Make a Difference

Tag: julia gillard

Gillard’s Own Goal Record Continues

Julia Gillard has lost the last milligram of respect I had for her.

Her smarmy and disingenuous comments about Mary Jo Fisher – an attempt to distract media and public attention from Craig Thomson – reveal Gillard to be the perfect example of a slimy, self-serving politician.

“The only person in this parliament who is charged with a criminal offence is a Liberal senator, charged with an offence against property, an offence against the person, charged with theft and assault,” Ms Gillard said yesterday.

“It would be completely inappropriate for me to volunteer a view as to whether the Liberal senator charged with theft and assault is guilty of those charges.”

So why mention them?

Just to be clear, Senator Fisher is charged with stealing $92.92 worth of groceries from a South Australian supermarket, and assaulting the security guard who stopped her.

Senator Fisher suffers from well-controlled depression. At the time of the alleged offences she was in the midst of a change of medication. By all accounts, there was no attempt to hide any merchandise. She simply had a mental blank and began to walk out of the supermarket, then panicked when grabbed by a man she did not immediately realise was a security officer.

Neither the supermarket nor the security guard wished to press charges.

Even if Senator Fisher was attempting to steal the groceries, this is a once-off offence. There is no pattern of behaviour here which would allow one to make any judgements about her character.

Craig Thomson, on the other hand, is alleged to have stolen a large amount of money from his employers over a period of  years, some of that money going to pay for prostitutes. That is a pattern of behaviour which enables judgements to be made about Thomson’s character.

For Julia Gillard to suggest there is some sort of parity between what is alleged about Senator Fisher and what is alleged about Craig Thomson, in order to deflect attention from Thomson and give the impression he, and she, are being treated unfairly, is cynical and dishonest.

There is a pattern of behaviour evident from Gillard and the Labor party. Draw your own conclusions about what that pattern says about their character.

Julia’s Advice to Michael Clarke

Well, I guess that’s what she was trying to do; offer advice to the Australian cricket team as they prepare to face Bangladesh in Dhaka.

That’s the trouble with Julia – you have to guess what she is trying to do. Partly because the outcomes she achieves never seem to match her stated intentions.

We’ll reduce the number of asylum seekers held in detention (by implementing policies which invite huge numbers to come).

We’ll increase employment (by punishing businesses and imposing heavy new taxes on our most productive industries).

You get the idea.

So I’m only guessing when I say that Julia must have been trying to offer our new test captain some helpful advice.

Her suggestion was something she calls the ‘hyperbowl.’

Based on her implementation of this technique, the hyperbowl can be summarised as follows:

A long run up, slow at first, then at a frantic pace towards the end. A flamboyant display is made of bowling with the right arm, but the actual delivery is made under-arm with the left.

That could work.

This Is A Bit Rude

Antipodean Greens have established themselves as the rudest on the planet, with the New Zealanders easily winning the local derby.

Tomorrow Prime Minister Julia Gillard will address the New Zealand Parliament in Wellington in what her Kiwi counterpart, conservative John Key, had hoped would be a first.

The Greens vetoed a plan to invite Julia Gillard to address the NZ Parliament while it was in session.

“In New Zealand, no head of government or head of state has addressed a session of parliament and that’s a principle that we’re quite keen to keep,” NZ Greens co-leader Russel (Russel) Norman told AAP.

“The governor-general isn’t even allowed onto the floor of parliament, our own head of state.”

If it were allowed, it could permit future governments inviting “all sorts of unpleasant people, like George Bush, for example …

George Bush? Unpleasant? He would never have been so rude to a guest.

Julia Gillard will still get to address New Zealand MPs in the chamber, so this is just a bit of symbolic bullying from the Greens.

But I bet they wouldn’t be objecting if it were Al Gore.

Historic Health Reforms?

Right up there with the great moral challenge of our time.

Having a single government funder of health services would help to prevent some of the bickering between Sate and federal governments, and reduce some of the cost of bureacratic oversight in health service delivery. So more money could be spent on actual medical care.

Well, maybe that’s wishful thinking. Reducing the size of a bureaucracy is a bit like trying to clean out the Augean stables. The crap just keeps flowing in. But Hercules managed it, so why not Julia Gillard?

Oh. Right.

Anyway, Julia seems to be thinking the same thing. Or something. Because the ‘important, historic Labor health reforms’ of 60% funding of state health services in return for a reduced portion of GST might be replaced by something else.

Something like the Liberal Party’s policy of direct funding to hospitals, bypassing state government coffers and management altogether.

This is a good idea, for the reasons outlined above. Fewer layers of government oversight mean more local autonomy, more responsiveness to community needs, less cost, more money for services.

But the delays and dithering make this yet another stuff up, run around, prevaricating around the bush episode by this utterly inept government.

Federal opposition health spokesman Peter Dutton says Prime Minister Julia Gillard makes her predecessor Kevin Rudd and former environment minister Peter Garrett look competent.

The Prime Minister is more incompetent than Kevin Rudd? Or the Minister for Plastic Bags and Pussy Cats?

Amazingly, this might be true. Has anything they have done worked? Has any policy when implemented had the results we were promised?

Sophie Mirabella

Sophie Mirabella is one of my favourite Australian politicians.

She is hard working, honest and intelligent – a possible future Prime Minister, and one who would be vastly more effective, in part because she has vastly more integrity, than the present incumbent.

Ben-Peter Terpstra calls her a Greek goddess in comments on the Australian Conservative website on an article by Sophie in The Punch.

Sophie offers Julia Gillard some helpful advice. Namely, mean what you say, say what you mean, and do what’s right.

I won’t quote from either Ben or Sophie. Both are worth reading in full. And the comments on Ben’s article are an amusing dialogue between shallow leftist trolls and reasonable people attempting to reason with them.

P.S.

‘Mean what you say, say what you mean, and do what’s right’ could be Sarah Palin’s motto.

Despite liberalist frenzy and legacy media blackwashing, people like her because she is straightforward, has faced the problems they face, loves her family and her country, knows how to run things, and has a vision for the future.

The usual liberal complaint about anyone who disgrees with them is “He’s stupid, ‘She’s stupid.’

But I defy anyone to read Sarah Palin’s thoughtful and well-constructed open letter to new Republican members of Congress, and believe anything other than that she is caring, intelligent, and capable.

Gillard: What I Said Before, Forget About It

Julia says things are different now. And they are. She doesn’t need you to vote for her anymore, and won’t for the next three years, by which time you will have forgotten. So bye, bye promises.

Also, Julia says the Opposition should stop acting like an opposition, and just be nice. By being nice she means they should agree with everything she says.

Apparently, now is not the time to be disagreeing about stuff. We should all agree about stuff. Like a carbon tax, and the National Broadband Netwreck.

But the job of the Opposition is to oppose. To pick holes, to ask questions. To try to ensure that legislative and executive decisions made by the government are in the best interests of the country.

Which may not always co-incide with the best interests of the ruling party.

But Julia wants to keep a light burning:

“With restraint and civility we can put aside the empty rancour of partisanship and seek to work together,” she said.

“We can strengthen opportunity for all Australians and build an enduring legacy for future generations.

“That is how we will honour Ben Chifley and keep the Light on the Hill burning bright.”

At yesterday’s Liberal conference, Mr Abbott says Ms Gillard’s admission that several election promises will be broken due to the hung parliament is an example of why she cannot be trusted.

“The more we see of Julia Gillard, I’ve got to say, the better Kevin Rudd looks,” he said.

“I never thought I would say that, but Kevin Rudd looks strong and principled by comparison to the current incumbent.

“We have Prime Minister Gillard saying that she has a blank cheque to break promises.

“What an outrage. If the Prime Minister did not believe that she could put her election commitments into practice she should not have accepted a commission from the Governor-General.”

Hear that Julia? If you did not believe you could put your election commitments into practice, you should not have accepted a commission from the Governor-General.

Gillard Strident and Negative – ABC News

No, Julia Gillard being strident and negative is not news. What is news is that an ABC correspondent says she is.

Even Julia seems to be admitting that she is now running a wholly negative campaign. She has to, you know, because things are tough.

John Styles at Australian Conservative nails the Labor strategy:

  • Lies: simply assert something about your opponent’s policies, or costings, without any basis in fact
  • Fake polling: Release “secret internal polling” in an effort to drive the media agenda
  • “Friday dumps”: Untrue “news” stories dropped into marginal seats on the day before the poll
  • Endless negativity: Claim you’re being positive but all you do is attack your opponent
  • Scare campaigns: Make up things about your opponent and his policies
  • Personal attacks: Relentlessly repeat that your opponent is a “risk”

This may work with some of the people, some of the time (hmm.. that sounds familiar).

But my suspicion is that people have had enough, and this latest bout of ranting about how horrible Tony Abbott is, and he will bring back Work Choices, and reduce the number of doctors, and ruin the environment, and goodness knows what other dreadful things he is planning because you can’t trust a word he says, will backfire.

Julia really does look and sound strident and negative and desperate. Maybe she’s beginning to wonder if people have realised she is the one who can’t be trusted, who is too big a risk.

© 2024 Qohel