Jesus Christ Pose

Posted: July 25, 2012 in Politics

The Greens are like that dorky cousin you had when you were a kid, kind of goofy, a bit nerdy, but still OK.

They may well have come from a similar background, and had many similar principles, but they were a bit embarrassing at times, however you knew at the end of the day you could probably count on them.

Those watching the Labor Party yell and scream about the impact the Greens are having on our primary vote and wondering where it all went sour, need to realise, this has been coming for a while now. Frankly, it had to.

Although we may seek many of the same or similar outcomes, the fact is there are many areas we will never agree on.  And although the same can be said for the Liberal and National Party’s, you don’t see that National Party tail telling people it is wagging the Liberal Party dog.

The truly sad thing is both the Labor Party and the Greens need each other, it is unfortunate but true. We need all the help we can to fight the Coalition, even the English and French managed to work together, somewhat, to beat the Nazi’s, not that I’m making the same comparison…

There are 3 problems we seem to face however. Ego, Arrogance and childish carry-on, and not just on one side either.

The ALP has had members that have made some statements that I’m sure they regretted later, things tend to spew out in the heat of the moment. Some of these things said have no doubt made Labor look bad. However we need to view this as not just anger, but passion coming out.

Victorian ALP Leader Daniel Andrew’s, was trying to distance himself from comments made at the NSW ALP Conference in Sydney, during the Melbourne bi-election. I don’t blame him. Maybe his way of calmly debating with the Greens works in Victoria, or maybe the massive amount of media coverage of the NSW Conference received Australia wide also had an influence. Who really knows?

Sam Dastyari at the NSW Labor Conference

All I will say is, I don’t really care why, it was great to see Labor claim victory in a seat that the Greens only conceded they lost yesterday, long after the horse had bolted. This futile act of not conceding for days by the Greens seems just a wee tad sooky-la-la to me, and must disappoint those Greens voters who assumed they were voting for an adult.

Adam Bandt, who earlier in the weekend dedicated the loss to Bob Brown, oops, I mean dedicated the campaign to Bob… Had a bit to say on preferences.

After the victory Champagne, streamers, and victory cake were placed out of media sight, or maybe tossed in a skip bin out back, Adam fronted the camera’s looking glum. Adam told us all that it was disgusting that they lost on preferences, and the system needs to be changed.

What really needs to change Mr Bandt, is your attitude. We have had this system of government for a while now, and it appears to work fine. Just because you look like a dick for claiming victory in a bi-election before anybody has voted, don’t try preaching to us about preferences. Put these words together in a sentence if you can Mr Bandt.

Spilt, Milk, Crying, Baby, Adam, Fucking, Bandt. Harden up a bit.

I seem to remember a certain candidate singing the praises of preferences not so long ago in a certain federal seat… your seat Mr Bandt, won on the back of preferences from the Liberal Party. That’s right, Tony Fucking Abbott put you in the big house buddy, I suggest you sit there and shut up, opening your mouth seems to make you look and sound stupid of late.

Adam Bandt,  judging from the posters, campaigning somewhere other than Qld

Many wonder what brought all this on with Labor and The Greens, here’s is my $23.78 worth.

In the last state election in NSW, the Greens refused to preference Labor in many seats, including several where we were not fighting each other. This cost us seats, there is absolutely no doubt of that, you will note I said seats, not seat, I do mean it in the plural.

In NSW the Shooters & Fishers Party hold the balance of power, by 1 seat.

One, Numero Uno, a solitary seat, more than 0 but less than 2….

If The Greens had put their preferences our way NSW would be looking a lot different. We would not be selling most of the states assets, we would not be capping public sector wages, we would not be crucifying the superannuation schemes of the states citizens screwing over firemen, ambo’s, and nurses. Another thing, we sure as shit would not have amateurs shooting up our National Parks.

So here in NSW we have a lot to thank the Greens for…at least the Coalition and gun nuts do.

The people who voted Green in the Queensland state election must be shaking their heads, both of them in fact were seen doing just that. Aww, that was silly I know, but it does show us just how credible the “Green vote is a wasted vote” way of thinking is.

Many of you would have seen on the news Sarah Hanson Young, and Lee Rhianon at some Greens rally for Julian Assange.

I will leave aside the irony of the Greens rallying for a man who is all about transparency, and uncovering that which is hidden, when in fact they are the only political party that does not allow camera’s or press inside their national conference.

Wise words anywhere but a Greens Conference

What many may find interesting is this…

This rally was held outside Sydney’s Town Hall, and was designed to recruit members and get some media attention. What many didn’t realise is what was going on inside the Town hall at the time. Inside the NSW State Labor Conference was going on.

For Sarah Hanson Young to go on TV and have a sook, and complain she can’t understand why the Labor Party would take issue with the Greens is ridiculous. Is she stupid, ignorant, arrogant, or all of the above.

Every time I hear the Greens use the words “progressive” I want to puke. A “progressive party”, my ass. Figure out how to pay for your pipe dreams and we may have a start.

“Progressive” after all, is just another way of saying “Moving Forward”, where have I heard that before??? Hmm

Maybe I should do what they do, start my own party, I could call it the “Do All Party”.

Policies like no more pollution, ever, world peace, no taxes, free love and mung beans for all… but safe in the knowledge that I will never be held to account, because I will never have a majority.

If there is one thing that the Asylum Seeker drama’s show us about The Greens, it is that the platform is worth more than the policy. Why would they take the low road, and negotiate on a policy, with either side, that may save lives? Not when they can take the high road, block everything, and then take on the Jesus Christ Pose while men, women, and children drown at sea.

I’m starting to form the distinct impression that if the Asylum Seekers were all looked after, and if same-sex couples were getting married all over the country, nobody would be more upset than The Greens. That would be the end for them, no more political platform. No more record political donations from Wotif…

It is about time the Greens looked in the mirror, hard, and decided if they are going to try and join Labor in the fight to keep Tony Abbott out of The Lodge, and put him in the outhouse where he belongs.

The Greens have some fantastic members, and passionate supporters, most of whom seem to want what is best for the country.

The Greens remind me more than a little of Hillsong. They have fanatical, trusting, and dedicated followers, all of whom assume their actions are all pure, and for the best of reasons. However they are blind to the goings on behind the scenes, the power, the ego’s and the cash. Not to mention the often pretend ideals.

The ALP is not perfect, far from it, we have issues with factions just like any party. We have trouble selling our story of late, and that is not the fault of The Greens, it is us, like it or not. We certainly need a can of “Toughen Up” as a party, maybe even a keg.

However, Labor are putting in place policies that are having a positive impact on our environment, and are also making a difference in the lives of many Australians. That is our point of difference, we are currently crap with our words, but strong on our actions. But at least we are acting.

Some say we should do what we did as kids, when we acted out of instict, and push the greens to the side of the dinner plate to avoid. I don’t think that is the answer.

We should both be acting together on one goal, keeping the Coalition on the opposition bench. After all, that is the biggest threat to this nation of ours.

Now we have had the necessary public row, can we get back to the job at hand?

The ones benefitting most from our battle, are the ones we should be fighting.

Comments
  1. Elizabeth Aitchison says:

    you’re a bit behind the times – they conceded yesterday…

  2. Your Ass?

    Oh, you’re not Aussie, I see.

    • wixxy says:

      I hail from Uranus 🙂
      Get it? ass uranus… sorry, it’s been a long day. I’ll go watch Beavis & Butthead…

      • Mischelle says:

        So do I wixxy..They call us Aquarian, progressive thinkers and everything you wrote I believe was spot on! I’ve always voted Greens 2 with Labor 1, but since Sarah Hanson Young and Adam Bandt ‘s antics of late, and watching Christine Milne in close conversation with Hillsong Pastor Scott Morrison on the day Labor tried to get all parties to drop their political scoring and come together in addressing asylum seekers, I’m starting to think The Greens have become an extension of The conservative Tony Abbott Tea Party…That’s something because I’m a big Labor Greeny thinker!

  3. RexRox says:

    I’m going to preface this by saying that whilst I do tend to agree with you on most of your pieces, and have found you Jacksonville series superb, I am Greens 1, Labor 2 voter – I’ll get to why in a second.

    Firstly, you’ve made the same mistake in this piece that everyone else assaulting the Greens has – you haven’t just attacked the party’s behaviour, but their policies and by extension every voter that votes for the Greens because they stand for what Labor used to stand for. That whole paragraph on pretend ideals where you compare Greens voters with delusional fanatics? Lovely stuff. Exactly what voters want to hear from a party that lost their vote because said party walked away from the policies and ideals that won that vote in the first place.

    I’m talking about social issues. Little things like not letting ASIO give themselves more power than the secret police in most dictatorships (have you read that lovely little paper from the AG’s office? They’re ‘seeking views’ on being able to tamper, destroy and plant evidence as they damn well feel like. Super support of the justice system from ASIO, there.) Not giving the very, very small Christian Right their way and turning Australia into some sort of bubble-country, where poor, ignorant citizens are protected from information that might disturb them. Not spitting on freedom of speech and supporting citizens in the same way that every other developed country is (check out Britain’s behavior regarding their citizens held at Guantanamo Bay).

    The Greens have a lot of party issues. Incongruities and the like (such as their little tantrum and then not conceding). It’s why I’m not a member. It’s also why I’m not a member of either the ALP or Liberals. I’d like to support Labor first, but it’s hard to vote for them before the Greens when they do support so many laws and policies as the Liberals do that I believe are unforgivable. For these matters, I want the Greens to continue to stand separate from the ALP, as it’s compromise and vote-whoring that caused the ALP to abandon them in its endless drunken lurch to the Right.

    • wixxy says:

      Thanks RexRox, I knew many would disagree with a lot of what I said
      However the only way to change the Labor is from the inside I think, they are far from perfect, but there is no other option that will ever have a majority

      • Lachlan Ridge says:

        Wixxy, I was a founding member of Macquarie Young Labor back in the early eighties. I hail from near your neck of the woods. I’ve been a life-long trade unionist and have suffered greatly on the income front for not taking the easy way out and keeping my mouth shut and my head down. My dad was a secretary of the Macquarie FEC in his time and very close to the Catholic right in western Sydney – one of their key organisers in the seventies in fact. Dad and I had different political leanings. I say this because I am no idle dilletante observer of the labour movement, I’m an active participant and understand deeply it’s history, it’s culture and it’s people. Why do I do this? Not because it’s just, ethical and pure – although those things could be said and in and of themselves are nice – but because it’s the best instrument for working stiffs like me to keep my economic head above water. It’s sheer bloody minded self interest, and I’m not fussed about that.

        After ten years in the ALP I quit in 1991 because I realised that the parliamentary party will ALWAYS trump the party membership on any policy issue you may care to think of. This is even more true in 2012 that it was twenty years ago. The ALP parliamentary leadership does not represent my class and economic interests. Never has and never will. There’s a bloke called Vere Gordon Childe who wrote a book in 1923 called How Labour Governs. Look it up and read it, along with Bill Murray’s The Split and The Latham Diaries it is part of the must read for anyone thinking of involving themselves in ALP politics. Childe’s book could have been released last week for the understanding it brings to how the ALP reseolves the conflicts both within its own ranks and when it comes up against powersful social interests. In a phrase, when the goiung gets tough ALP governments will fold like Superman on laundry day and buckle to powerful interests.

        I am well aware of the “ALP must be changed from within” argument. I’ve seen it from several different sides. It’s rubbish. It won’t change because it can’t, and better people than me have pointed out why that is.

        First, let’s discover what the ALP isn’t, the n we might be able to see what the ALP is.

        The ALP is not a progressive party. It has progressive elements, to be sure, but it also harbours some incredibly reactionary elements (the SDA for starters), some criminal and corrupt elements (I was a member of Marrickville West branch before it was fashionable), some crazy elements (Amanda Fazio anyone?) and a leadership group that doesn’t believe in anything except power for power’s sake. This is from someone who knew Mark Arbib before he was a superstar and remembers a pimply faced Eric Roozendaal opposing sanctions against Apartheid South Africa.

        The dominant leadership ethos of the NSW Right was learnt in the southwest suburbs of Sydney where Greame Richardson thought he could get the party ahead by being better Liberals than the Liberals. If the NSW Liberal party wasn’t so sectarian in the early seventies these jokers would be lined up today with David Clark, Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey.

        If you read the comments below Andrew Elder’s piece on Paul Howes you will know that I worked with that tool back in 2004-2005 (Howes, not Elder). The idea that the SDA and the AWU are going to give up their stranglehold on the ALP and hurl themselves into a pit of irrelevance simply because more people vote against them than for them is politically naive and displays a level of ahistorical thinking that is, well, scary.

        Wixxyleaks is a far more potent political tool than a hundred ALP memberships ever will be, and if you don’t understand that now then, well, you will one day.

        So what is the ALP? It’s a networking opportunity for people interested in power and an electoral machine. Nothing more, nothing less, so let’s not get carried away by any great ideals it may or may not hold. It’s not a bad thing, it’s not a good thing – inherently. It’s the different uses that people apply it to that count, and the ASX200 has greater access to, and sway over, the Federal ALP parliamentary leadership than any ALP branch member ever will have. And that’s bad news for people who work for a living. In NSW you can replace the ASX200 with Treasury and three property developers (whom I won’t name because it would open you up to defamation proceedings from former NSW Ministers, but am happy to supply that info offline – it’s common, if not public, knowledge).

        And read Vere Gordon Childe. After quitting the ALP he went off to England and became a giant in the world of archaeology – the character Indiana Jones is based on him.

        As the author Conrad once said “truth is stranger than caricature”.

  4. Marilyn says:

    How can you stoop to this redneck crap?

  5. Marilyn says:

    And how is wanting the country to uphold refugee and human rights law under the attacks of moronic Gillard and equally moronic Abbott’s law breaking lies taking the low road?

    We don’t get to trade away all the human rights of one small group of human beings and break the law of the land to do it – go away and learn what the debate was really about Peter, then get back to us.

    • wixxy says:

      Marilyn, with respect I do know a bit about it, and the Greens theory is in no way a solution, Labor & Liberal policies totally suck, I agree, but boats sinking is not a solution. The Greens solution is to treat them better, if they survive the trip

      • Marilyn says:

        Do you seriously think that stopping a few people drowning will solve anything? The law is what it is. Sarah actually worked on low pay for Amnesty on this for years and I was not talking about Bandt and preferences.

        And the only boats that sank are those Australia allowed to sink.

        You do not get to break the law for one group of people just to lie to the public and nothing you ever claim will make that the truth.

        We do not own the oceans, asylum seekers are not our chattels and goods to trade like tins of peas.

        We have zero right under the convention to prevent one person taking a boat if they so choose and if you followed the truth about the debate the people would still have had to get here.

        Claiming it is about stopping people from drowning is just a lie, 340 Australian’s drown every year and 9 million kids a year die of starvation without us mentioning a word.

        The fact is Gillard hates refugees and this I know from ugly personal experience.

        And I have known Sarah since she was 19 years old and helped to tear down the walls and fences of the Woomera hell hole.

        Now we can invite as many so called refugees here as migrants as we like, what we cannot ever do is boot out asylum seekers and dump them somewhere else so what we have to do is grow up and accept that it is a right to seek asylum on fuckiing boats.

  6. Ian says:

    Agree totally.

  7. owen says:

    hi Wixxy.

    usually i find your observations thoughtful and most agreeable … i guess we all have our bad days … i wish to bring a couple of points to your attention … if i may (almost mis-) quote you …

    “If The Greens had put their preferences our way NSW would be looking a lot different. We would not be selling most of the states assets, we would not be capping public sector wages, we would not be crucifying the superannuation schemes of the states citizens screwing over firemen, ambo’s, and nurses. Another thing, we sure as shit would not have amateurs shooting up our National Parks.”
    … your advice to Adam Bandt was spot on … for you both …
    “Spilt, Milk, Crying, Baby. Harden up a bit.”

    and …

    “If there is one thing that the Asylum Seeker drama’s show us about The Greens, it is that the platform is worth more than the policy. Why would they take the low road, and negotiate on a policy, with either side, that may save lives? Not when they can take the high road, block everything, and then take on the Jesus Christ Pose while men, women, and children drown at sea.”

    … you will of course excuse my ignorance of how our system works … but i was under the belief that if the ALP and Lib/Nat came to agreement through negotiation, the Greens would have NO say … yet you lay the blame for inaction on Assylum Seekers at the feet of the Greens … for not supporting the ALP with their policy (which has far more in common with the Lib/Nat AS poilcy).
    … really? are you sure you thought this through?

    … and one last thing …
    … maybe the passage of time has not yet shown to you – as it has to many of your contemporaries (including engaged readers and supporters) – that the nerdy cousin actually turned out to be a pretty cool and mature adult … in fact i have learnt plenty from my nerdy cousins (those of whom i was not always as appreciative and supportive as perhaps i could have been) …

    i hope you find the same to be true at some future time – it’s very rewarding.

    cheers.

    owen

    • Marilyn says:

      It makes no difference if the major parties agree to break the law the high court will tell them again to shove it because it is illegal.

      Pakistan is currently kicking out 3 million Afghans, are we going to whine endlessly when some arrive knowing they have been kicked out of the place many have lived for 30 years.

      • wixxy says:

        Marilyn I am on the same side as you, I too am a member of Amnesty
        However it is just the method we disagree on, if they came on boats that stayed together, that would be one thing, but many don’t

  8. owen says:

    can i just add that i support Rex and Marilyn on their comments here also … i forgot to mention that they adequstely addresses my feelings on The Green, the ALP (what is was and where it is now), and the dismay at your latest item …
    that the ALP does not support Assange is also a measure of where the ALP has ended up … if we are going to pretend to live in a democracy, lets have some transparency where the money goes … otherwise how can the people make an informed decision?

  9. jaycee says:

    I am a Labor 1 Greens 2 voter….sometimes I back Greens 1 for the senate….I am fiercly left wing, but I also rationalise that the “I” part does not make me a majority and one has to swing behind those with the most fire-power in the battle if one wants to eventually win the war!
    Wasn’t it Mao who said ;”all power is achieved down the barrell of a gun”.
    While I concede the Greens are Left-wing…I cannot accept they are of the Marxist/rational Left-wing….more of a post-modern style of left-wing……hence the swings between warm-fuzzys and vitriolic abuse!
    Saying the above, I do believe and hope there is serious reconcilliation and coherence between the two parties as each has something to offer the other.

  10. Susan Scalise says:

    great stuff…I agree… the first rule…..know your enemy….I can remember the wonderful Anthony Albanase saying to an audience at Lindsay Tanner’s last FEA Dinner when discussing The Greens “and everyone knows what right wingers Lindsay and I are”…we laughed our heads off

    • Signe says:

      I never quite get how looking for a scape goat works in the real world. Wixxy we have discussed our differences in the past sometimes agreeing to disagree but seriously man its time to accept some sad facts: labor is lost, its moving so far right its looking for direction from its own grim reaper the Libs : like us or not the Greens are here to stay and I’m proud to say at times we may make some mistakes but we don’t move from the principles on which we are based. We are working on ways to be more transparent in our meetings but unlike the Libs and labor we are not rehearsed or stage managed, and sometimes reaching concensus takes time and debate but our members delegates represent us from the local group level and are not dictated policy too but genuinely guide it. In the jackass statement stakes well you still outnumber us quite considerably..we’re not immune from making them and sadly like women in politics we have to do the job twice as well as our counter parts just to get noticed or God forbid we’re labelled loonies etc.

      The future of this country is more important than petty squabbles amongst friends and the only winner here was Libs, and your lot and to a lesser degree mine played right into their hands…so get over yourself, suck it up, accept and own your issues fast because it scares me spitless where we might end up if you lot don’t stop naval gazing, sell the successes,even those we’ve shared, move away from blame, shut some of your fools up and get on with the job, because if you don’t we will be as you have rightly said screwed.we have a ways to go and turning over this country to the likes of Abbott and co is a price to high! With respect

      • wixxy says:

        Thanks Signe, you are one of those Greens who I think highly of, and I know you are above all of this.
        I just get frustrated at the antics of your party hierarchy. They complain in NSW about the Coalition they handed seats to rather than preference Labor. They claim victory in Melbourne before the votes have started being counted.
        If what happened in NSW had happened at Federal level, we would have a Coalition govt now, I don’t see how that benefits anyone…

    • Lachlan Ridge says:

      I have known Albo since he was a teenager and Albo is no left winger. Albo is for Albo, always has been, always will be – the “lefty” mantle is simply the uniform he uses for his ladder climbing. The man is a fraud, as thousands who have relied on him over the years have found out.

  11. Sue says:

    Hi Wiixy
    I did love seeing a picture of a smug Green holding up the Australian newspaper with the headline of the Greens heading to victory. Then of course the Australian headline was most probably based on its own Newspolls. Silly Greens should stop and listen to the maxim about waiting to the votes are counted before celebrating.

    And Wixxy how is it the Greens demand Labor preference them but gloat about not directing its voters to preference Labor.
    After the Greens voted with the Liberals to defeat the ETS back in 2009 I decided never to preference them let alone cast a vote in their favour. About time Labor looked for Labor leaning independents or parties in every electorate. As for the Senate voting for Sex is a lot better than any of those supposed Christians.

  12. Marilyn says:

    Peter, it makes no difference what the boats are like, we don’t break the law just to appease a few rednecks.

    What about if the parliament tomorrow decided that no person called Peter could ever have any human rights protected in Australia.

    Would you fight that discrimination or suck it up.

    • wixxy says:

      Marilyn, I know it is their right to come here by boat, and their right to die doing it, however, I am saying that I am happy for them to arrive here, but I’d rather it was not in a body bag

      • Marilyn says:

        Well that is not your choice. As a matter of fact over 98% of them get here, 100% would be dead if they stayed home.

        I do like those odds don’t you and it’s not like we care when they are here safely.

  13. A pretty good article for the most part; Yes there’s hypocrisy and bluster on both sides. Although the be honest the Greens *have* talked about ways of funding their federal polices. (eg: revert to the original mining tax template and bring in an addition $100 billion over 10 years) At a state level it’s far more complex; the tax levers just aren’t there; it’s all about priorities. In the face of the States rejecting a role in NDIS funding we in the ALP also have to start thinking where the money is coming from. In the past – “robbing Peter to pay Paul” we (in the ALP) have come up with projected funds by cracking down harshly – and unfairly – on disability pension eligibility. And we’re looking at raising the retirement age as well. Both steps backward. Rather we need to be more decisive about tax reform – so we can implement the NDIS, implement Gonski, reform welfare, radically improve Aged Care, provide funds for the resocialisation of energy infrastructure – Because privatisation there has driven the Cost of Living crisis!!! Even an increase in progressive tax by 1% of GDP could make much of this possible. Whatever happens we’re going to need the Greens in the Senate. Which makes NSW Right posturing all the more ridiculous and self-destructive.

  14. Allegra says:

    Don’t apologise for not knowing the final election result for Melbourne the Green’s candidate Cathy Oke conceded defeat via a tweet congratulating successful Labor candidate Kanis yesterday , yes that’s right she conceded on twitter how brave. That’s after Bandt embaressingly refused to concede after defying the VEC 2PP results and challenging the same formula the essentially got him elected on Conservative preferences, should we challenge the legitimacy of his elected position? The Greens are a far more pragmatic party then Labor.
    The Greens have been relentless in their vitriol against Labor why? Labor have core values the Green’s don’t . They are the party of pragmatism. They will cut education funding to Catholic Schools because of their social fundamentalism , not realising some Catholic schools are poorer then State Schools in funding, but they need to make a point of differentiaition and they do not care about the consequences of their narrow social agenda. Uncosted, pie in the sky policies sound great to inner city trendies, but what about jobs ? Their Melbourne campaign outspent Labor by miles , but ignored 2 key state issues TAFE cuts, job losses preferring to tackle it more like a local council campaign , and gloated confidently to all media and bookies that they had it in the bag.

    Labor is a broad church and I have far more respect for the Left in the Labor party who seek change through discussion and real policy reform , then the Greens who claim to be ‘Real left” , but as Bob Brown asserted boldly Greens aren’t a “preferencing machine”, within two months cut a preference deal with Labor.

    • Lachlan Ridge says:

      Pragmatism is a core value? God help us all.

      The Greens certainly didn’t cut a prefernec deal in NSW. In the House of reps preferences desisions are made by local groups.

      And why should my tax dollars go to an education system that has been shown to systematically cover up pedophilia? Thank god someone out there is standing up against the catholic education vote. I went to a “poor” catholic school, St Dom’s in Kingswood. It was a shit education, but they had fantastic sporting facilities!

      The Greens are the only party that supports free TAFE education, which would allow working stiffs like me to get qualifications. The free-market model being pushed by Gillard, J. has, and will, shut me out of education for the rest of my lifetime as on $600 a week education comes behind paying the rent, eating and keeping the car registered so i can work night shift.

      Get your facts right Allegra (non troppo?)

  15. denniallen says:

    Great article Peter…loved it…regardless of what others might think…

    • Marilyn says:

      Yes but Denise, you are another ALP hackette without a clue.

      • Mick says:

        Way to show your maturity there Marilyn. I’m totally on-board with the Watermelon’s – oops, Greens as a viable option to govern this country now.

      • Marilyn says:

        Well she is just another ALP hackette – I get sick to death of the partisans like Denise refusing to understand when their ridiculous party is wrong.

        Trading humans for politics, for god’s sake Denise grow up.

    • Mischelle says:

      So did I..He said everything I’ve been thinking for months..I actually miss Bob Brown at the helm..He was more level headed…He was more diplomatic and more willing to work with Ms Gillard..A true gentleman who would have put people’s lives before politics on the day our PM tried to get everyone together, to stop playing politics with people’s lives..I was shocked to see Milne chatting with racist Scott Morrison in the hall way of parliament on that day..Labor sticks to it’s policy and has pushed through over 300 nation building policies in a minority gvt..yet all we hear from the criminal Murdoch MSM is lies and scandal..it seems to have penetrated the minds of so many. Not mine…I know Julia is doing a great job..she’s working her ass off for this country’s future and no criminal called Rupert
      Murdoch is going to tell me otherwise!

  16. Its by-election mate, not bi-election. A Bi-election would be 2 elections. A by-election is a single election that is not part of a general election. Think biennial. Bicentennial.

  17. Sorry Peter we have some points of disagreement.
    “The truly sad thing is both the Labor Party and the Greens need each other, it is unfortunate but true.”

    There is nothing sad about it. There is much to be gained from the inevitable co-operation. The question is just how long will it take Labor to realize it.

    “The ALP has had members that have made some statements that I’m sure they regretted later, things tend to spew out in the heat of the moment. Some of these things said have no doubt made Labor look bad. However we need to view this as not just anger, but passion coming out.”

    Really. Not anger just passion? Things must be different in NSW. Down here in Victoria I assure you it is white hot anger and it is grounded in a massive sense of ENTITLEMENT. The chief problem the ALP has with the Greens is that they are ‘stealing’ votes from Labor. Labor spokes-people are not always so forthright in expressing this sentiment but in my experience this is how the ALP (in Victoria at least) regards the slow but steady increase in the Greens vote. Actually perhaps things are not so different in NSW after all. One delegate to the NSW State Labor conference said it outright – the Greens are stealing Labor votes. Former Labor Premier Geoff Gallop’s response to that proposition in a speech he gave at a book launch should give ALP members real pause for thought but won’t. Gallop’s point (as I remember it) – the Greens are not stealing votes they are mounting policies that embody ideas and principles they believe in and people are choosing freely to vote for them.

    You and I both know that Labor long ago abandoned the positions and policies most important to the progressive middle class in the name of courting the swing voters in the marginal seats that determine elections. But they have retained the sense of entitlement. They think these votes are theirs. They need to get over it. As one who after decades of voting Labor finally got sick of being fobbed off and disappointed by Labor’s increasing market oriented expedience I jumped ship. I promise you my vote is not simply parked with the Greens. I think the Labor geniuses that conclude that these votes will come flooding back when the ALP strikes the right balance on, for example, asylum seeker policy profoundly fail to understand what is going on.

    “After the victory Champagne, streamers, and victory cake were placed out of media sight, or maybe tossed in a skip bin out back, Adam fronted the camera’s looking glum. Adam told us all that it was disgusting that they lost on preferences, and the system needs to be changed. What really needs to change Mr Bandt, is your attitude. We have had this system of government for a while now, and it appears to work fine.”
    I didn’t see the interview with Adam Bandt are you sure he said ‘disgusting’ it doesn’t sound like him or are you perhaps just giving vent to a little ‘passion’? I did hear him next day on RN Breakfast show and there he did make a clear distinction between the unsolicited flow of Liberal preferences that saw him elected in 2010 and the promises Victorian Labor apparently have made to fringe dwellers Family First and (especially) the Sex Party that saw Labor get up in the Melbourne by-election. Fiona Patten for a Federal Senate place? Why not? Last time it was Steve Fielding with a couple of percent of the vote and Labor preferences so why not Fiona? Are you sure you are comfortable with this way of operating Peter?
    I’ve not heard before of the preferencing fiasco you describe in NSW but if you are reporting correctly it does smack of stupid intransigence and a certain political naivety on the part of the Greens. It suggests that some Greens are smarter than others. Perhaps you’ve noticed that about the ALP also? I can’t say more than that.
    By the way I wouldn’t get too carried away with Daniel Andrews’s calm debating style either. His campaign was pure rat cunning. Behind closed doors he made sure he had the preferences sewn up. He and Jennifer Kanis kept a low profile and offered no policies. In Andrews’ public utterances he did nothing but slander the Greens for their supposedly purer than the pure stance on policy about which I’ll say a little more shortly. While I’m on the subject of the Melbourne by election how do you feel about Labor members Raymond Collins and Andrew Landeryou working on the polling booths for David Nolte a Member of the Liberal Party standing as an Independent. Raymond Collins obviously thought it was a bad look as he attacked a photographer and attempted to destroy the evidence. That OK with you Peter? Tell me what does the Labor Party stand for.
    “Many of you would have seen on the news Sarah Hanson Young, and Lee Rhianon at some Greens rally for Julian Assange.”

    See the Four Corners on Assange did you Peter? Comfortable with the Gillard government’s efforts on behalf of a fellow citizen who has broken no Australian laws, doesn’t seem to have broken any Swedish laws and no US laws either until they have worked on them a little? Assange is probably naïve, certainly egoistic and maybe just lucky that his exploits did nothing worse than embarrass the US and other governments but do you honestly think that qualifies him for the sort of treatment the US has dealt out to Manning who supplied him with the material. The UN rapporteur called that torture. That seem fair to you Peter? Let ‘em torture Assange?

    “Every time I hear the Greens use the words “progressive” I want to puke. A “progressive party”, my ass. Figure out how to pay for your pipe dreams and we may have a start.”

    Read any Greens policies Peter? Doesn’t sound like it. I have. It’s pretty easy to do, they can all be accessed from their web site but the loudest critics are usually those that know the least. Pretty sensible stuff the ones’ I’ve seen. The sort of thing a party which prioritized social equity would be proud to support. Plenty of common ground there with the Labor Party I thought I was voting for all those years but times have certainly changed.

    “If there is one thing that the Asylum Seeker drama’s show us about The Greens, it is that the platform is worth more than the policy. Why would they take the low road, and negotiate on a policy, with either side, that may save lives? Not when they can take the high road, block everything, and then take on the Jesus Christ Pose while men, women, and children drown at sea.”

    This is complete and utter crap. It contains two total fallacies that Labor loves to repeat about the Greens. The first is that Greens think themselves too pure to negotiate. The Gillard government has passed more than three hundred pieces of legislation with the support of the Greens. They negotiated, sometimes they got concessions sometimes not but they have supported this government staunchly and it would be better all around if Labor could bring itself to acknowledge this. The Greens have worked co-operatively in this parliament, none more so than Adam Bandt and the Gillard government wouldn’t have lasted three months if this childish slur actually had any credibility.

    The second total fallacy is that somehow the Greens stance on asylum seekers will be the reason that they drown at sea from now on. Sorry Peter the appalling asylum seeker cock up is all the work of the two major parties which are so terrified of alienating the marginal voters in the outer suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne that they are competing to see who can mount the most inhumane policy. The cowardly ineptness of the Gillard government in the handling of this matter has been beyond belief. They undertook to the Indonesians to take the pressure off by flying down substantially increased numbers from the Indonesian camps for processing. As I’m sure you know the vanishingly small numbers they accept from Indonesia are seen as a major driver of the boat trade and flying them down was seen as a positive move to take the pressure off. But of course they have welshed on the deal. Probably terrified how it would play in the marginals if they actually showed some guts and principle. In complete desperation when everything else she tried had fallen in a heap Gillard first rejected then adopted as her own the Greens suggestion that an expert panel should attempt to find a way through this mess.

    “It is about time the Greens looked in the mirror, hard, and decided if they are going to try and join Labor in the fight to keep Tony Abbott out of The Lodge, and put him in the outhouse where he belongs.”

    This is pathetic. Although a couple of Greens have allowed themselves to be provoked and have bitten back. It is Labor who is doing the sledging. Labor who is making the threats. Labor’s dreadful polls are all of its own making. It is Labor who needs to wake up recognize its changed circumstances and face reality. Part of that reality is its internal dysfunctionality now so severe that the party is haemorrhaging disaffected members faster than asylum seekers drown. Another part of this changed reality is a reduced role for the formal union movement and accordingly reduced income. Another part of the changed reality is Labors’ inability to articulate what it stands for. Here I disagree with you again this is far more than a communication problem.

    “However, Labor are putting in place policies that are having a positive impact on our environment, and are also making a difference in the lives of many Australians. That is our point of difference, we are currently crap with our words, but strong on our actions. But at least we are acting.”

    I should bloody well hope you are acting. You are the government and you do hold almost half the lower house seats. However your assertion that Labor is putting in place policies that benefit our environment is ridiculous. If you had said that they are not as damaging as the other side I could have agreed. Let’s acknowledge the Clean Energy Future package that would not even have been on the table but for the Greens. Before you start you may have forgotten Julia Gillard’s ridiculous and distressingly brief pre-election nonsense on climate and the environment but I haven’t. We should also acknowledge the marine parks package which does seem a genuine positive Labor initiative. But the few positive environmental bits and pieces this government has implemented are dwarfed by the herculean efforts of my local member the energy minister who is single handedly ensuring the destruction of our environment. Labor’s schizophrenic position on climate and the environment is the perfect illustration that it still has to work out what it stands for. Until it has done so it can’t expect to convince the rest of us and at the moment it is not cutting the mustard as an environmental party. Trust me this is a topic I know a bit about.

    The Greens are a new political party twenty years old but still very much learning how it is done. They are still transforming themselves from a community group into a political party. They operate from a ridiculously low resource base. Some of their elected folk are fairly underwhelming (but perhaps that applies also to other political parties) On the positive side they already have half as many members and growing as the incredible shrinking Labor Party. There is much to be gained from cooperation between Labor and Greens but what is needed now is a bit of careful calm discussion of realities. The poorly argued spray that comprises most of your post is counterproductive

    • wixxy says:

      Yes Labor lost its way, we dropped the ETS, I seem to recall the Greens blocking it, even when we had some Liberal support. I guess that would mean if Labor lists it’s way, the Greens never found the way?
      Labor is doing all the sledging? I admit we are doing some, but like some sort of Hillsong Missionaries the Greens are all on the side of good??
      It is Labor slagging preferences and accusing Greens of dirty deals in Melbourne after losing is it?
      It is Labor MP’s campaigning and recruiting outside a Greens National conference is it?
      It was Labor who handed the Coalition seats in NSW when they wouldn’t preference Greens was it?

      Ok

      • Lachlan Ridge says:

        The ETS was a steaming pile of crap and anyone who understood it knew that. the fact that Turnbull was happy to sign up to it should have woken up the ALP backbench as they sleepwalked into irrelevance, but hey, it’s history…let’s move on.

        Mate, there’s a bloke who lives up at Kurrajong Heights, his name is John Robertson, but I don’t see him running as ALP Candidate in Hawkesbury. Now what poor schmuck got dumped with that job Peter? I guess Robbo keeps in touch with you given you’re his most recent state ALP candidate?

        The ALP did do dirty deals in Melbourne. I know. I worked for Fiona Patten and Robbie Swan (who call themselves the Sex Party these days, used to be the Eros Foundation). Yep, they did dirty deals, and they did them dirt cheap.

        Let’s get up a list of everyone campaigning outside the ALP state conference shall we? What do you propose? That they should be barred? Way to go democracy there Petey boy. People have been campaigning outside ALP conferences since it was called the Labour Electoral League in 1892!

        Name ONE seat in NSW that would have had a different result under optional preferential? One seat mate? Now, if I remember rightly, under optional preferential thre ALP’s policy is to not preference anyone, and their preference decisions are made is Sussex Street and ratified by the Admin Committee? Right? Greens preference decisions are made by local members and, gee, if the local ALP candidate is someone of the character of, say, Karen Paluzzano then who can blame the local Greens for saying thanks, but no thanks.

        What? Your talking about the upper house? The Legislative Council? Well the last seat there came down to a three way race between that son of entitlement himself Andrew Ferguson, Jem Buckingham from the Greens and Pauline Hanson. Not a shooter or fisher in sight old son, they got their quota way earlier in the count. So if the Ferg got up it would have been at the expense of a Green MP, the same Green MP who has been working hard to make sure they don’t turn Cambelltown into Texas with gas wells on every corner courtesy of your mate Ian “love you long time” Macdonald! What’s the Ferg’s claim to fame? Taking a Cuban band around to building sites instead of getting subbies entitlements. If it wasn’t for “Sparkles” Parker and Andrew Quirk the Ferg’s Union, the CFMEU, would have dissappeared up its own fundament long ago! Not many CFMEU tickets on those house construction jobs out your way mate, but plenty of cash in hand and FA safety! Onya Ferg, the brother of Mar’n and Laurie, three men whose only claim to ability is their dad was the deputy premier of NSW.

        You’re a big believer in facts Wixxy – get them right.

      • Marilyn says:

        Peter, let me suggest you read Shitstorm to see what had been done to the ETS by the time negotiations with the liberals had finished. Billions to the coal companies, free passes for the worst of the polluters and so on.

        The Greens should not have to support terrible policy – yesterday a young man was shackled and forcibly pushed back to Sri Lanka a day after it was shown that Sri Lanka is torturing returned asylum seekers and a month after the British High court stopped all such deportations. The ALP are actively working with the criminal Sri Lankan government to prevent Tamils from leaving and telling the truth of the atrocities still being committed there – that is the exact same thing this country did with Jewish refugees and it is a sin and a crime.

        They have police in Pakistan preventing Afghans from leaving the hell that Pakistan is becoming with 3 million people being booted out before Xmas, they have police in 30 countries preventing people from escaping, they refuse visas to anyone who dares to want to claim asylum, they are torturing babies and children with permanent prison, Gillard has had more deaths in custody in 2 years than Ruddock had in 7, more drownings due to sheer lack of interest – see sievx.com if you don’t believe that, more suicide attempts than even Ruddock and although many domestic policies are better DIAC are still getting 83% of cases wrong.

        Most of the ALP platform I really like, the racism in the party though harks back to the days of the White Australia policy and Peter old son you need to take off your blinkers.

  18. Peter C says:

    I was, until the last federal election, a rusted on labour voter for 48 years. I am now a Green 1, Labour 2 one. The salient point you make about Labour & Greens needing each other is spot on.

    Having joined the Greens party I can attest that it is having factional problems the same as the Labour party is. Although none so bad as the Labour right/left debacle.

    However, petty name calling from either side only benefits the Mad Abbott and his ilk. Can we please adopt a more conciliatory approach and get rid of this dangerous lot?

  19. Rob Alan says:

    ‘Marilyn says: July 25, 2012 at 11:27 pm

    Well that is not your choice. As a matter of fact over 98% of them get here, 100% would be dead if they stayed home.’

    And there’s the thing. I remember well Vietnam and how Australia went dark on refugees coming to Australia to escape agent orange making any future at homeland for next gen hideous. Same thing with the middle east. Spent uranium weapons making the future there too toxic for bringing up a family.

    Australia lib/lab franchise says ‘yes we can’ to war but ‘no we wont’ to the responsibilities that come with making such decisions. Ethnic cleaning good, taking refugees bad. I don’t trust the Greens either. When a party holds out for the impossible essentially blocking any progress at all, it makes me suspicious as to why and on behalf of whom.

    ALP need send that right wing over to the Libs where they belong. Do that, get some balls in dealing with offshore predators and I would vote ALP.

    • Marilyn says:

      But pushing refugees away is not progress, it is illegal and that is all the lib/labs want to do.

      The Greens and many others want us to stop warehousing refugees in Malaysia and Indonesia and let them fly here for protection, how is that the Greens stopping progress and who are the off shore predators? The only predators off shore are the AFP, ASIS and ASIO who hunt down and jail refugees in stinking shit holes or have them deported in our names.

      You have to understand that the entire lib/lab debate was only about breaking all the laws we have made over the last 100 years and throwing 800 years of common law which our constitution is based on for racist purposes.

      The myth that there are people stealing from refugees to force them to come here is a delusion, the refugees want to come here because the rotten prisons we have built in Indonesia are sickening and refugees are tortured and beaten to death, denied work and education and can be deported at any time without due process.

      So before you whinge about stopping progress you have to look at what is actually proposed.

      Oakeshott wanted the government to be allowed to dump people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, China, Syria, North Korea and other refugee source countries.

      That had to be blocked as the ludicrous proposition it was and is. That is not progress, that is nazi behaviour.

      Australlia has to obey the law, if the parliament cannot obey the law why would anyone else.

      And the question no-one asks is this – if we think we can dump refugees all over the world why can’t the world dump millions of refugees here?

      We only deal with 0.0001% of them as it is.

  20. owen says:

    the message seem LOUD AND CLEAR Wixxy … you have more Green readers than ALP readers … which oos great as they are more passionate and much closer to the ALP you seem to believe still exists (it doesn’t … just a few good individuals … the same people “taking one for the team” is how i think you put it … why not consider a shift … i am sure you would be welcome …

  21. “Yes Labor lost its way, we dropped the ETS, I seem to recall the Greens blocking it, even when we had some Liberal support. I guess that would mean if Labor lists it’s way, the Greens never found the way?”

    Labor dropped the CPRS because Gillard and Swan talked Rudd out of it. Lindsay Tanner, a decent intelligent man who argued for its continued support saw the writing on the wall when he lost that argument and resigned. Combet, a little younger with his star still on the rise hung in there and finally saw the Clean Energy Futures legislation pass the House. The Greens opposed the CPRS because the package worked out between Rudd and Turnbull was so compromised by caveats, exemptions and other small print industry prompted concessions that it was climatically useless. Repeat climatically useless. I read the stuff and know this to be true. There was much discussion of this at the time. I guess you missed it. The stupid suggestion that this is an example of The Greens allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good is only made by people (Chris Uhlmann for example) who didn’t understand (couldn’t be bothered trying to understand) how the CPRS proposal would actually work.

    There are two crucial differences this time.

    1. Although the level of ambition in terms of emissions reductions is still spectacularly below what the science demands the mechanisms for increasing emissions reduction goals and for the independent science based assessment of these are built in. Both were missing last time.

    2. Although the level of ambition in terms of emissions reductions is still spectacularly below what the science demands an extra measure intended to do the heavy lifting in terms of driving the transition to renewables in the first decade or so was built in in the form of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and its $10 billion bank roll. No such measure was contemplated last time.

    The first was Greens policy prior to the 2010 election. The second was a condition of the Greens signing up this time. I know this is fact not mere supposition.

    “Labor is doing all the sledging? I admit we are doing some, but like some sort of Hillsong Missionaries the Greens are all on the side of good??”

    What on earth are you talking about? Labor has been doing (almost) all the sledging. Read the press reports. There have been a couple of retorts from Greens that made the media at least but the sledge has been (almost) one way traffic. I know it. You know it.

    “It is Labor slagging preferences and accusing Greens of dirty deals in Melbourne after losing is it?”

    Did you read what I wrote? I see a difference between the unsolicited flow of Liberal preferences (which Adam Bandt claims to be the case for him in 2010) and buying the preferences of fringe dwellers that in no way represent (supposedly) the values of the ALP with promises of other favors later. I see an ethical problem with Labor party members working on behalf of a Liberal standing as an independent. Do you? Or is that just the way things are in ‘whatever it takes land’?

    ‘It is Labor MP’s campaigning and recruiting outside a Greens National conference is it?’

    I wouldn’t have done it but after the treatment Labor had been dishing out why are you surprised and why are you so upset about it?

    Can you put these words into a sentence Peter? Get, you, kitchen, can’t heat, stand, out.

    “It was Labor who handed the Coalition seats in NSW when they wouldn’t preference Greens was it?”

    As I said last time. If you are reporting this correctly this seems a particularly stupid move on the part of the NSW Greens. Some Greens are apparently smarter and/or more principled than others. Who’d have thought it?

  22. Lachlan Ridge says:

    Geez Wixxy old mate. Deafening silence in defence of your claims about the Greens costing the ALP seats, any seat, in the last NSW state election. Was it that paragon of public service, Ninos Khosaba in Smithfield? Or maybe Cherie Burton in Kogarah, sober as she was at the time?

    Wassa matter mate? Cat got your tongue? Or is that little Albo/O’Connor myth having a little trouble getting off the ground?

    (Nothing wrong with those two that having to work for a living like the rest of us wouldn’t fix)

    As for changing the ALP from within, remember, when the axe came into the forest the trees said “the handle is one of us”.

  23. Peter

    Just a short final comment. You get plenty of credit from me for your Wixxyleaks posts. The relationship/similarities/differences between ALP and Greens is an important field to investigate but this post is not the way to do it. Let’s have discussion based on fact rather than slurs and slogans at forty paces. Look forward to future posts.

    • wixxy says:

      Thanks Doug 🙂
      Our parties are friends who are having a spat over dinner.
      Bring it on and get it out of the way I reckon, then we can join together and belt Abbott next election.
      More HSU coming really soon…

      • Lachlan Ridge says:

        So are you going to withdraw your absurd claim that teh Greens cost you seats at the last state election?

        Or are you happy to catch the delusional bus with Kath Jackson?

        Are you so deluded that you think Ian ‘love you long time’ Macdonald didn’t offer teh Shooters free range in National Parks in an effort to get Costa’s power privatisation bill through? Ask Mrs Albanese, Carmel Tebutt, if you think that’s bullshit. If you don’t trust her try that other paragon of the working class, Verity Firth.

        The difference between the O’Farrell government and the Carr/Iemma/Rees/Kardashian governments is the letterhead, Ask the Firies who were given a 2.5% ultimatum by Roozendaal when he was Treasurer. Same shit, different shovel.

        Mate, in this shit you are so wrong you could go for gold at the Wrong Olympics. Hopefully you’ll man up, put your hand up and admit it.

      • wixxy says:

        Why would I withdraw a fact? There was one Blue Mountains seat whose name eludes me that the Libs won narrowly, but with a low primary vote. Alas The Greens did no preference Labor, or the outcome would have been different.
        Ametuer shooting in National parks came in under O’Farrell, like it or not, that is how it is.

        You might thinking that a sexist remark about the states first Premier is OK, I don’t.

        You seem to be buying any shit that you are shovelled. I suggest you look past the buzz words like “progressive” and look at who sided with the Christian Democrat “Gay haters” to stop the unions from funding campaigns for the workers.

        Only big corpoarte donations are allowed if they go to the Greens, in a fine display of selling out their own ideals for a fast buck. Don’t feed me that crap about ot was a personal donation, not WOTIF either, Rupert Murdoch, Gina Rinehart, Clive Palmer…. they are all capable of personal dontaions too…

      • SG Warren says:

        Wixxy, I’ve voted for both parties but could never be a member of Labor as it currently is run and am dubious about becoming a member of the Greens as they are currently run. So I guess I’m exactly the type of voter most of the Labor faction heads are upset about.

        I appreciate you want to change the Labor party from within, the only problem is even if you become a delegate you have no way to do this.

        A quick look at the HSU’s delegates will show you why. 600 delegates from a membership that is predominantly left oriented. The unions executive are all right-oriented (probably on account of wanting to keep all the money they have looted) so nearly all of the delegates chosen support the right faction of Labor.

        How is that representative of their membership? Quite frankly it’s not. There is no real democratic principles in play in how the Caucus is run so there is no real democratic representation of Labors members in how their policies are chosen.

        Instead it’s the faction heads who have to want to change Labor if it’s ever going to change. This is because the union heads are the ones responsible for determining who gets to be delegates for their union. This directly affects who gets chosen as candidates for Labor and anyone who makes it into Federal Labor is considered by the union that got them their to always work to represent that union.

        So essentially the only way you could possibly change Labor from within would be for you and a bunch of mates to enter a bunch of different unions, work for years on end to make it into leadership positions in those unions then suddenly work together to dissolve the power base you have managed to accumulate. Good luck with that.

        So has any faction head ever even looked like dissolving their powerbase to give more power to members? Of course not. By the time anyone becomes a faction head, they are usually incredibly pragmatic (idealists need not apply) and understand the concept of quid pro quo.

        Unless a bunch of faction heads suddenly grow a conscience overnight the only way we are going to get a reformed party of the Left is to make a new one.

  24. Marilyn says:

    We rely on the HSU stuff and the work is amazing, but do not comment on compromising away human rights ever again, that is a very slippery slope indeed.

    Remember the little poem of Pastor Neimoller because as a very loud and bossy advocate for human rights it is my fear that one day they will come for me.

  25. Lachlan Ridge says:

    Rubbish Wixxy. There is only one Blue Mountains seat, and Trish Doyle did a bloody good job for the ALP but Rosa Sage was always going to win. Here’s the first preference votes:

    Roza Sage LIB 17,681 (39.1 %)
    Kerrin O’Grady GRN 7,647 (16.9 %)
    Merv Cox CDP 1,841 (4.1 %)
    Trish Doyle ALP 10,253 (22.7 %)
    Janet Mays IND 7,804 (17.3%)

    Mays was a councillor and pro-business independent. Her preferences elected Sage, by the time O’Grady went out of the count the bible bashing Sage was already elected, mainly from the big booths around Springwood. You will also note that Trish Doyle’s 22.7 percent plus O’Grady’s 16.9 percent equals 39.6. So even if every Green vote had gone across to Trish she would still be over ten percent short of a majority.

    It was widely expected before the count that Trish would come third, or even fourth. If you doubt me ask my old mate Katoomba ALP Branch President Don Macgregor before you make an even bigger fool of yourself than you already are by backing in parasites like Keneally; the person who claimed at the special ALP conference in May 2008 that if the party didn’t privatise electricity then crippled kiddies would be thrown out of hospitals. Pathetic.

    So far you’ve come up with one seat, and that turned out to be bullshit. What else have you got?
    I know what I’m fucking talking about here sunshine, so don’t peddle your bullshit with me.

    And nothing backing your ridiculous claim about the shooters party because, if you read the post above old son, you will learn something about the Legislative Council vote, and that is that The Shooters didn’t get their seat off the back of Green preferences.

    I worked on the Your Rights At Work campaign matey, so don’t give me a strawman lecture from someone from the party of Ian ‘love you long time’ Macdonald about political donations. Your mob kept building workers as second class citizens courtesy of the Australian Building and Construction Commission despite the union movement giving you government in 2007. That, and Gillard rebranding WorkChoices as the Fair Work act makes any donation from a union to the ALP as an act of culpability that is on par with anything Jackson and Williamson have done.

    So save your crocodile tears for working stiffs mate, we know that the difference between the ALP and the Liberals is the brand of lubricant they use when they shaft us.

    If you want to spout bullshit old mate, go right ahead, but don’t piss in the pocket of someone who was in the ALP before you were born and tell them it’s raining. If I didn’t live so far away these days I’d suggest we go down to the Royal and have a few schooners while I filled you in on a bit of history. As it is I might make the trip anyway if you’re up for it?

    • wixxy says:

      Always happy for a schooner.

      There are other seats, I’m just not sure what they are, however there is more than 1 seat in the Blue Mountains, even my seat covered parts of the mountains…

      I will get back to you, as I haven’t got time to look them up today, but you seem to be right on that seat you mention. But I will check out the others.

      Email me if you want that beer

  26. Lachlan Ridge says:

    chromefist, there is not one lower house seat that Wixxy can point to where a lack of Greens preferences changed the result, and as you point out there was no impact on the Legislative Council result from Greens Preferences. The Green, Jeremy Buckingham, was the last MLC elected, so Greens preferences weren’t even notionally distributed!

    On this issue Wixxy is talking through his arse and repeating a myth that elements within the ALP have been building up for the last eighteen months or so to suit their own agendas: That of the Greens being some kind of thief of the entitlement the ALP has to progressive voters, rather than the bunch of hopelessly out of their depth schmucks that most ALP MPs in reality are.

    …and he aught to apologise for the bald face stinking lie that he has slandered The Greens with. I am sure not wanting to be as delusional and factually unreliable as Kathy Jackson he will man up and admit his bullshitting, and we can move on.

    • wixxy says:

      East Hills…. that’s after a quick look

      http://www.pastvtr.elections.nsw.gov.au/SGE2011/laPDF/East_Hills.pdf

      Monaro too

      http://www.pastvtr.elections.nsw.gov.au/SGE2011/laPDF/East_Hills.pdf

      Ready to take back your baseless insults yet?

      That’s 2 extra seats…

      • Lachlan Ridge says:

        I’ll leave the baseless insults to you Pete, you’re the expert.

        Monaro is a seat I know a fair bit about, I drive 170Km across it each day on my way to night shift. Whan’s vote actually held up in Cooma, which was a shock to everyone, including little Stevie, but he got smashed in the big Jerrabomberra booth which, if you know Struggletown, is hardly a green stronghold! 3,000 behind on first preferences, Whan was never going to get up, but it took him until Tuesday afternoon before he conceded. What was that you were banging on about the other day about teh Greens in Melbourne not conceding? They must have learnt their trade from Whan the lesser.

        But fear not, being the son of entitlement, little Stevie has been bumped into the Upper House where his presence has set policy makers minds atingle. Or not.

        Either way, being the son of a pollie Steve has been saved from the ignominy of having to look for a real job like the people he purportedly represents.

        And you’re going to tell me that the loss of Alan Ashton to public life is a blow to working people? Give it up Pete, you’ve missed the bus on this one old mate. If you need preferences to hold onto East Hills you’re so far up shit creek you may as well throw the paddle away.

        But let’s look at how the Greens preferences broke in East Hills in 2007, the election before. Of the 2.721 votes cast for the Greens in that election 779 went across to Ashton. Of the 2,437 votes they had in 2011 (note the drop in votes) 734 went across to Ashton. Pretty much same-same, regardless of the how to vote card. Probably because East Hills is hardly a bubbling cauldron of Green activity which would be reflected in their ability to staff booths. But significantly only 382 Greens preferences went across to the Lib in 2011 compared to 462 in 2007, so you were actually better off in 2011, and you’re still having a sook!

        Mind you, I didn’t see the media release from Alan Ashton thanking the Greens for their crucial role in him securing the seat in 2007, probably because it didn’t happen. But somehow they were crucial to him losing it in 2011, despite their vote and preferences flatlining.

        So I don’t buy the Green preferences changing the result in either Monaro or East Hills.

        So suck it up and make with the apology sunshine because you still haven’t come up with one seat yet (you know, less than two, but more than zero).

      • wixxy says:

        You can talk about 2007 all you like, and I don’t care if your middle name is Monaro and you were born in East Hills, the facts don’t change based on your opinion.

        You said I wouldn’t find a seat, well there is 2 I have pointed out and given the evidence to prove it

        You are helping me prove my point, the Electoral Commission isn’t biased, the laws on mathematics haven’t changed nor are they biased, it is you that is biased. Just like the Hillsong crowd you will not let the facts get in the way of your rhetoric, because you are the pure one, demanding everybody else apologise for your mistakes.

        Not me champ, you asked me to find 1 seat that had gone to the Coalition in the last NSW state election due to Green preferences not going Labors way.

        I found you 2, and I note that a substantial nimber of the Green preferences went to the Coalition in those seats also…

        I will consider this matter closed now as I have done as you have requested, and more, and I will no longer waste my time debating with someone who dismisses facts just because they don’t suit

  27. The polls show that of the 10% or so that has come off Labor’s primary vote since last election 5% have gone to the coalition and 5% to independents while the Greens vote has remained stable. The ‘Greens as vote thieves’ line is bullshit. The Labor meat heads know that they have to claw votes back from the coalition and independents and that they can only do this by differentiating themselves from the Greens. Their deep confusion over policy direction leaves them unable to articulate sensible policy differences so they are reduced to slogans, invective and insults.

    • Lachlan Ridge says:

      You hab=]ven’t produced facts at all! You’ve produced a blinded opinion and demonstrated your ignorance of how preferences work in the real world and then run naway when the argument got tough. Yoiuyr argument isnb’t based on mathematics, it’s based on wishful thinking!

      Typical gutless ALP hack.

      No wonder you got smashed in 2011, you deserve more of the same in the future.

  28. James Adelaide says:

    Wixxy, while I do not know whether green preferences have affected any outcome in any seat, I do remember Stephen Field, put intp the senate by Labour preferences ( and those of every other big party) in a ‘bash the greens’ deal. If the greens had won that senate seat……

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s