priest has a hangover or not.

  27. TerjeP (say tay-a)
    December 7th, 2009 at 11:13 | #27

    Alice – the Higgins election comes after a few dreadful weeks of negative publicity. And in spite of your false claims the proportion of the primary vote increased for the Liberals. Higgins was a good result for Abbott.

    Next election I’m still tipping an ALP win.

  28. TerjeP (say tay-a)
    December 7th, 2009 at 11:20 | #28

    Oh and the polls suggest that women have no particular problem with Abbott. So your insights on that matter were not particularily useful.

  29. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 12:02 | #29

    @TerjeP (say tay-a)
    Well then, we have agreement Terje (on the tip) and disagreement on the rest. Status per normal!

  30. Alice
    December 7th, 2009 at 12:07 | #30

    @TerjeP (say tay-a)
    Higgins was shocking result for the libs given no ALP candidate Terje. Abbott wont poll well – he isnt now. The negative publicity you refer to was weeks of the fruit loops getting up and letting rip with their delusionist ideas here, there and everywhere – which then made the papers. It may be negative publicity but they clearly have those ideas (Minchin, Joyce, Abbott). How does that make it negative publicity if its a fact thats what they think? Id call it the truth. Thats the trouble with the hard right. They have hard right views that are now unnaceptable to the majority of people.

  31. TerjeP (say tay-a)
    December 7th, 2009 at 12:32 | #31

    In the Werriwa by election in 2005 the Liberals did not stand a candidate. The net swing to the ALP was 2.9%. The absence of a major party opponent does not guarantee much in the way of extra votes. So the fact that there was no ALP opponent in the Higgins election does not mean that the Liberals should in normal circumstances have expected much of a swing in their favour. The fact that there was a slight swing in spite of recent negative publicity means that Higgins was a good result for Abbott.


  32. Paul Williams
    December 7th, 2009 at 12:51 | #32

    Glen Milne reports significant swings to the libs in booths that they lost in 2007.

  33. nanks
    December 7th, 2009 at 12:51 | #33

    I’d be agreeing vaguely with terjeP – the by-elections show little movement from libs to Greens and a preference for labs to vote Green in the absence of their own candidate. On the upside labor voters did choose Greens over Libs, with little or no leakage.
    Not too surprising – I would think that in a country like Australia, where the mass media more or less speak with one voice, the delusionist campaign has been successful in neutralising the impact of global warming as an election decider. Maybe… the real electoral battle will be in the Senate as usual and hopefully enough people will throw off their history of same old same old to vote for the Greens – the only actual alternative.

  34. Paul Williams
    December 7th, 2009 at 23:06 | #34

    O”Dwyer now 38,320, Hamilton 25,446 with 75.32% of vote counted.

    If I am reading the table correctly, the swing against Labor is 31.08%, but the swing to the Greens is only 21.76%. Looks like a third of labor voters don’t want an ETS either.

    Bring on that double dissolution!

  35. Alice
    December 8th, 2009 at 05:43 | #35

    @Paul Williams
    Hardly – the swing to the SEX party was about five times bigger than the swing to the libs Paul. The Greens still picked up 40% of the votes in a blue seat – you cant ignore that. Yes bring on the DD if this is the best you can do in liberal heartland.

  36. TerjeP (say tay-a)
    December 8th, 2009 at 06:06 | #36

    Nanks – I suspect that a lot of Liberals that might have traditionally voted for the Australian Democrats in the senate in order to “keep the bastards honest” or because of socially liberals views won’t so readily vote for the Greens as a proxy alternative. These voters abandoned the Democrats due to a drift too far to the left. I suspect they will mostly shift back to backing the Liberals in the senate, especially given that Labor is in government. The Greens mostly draw their support from ALP voters which must have the ALP quite worried at times.

  37. paul walter
    December 8th, 2009 at 06:25 | #37

    Terje, they are still going to lose city seats. The ALP picks up a couple of doctor’s wives seats as consolation should the Greens pick off a lower house seat inner city seat or two.
    This is how the Conservative/Liberal split will play out and a good thing too, since they seem to need time, really, to start to think SERIOUSLY about certain of the issues in play in contemporary life.
    Maybe a better attempt in 2113, when they’ve trimmed the dead wood, or finished the seasonal moult, or whatever.
    Because, at the moment they are one ragged looking budgie.

    Musing, it does seem to be shaping up a little like that election inWA awhile back, when Geoff Gallop won government.

  38. rog
    December 8th, 2009 at 06:52 | #38

    Looking at the line up of the shadow cabinet – Minchin, Joyce, Bronwyn Bishop, Kevin Andrews to name some – one could conclude that Abbott has abandoned the non rural seats.

  39. paul walter
    December 8th, 2009 at 07:01 | #39

    Sort of reminds me of when I was a kid on holidays, sitting down to watch “Abbott and Costello(singularity) meet Frankenstein”.
    Some good laughs and a few spooks.

Comment pages
1 2 8104
Comments are closed.