Johnny come back!

So that's it for another week and I'm sure I speak for many when I say that the weekend could not come soon enough! As always I have the results for this week's Right Side Poll and there was a clear disinterest in both Abbott and Turnbull as the voter's preferred Liberal leader to head the assault on the next election. While 40% of readers felt that it didn't matter who leads the party, as Labor is so skilled at the art of incompetency, a whooping 60% want to see the one, the only, John Howard make a comeback. I must confess that I, like many of you, am in the majority. It was a sad day when the former Prime Minister was unjustly turfed out of office by the snake-oil salesman in Rudd but, ultimately, the proof is in the prosperity. Under Howard Australia experienced a Golden Age of prosperity, now, with Labor running the show, we up debt creek without a paddle. So I thought that I would dedicate this week's TGIF post to John Howard, the man responsible for Australia's survival of the GFC... I don't care how much Labor harp on about their stupid cash handouts saving the economy, the truth is Howard and Costello spent over a decade reforming and growing the Australian economy; they, and they alone, are responsible for our survival. The only thing Labor can claim credit for is our enormous debt which our grandchildren will still be paying off!


John Howard = Legend

This week's Right Side Poll asks what you believe the outcome of the 'Malaysian Solution' deal will be. So I hope that you have all had a good week and, as always, I like to end my Fridays on a lighter note, so I've included a link that always makes me laugh. I hope you find it as amusing as I do.

Have a brilliant weekend and I hope to see you back here next week...

The Grand Inquisition

No, I'm not talking about the Spanish Inquisition, I'm talking about the Climate Change Inquisition which is unfolding right here, right now. I must be quick, for I don't know how long I have before they find me. For you see, my friends, I am being hunted for I am a heretic, an unbeliever! Shocking, I'm sure, but reality none the less. As we speak High Priest Bob Brown and his Inquisitors hunt people like me. I can hear them now, signing a variation from a song which was sung back in the 12th Century, at the time of the first great war against the heretics:

"The Inquisition, what a show! The Inquisition, here we go! We know you're wishin', that we go away! So come on you Deniers and you polluters, We've got big news for all of yous! You better change your point of view today! 'Cause the Inquisition is here and here...to... stay!"

Why am I pursued by this unruly band of thugs? Am I a murder, cheat, or thief? No! I have merely dared to question the word of the prophet Al Gore, who descended from Mount Sinai with the holy PowerPoint presentation which would govern how we are now to live our lives:

"Renewable energy is the one true source of power generation, you shall have no other electricity generation before renewables!"

"You shall not covert fossil fuels, for these are false idols which lure you with the promise of baseload generation!"

"Honour thy Leftist Parties, for they know the true path to salvation. Scorn them for the wicked conservatives and their deceitful promises of economic prosperity and growth and you will be damned for all eternity!"

But I refused to live by their dogmatic rules, their claims built upon shaking science and the black-magic art of global weather modelling. And it is for this reason that they curse my name...

"Denier!" they scream "He dares questions the Almighty Science!" And so I run; I do not consider myself a denier, however it appears that the true believers hate all who simply do not share their fanatical devotion.


Behold! Rising sea levels! The Almighty Science is unquestionable!

I can understand this behaviour in the 12th Century, but now? In our supposedly, enlightened era? We have the true believers, zealots and fanatics such as Bob Brown, GetUp! and Greenpeace, who shout down and decry all who dare question the science. I hate to be the bringer of bad news, High Priest Brown, but while numbers may not lie, the people behind them can... and do! Climate Change Scientists are not going to get government funding by disagreeing with your political position on global warming, so they tell you what you want to hear in order to keep the dollars flowing.

Of course my research is independent and free of bias... By the way, when is the next round of funding?

Science is a business just like any other. Your income is grant money and your deliverables are scientific reports which can be used for political gain. While it might be nice to have completely ethical scientist tell us what's really going on, I doubt you would be interested, Senator Brown, if it didn't fit your agenda. Then who would be denying the science, Senator Brown...?

Deputy Prime Minister announces inquiry into the media

No, I'm not taking about Wayne Swan, I'm talking about the REAL Deputy PM, Christine Milne. Deputy PM Milne announced on the ABC's Q&A program on Monday that there would definitely be an inquiry into the media in the wake of the News of the World phone hacking scandal. Did I miss something? The last time I checked I thought that the Government was stilling undecided onto whether the inquiry would go ahead at all? Well, I guess Julia Gillard is just the middle-woman, the mouthpiece for the Greens...

But what, there's more! Not only has Deputy PM Milne stated quiet emphatically that there would indeed be an inquiry, but the Minister for War Against Regional Australia, Sarah Hanson-Young has stated that the inquiry would also explore the forced break-up of News Ltd, or as she likes to call them 'the hate media'. A more accurate term which Senator Hanson-Young might like to consider is 'the big meanie media that always points out how stupid I am'. I think the good senator is a little off the mark here, though. Reporting her numerous gaffes and incompetence is hardly part of some 'News Ltd. Conspiracy', it's just really easy (and fun!) to do...


Sarah Hanson-Young with all of her friends in the parliament...

The simple fact of the matter is that the Greens and Labor just do not like what News Ltd is printing, so they cry foul and claim it is some perverse attempt at regime change. The media reports what is going on in the community and reflects the attitudes and values of its readers. It is a reflection of popular opinion. The government's issue isn't really with the media, they just don't like the reflection which is starring them in the face.

The truth hurts, doesn't it Prime Minister?


"How dare you suggest that I'm some sort of nut!"

Bob Brown's 'Quote of the Day':

"All over the world, wherever there are capitalists, freedom of the press means freedom to buy up newspapers, to buy writers, to bribe, buy and fake “public opinion” for the benefit of the bourgeoisie"
Vladimir Lenin

The economic damage the Government refuses to see...

Working within a secondary CBD hub, I have the great advantage of being within a brief walk of everything I could possibly need without the overcrowding that comes with operating within the heart of the business world. Connected enough without the claustrophobia; just the way I like it. Today the sun is shining and, without any early meetings or pressing deadlines I decided to go for a walk, which, if I am honest, is not a rare occurrence!

The morning air was crisp and the there was a bite to the wind, but the sun was out and the overall effect was both pleasant and refreshing. While on days like these I usually prefer to wander with no prescribed route in mind, today I decided to follow my usual path to the local newsagent. In such a built up area business space comes with a hefty price tag and the newsagent I frequent almost everyday is barely the size of a closet. Now while there are far nicer, larger places I could go to get my daily paper (The Australian, of course...) I always come back to this small, humble shop. Why? It comes down to the fundamental factor which is a key indicator of an organisations success: service. Since I first started working in the area some time ago and started shopping at this poky little newsagent, every morning I have been greeted by the smiling face of Mr Lee, the owner/operator.

"How are you today sir?" He would say in his less-than-perfect English the moment you squeezed into his small business (quite literally). Mr Lee always reminded me of Bert Newton as he had a real pie-face, that warm friendly look that made you feel welcomed. Everyday he was there, smile on his face and happy to stop and chat about whatever was in the news.

I have always been impressed by Mr Lee's work ethic. His store would be open and going by the time I arrived at the office and would still be opened when I was heading home, even if I had stayed back late. As far as I can tell he has never taken a sick day or shut his store to take a holiday. He was, for me, the quintessential small business owner, pouring everything he had into his little slice of the Australian dream. Hard work, dedication and a can-do attitude, these are the most important things you need to succeed... that was until Labor came to power...

I had noticed over the past few months that Mr Lee's business was far quieter than usual. On your typical day he would serve five or six people as I lent against the counter chatting about the local events or listening to him beam about how his children were doing at school. Moreover, Mr Lee's jovial smile had slowly began to disappear... and then, today, he was not there at all...



An all to common sight, yet the Government continues its war on small busines

 As I walked up to the little shop I noticed his signs and displays were not out on the side walk. Getting closer, I saw that there were two pieces of paper stuck to the security door. The first was a clipping of this story concerning the impact of the Carbon Tax on small businesses. The other was a handwritten note reading: Out of Business - Another victim of the government's war on small business.

While the government may release statements with reassuring quotes about understanding the cost of living pressures and the struggle thousands of Australian households are enduring everyday, they don't seem to realise that those statistics are actually people. People with hopes and dreams which are slowly being shattered and destroyed by Gillard and her incompetent government. The economy is not in as good shape as she would have you believe yet the Prime Minister is willing to embark on dangerous economic and taxation policy reform informed by the fiscally illiterate Greens.

Now this may be one story about one man and one shop, but I am certain that Mr Lee's story is not uncommon. Wake-up Gillard, the country you were elected to lead is hurting, don't inflict the unnecessary burden of another tax on family budgets already stretched to the limits. While you and your other leftist elites may be happy - and able - to pay a Carbon Tax, this does not mean that the hard working people of Australian are.

And to Mr Lee, if you should stumble upon this blog post I wish you all the best for the future; the mornings just aren't the same without your cheery smile.

Back to the Future: Moving forward... By going back to Kevin?

It may sound ridiculous - absurd even - that the Labor party would consider taking backing former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd... but that is exactly what they are doing. The Labor Party's relationship with the former leader is a strange and confused one, a love-hate relationship of sorts. While the party loves that Kevin is adored by public (especially the youth demographic, which has been deserting Labor in droves...) they hate, well, pretty much everything else. Kevin Rudd was a dictator, a control freak with a violent temper who chucked tantrums when he didn't get his way. In many ways K-Rudd is the physical embodiment of the Labor machine: policy and politics informed almost exclusively by the polls and gets stroppy whenever anyone dares to disagree with them. Kevin was a notorious poll watcher, as all politicians are, but he took being a reactionary leader to new heights. The "Greatest Moral Challenge" was turfed onto the policy too-hard-to-do basket faster than you can outrun the rising sea levels, all because the polls got a little jittery. It is this which is at the heart of Labor's current dilemma.

Make no mistake, the backbenchers are teeming with an undercurrent of anger, sharpening their swords with their eyes fixed squarely on what they view as their greatest vulnerability: Julia Gillard. No Prime Minister in history has burnt their way through public goodwill following an election faster than Gillard. Cast your minds back a few years, to the post Kevin07 euphoria, the longest honeymoon in Australian political history. The people loved Kevin and the polls secured his position... but the moment the polls with south their was no faction or friends to protect him. Given the outrage over the assassination of one of Australia's most popular PMs in modern history (a first term PM, which was unprecedented) Labor fears replaying this scenario with Gillard and incurring the wrath of the electorate. It is ironic that it was the very manner in which Gillard disposed of Rudd which is now protecting her from the same fate. I would argue, however, that the backbenchers and the factional heavies might want to reconsider leaving her in the top job...

Yes, there was outrage at Kevin's dismissal, but with Gillard languishing in the 30% satisfaction range, no one would shed a tear for her should she be removed from power. In addition, there would not be the same sense of insecurity; Kevin Rudd is a tried and tested PM who has demonstrated that he can do the job (not well, but still better than Gillard...). Gillard, while well know for her role in the 'Gang of Four', was still an untested leader, and this concerned the electorate. After all, you don't put an under-18's rookie in Barry Hall's full forward spot... Another source of outrage at Gillard's ascension was the means by which she achieved it: The factional heavies gave her the job, not the Australian people (even though the Australian people don't elect a PM, we still like to think that we do...). If Rudd was returned as PM, given our knowledge that he is not from a factional background, would allay the fears of the public over the 'faceless men'. In this situation the public would be more likely to view this as the Labor party doing what is necessary (and best) for the nation, as opposed to what was rightfully seen as Gillard's personal quest for power when she staged her coup.


Kevin Rudd, Come-Back Kid? Not such a laughable suggestion, really...


There is an even more powerful force which needs to be taken into consideration. Forget the factions and the Union warlords, I'm taking about the Australian psyche: we love a good underdog story. We love to see the little battler defy the odds to claim the title. Given the angst and distrust of Gillard, Kevin Rudd is perfectly positioned to make a public go for the top job. Kevin "K-Rudd" Rudd, after being KOed by his sneaky sparring partner, the Ginger Ninja, and beat out of the title fight, has returned to claim his mantle. "Save like a fiscal conservative, sting with detailed programmatic specificity. The public can't knock what the polls don't see..." The odds are against him, everyone doubts his ability to win... but that is exactly what you want in a good 'comeback' story... There is an undeniable mood in the electorate that Kevin was robbed of the top job and the Australian public would not react the same way to Gillard's assassination as they did when Rudd was knifed. In many ways I think the public would see it as justified pay-back, both to Gillard and the factional bosses. Who knows, the Return of the Rudd might just be the circuit breaker that Labor needs to free itself from the tyrannical hold of the factions...

So look out Ginger Ninja, Come-Back Kev is going in for a tune up and I suspect he will come out swinging...

Rocky eat your heart out...

The untold expense of being a Global Problem Solver...

There is an enduring saying which all parents will use at some point to allay the fears of their anxious children in those early years: “Don’t stress kiddo; for every problem there is a solution.” The advice is both sage and accurate, regardless of the obstacle which confronts us, there is inevitably a way to overcome it. It is an important message to impart as it teaches the next generation to approach difficulty and adversity with a sense of optimism. Now while I believe in having a positive outlook, I am also a pragmatist (which most confuse with pessimism...) which compels me to point out that while the saying is uplifting, it only tells half of the story. For me, the full saying would read: “For every problem there is a solution, and for every solution there is a cost...” The question is, therefore, how much cash are you willing to throw at the problem to make it go away? More pertinently, how much of the tax-payers’ dollars is the Prime Minister willing to splash to make all of the government’s problems go away?

Let us start with the much maligned ‘Malaysian Solution’. The problem which this plan was designed to solve is, of course, the fleet of illegal boatpeople flooding into Australia. The half-baked solution to send these illegal entrants to Malaysia exposed the extent to which this government is under the influence of the extreme left elements both within parliament and the broader community (I’m looking at you, GetUp!). The government will be sending 800 boatpeople to Malaysia for processing, as our centres are bursting at the seams trying to cope with the exponential influx washing over our shores. However, before we get too excited at the prospect of being rid of this burden we need to ask the very relevant question: “How much is all of this going to cost?” The answer will shock you, I know it shocked me: ($AU) $300 million. That’s right, your eyes are not deceiving you, and it will cost the hard working families of Australia, who are struggling to make ends meet as it is, $300 million to have Malaysia take these people off our hands. That means that each one of these people, who have come to our country illegally and unwelcomed, will cost us $375,000. The government will be supply them with everything they need to enjoy their holiday at Malaysia, on the tax-payer purse, while being processed. The crazy thing is that after they have been processed in Malaysia, there is a very real chance that they will simply be sent back to Australia for resettling. So, essentially, we are paying for a $375,000 vacation for these people just so that they can come back in a couple of months...

The costs do not end there. The figure of $300 million only covers those we are sending to Malaysia, there has been no mention of the cost the tax-payer will bear on the back of accepting 4000 of Malaysia’s refugees and resettling them here is Australia. If we work on the figure of $375,000 per person (which is not an unrealistic number given the government’s history of rolling out the red carpet for these people) we, the tax-payers, could be forking out in the order of a cool $1.5 billion for the great privilege of taking 4000 unwanted refugees off Malaysia’s hands... I wonder if that figure includes all of the Centrelink benefits the government will undoubtedly be handing out to them as they get off at the docks, along with the keys to their brand new, government supplied homes (although I would be wary of the insulation batts in the roof, I hear the government is still looking to off-load a few... maybe we can send them to Malaysia?).

So, all up, we could be looking at a bill in the order of $1.8 billion just for a temporary stopgap solution (if it can be called that...) to a problem which has no end in sight! But the violent haemorrhaging of tax-payer funds does not stop there – oh no! – for our foreign minister has be racking up the frequent flyer miles in a global cash splash. Kevin Rudd recently announced $80 million will go to the Horn of Africa because they are suffering from drought. I can think of somewhere a little closer to home which is more deserving of those tax-payer funded drought relief dollars: it is called regional Australia... you know, those communities on which this country was built, who feed us and who the Greens, especially Comrade Sarah Hanson-Young, seem intent on wiping out? The scary thing is that the $80 million being offered up by K-Rudd is just a drop in the vast ocean of Gillard and Rudd’s global handout scheme, with over $4.8 billion – that’s right, BILLION – which the government is handing out annually in foreign aid, a system which is frequently exploited and defrauded! How many Australia’s would think that China, an economic superpower, needs aid? Very few, except for their comrades in parliament, with Comrade Rudd handing out $22.5 million to the People’s Republic this year alone!

Shouldn't tax-payer dollars be used to help those suffering here, in Australia?

So what, exactly, is the point I am trying to make here? Well I can sum it up best with this reminder to Julia Gillard: Prime Minister, you were not elected to solve the problems of the world nor were you elected to tax the hard working families of Australia into poverty all so that you could pursue your – and Bob Brown’s – perverse wealth distribution agenda. Yes there is war, suffering and famine abroad, but the people of Australia, those who [unfortunately] elected you, are doing it tough. Do not compromise their wellbeing just so that you can alleviate your misplaced liberal guilt over living in the economically developed West... After all, charity begins at home...

So, my friends, what are your views on this matter? Am I right or have I simply confirmed my status as a conservative nut whose ideas make too much sense to be right? I would appreciate your input and feedback on this incredibly important national issue...

The week in review...

And so another week has passed by and I'm finding myself reflecting back on the events that I just did not have time to discuss... I have looked over all that I have posted this week and, for the most part, it is fairly negative. Yes, it is easy to be negative when an incompetent government being run by a group of socialist nitwits are trying to destroy everything you love about this great country of Australia, but nevertheless, I thought I would end the week on a happy note.

First of all I would like to take my hat off to the great big, sun burnt state out in the Wild West. This week saw Western Australia return to the top of the state rankings in the quarterly 'State of the States' report. Unemployment is low and the economy is ticking along very nicely. Kudos W.A., you certainly made the right move electing Premier Colin Barnett, he truly is one of the most competent politicians in the nation. Of course W.A. would be doing so much better if the federal government would stop withholding all of the state's GST dollars, but that's another story altogether.

Second I would like to congratulate the readers of this blog who took the time to add comments to my posts and who contributed to the inaugural Right Side Poll where we asked whether we should be going to an early federal election to resolve this Carbon Tax catastrophe. It was a resounding YES, with all those voting shouting out for an election. The new poll for the following week is 'Who is the best person to lead to Liberals to the next election?'

Finally, I would just like to say that this, the first week of The Right Side blog, has been a blast. I have very much enjoyed reading your responses and hearing what you have to say. I really hope that you will continue to contribute and comment as we continue to discuss the important issues.

I look forward to hearing from you all next week. Until then I'm John Citizen, stay safe and don't trust anything the liberal media tells you! Now, given that it is Friday and we have been discussing some heavy issues, I thought I would leave you with something that made me chuckle... and something else which I have already used in a previous post, but I think it is worth revisiting...

The ‘Malaysian Solution’: Gillard’s Refuge or Ruin?

The debate occurring in federal politics at the moment is fixed firmly on the Carbon Tax and the economic damage it will wreck on the Australian economy and households. While this is an important debate to be had, it is overtaking and foreshadowing pretty much every other issue in the public discourse. There has been much said in the Australian media about how the government and its chief sales persons, Prime Minister Gillard, need to divert the national conversation away from the poisonous Carbon Tax and begin discussing ‘other things’. Of course the government would want to ‘move forward’ from this toxic tax, but really, what else is there to talk about? A cursory glance over the list of other things which the government has been up to does not provide any bright spots for the PM to seek refuge. Speaking of refuge...

This may come as a shock to some in Australia but, over the past 24 hours there have been two illegal boat entries into our naval territory, with the latest boat carrying somewhere in the order of 60 asylum seekers. Now while the liberal media has done a fairly good job at keeping this under wraps and shielding this incompetent government from this line of attack the asylum seeker debate will surely return as a popular area of discussion in the public forum very shortly, what with the looming ‘Malaysian Solution’ deal nearing finalisation. So what can we look forward to in this Grand Bargain? Well, while there are precious few details out (much like the lead up to the Carbon Tax... is it just me or does this government seem particularly secretive and shifty? Pity they cannot hide their ineptitude!) but what we do know is that we will be offloading 800 asylum seekers in exchange for 4000 refuges. In addition Australia will be footing the bill for the whole affair and, undoubtedly, throwing Malaysia a hefty sum of ‘convincing money’; you know, the type that greases strategic palms...? [wink, wink]



How much longer can we risk having an open, unsecure border?


While we may not know all the details it would be a safe bet to assume that regardless of what the deal looks like the people of Australia will be shafted by this incompetent government. We will foot the bill, we will bear the international condemnation should Malaysia do anything naughty to the asylum seekers we send them (i.e. caning, general assorted beatings, unceremoniously being fired out of a canon into some other country...), and, ultimately, we will still need to deal with the tidal wave of illegal entrants into our territory because this deal will not achieve the government’s objective of stemming the flood of boats washing over our shores.

I question, though, whether this deal will actually go ahead at all. We have already seen the extensive influence that the Greens hold over the Prime Minister (it must be difficult to be a puppet to two masters; i.e. Bob and the Unions), and surely that will extend to this area of policy. Not content with destroying Australia’s economic stability and credentials, Comrade Brown will surely next be ordering his deputy in Gillard to abandon this asylum seeker deal in favour of simply opening the borders to every single person who can jury-rig together a moderately buoyant raft and point themselves in our direction.



"That's it... Dance for the cameras, my pet... Dance!"

“No need for ID papers or a legitimate and orderly assessment process!” Bob Brown will proclaim, his smug grin obvious for all to see as he stand on the dock waving in the illegal boats. “Come on in! It doesn’t matter where you’re from or even whether you are a security risk, just come on down to the People’s Republic of Australia! Be quick, the first five hundred get Centrelink benefits for life... Oh, who am I kidding? Centrelink benefits, for all! Unless of course you’re actually an Australian and have a legitimate claim to assistance... Anyone who questions my glorious edict is a racist, fascist tool of the evil New Ltd. Empire!” All the while Comrade Hanson-Young would stand dutifully by her leader, only speaking up occasionally to state which regional town she aims to bankrupt and destroy next.

For those of you who think that I am being a tad melodramatic and doing nothing more than playing on popular fears in an attempt to whip up contempt for vulnerable refugees, I would counter with this: The Greens have already screwed the taxpayer out of $10 billion for their ‘Green Bank’ to fund their pie-in-the-sky renewable schemes and are currently bullying the government into a soviet-style purge of those in the media who do not tow the party line, wanting all journalists to unquestionably accept their green-propaganda... what next? Is it so hard to believe that their next step, having destroyed the economy and the media, will be to obliterate our border security? This deal will either be vetoed by Brown or will be watered down to such a degree as to rid it of all use as a deterrent.

If only there was a simple solution to this problem... something based in the Pacific, perhaps?

A mandate, a mandate, my kingdom for a mandate!

Mandate (noun): An official or authoritative command; an order or injunction; a commission; a judicial precept.

There is a loud and righteous chorus ringing out in the public arena at the moment, a deafening, undeniable chant of a dissatisfied people. The message is clear: We, the people of this great Commonwealth of Australia, want an election... and we want it NOW! The most recent polling suggests that somewhere in the order of 60% of the electorate want to go to the polls early and pass judgement on the Carbon Tax. So poorly has this legislation been developed and communicated that the people of Australia want to have a second election in under a year. This is unheard of given our general dislike for elections, what with all the baby kissing and slogans and whatnot... Nevertheless almost 2 out of 3 voters want to have their say, and rightly so, I should add; after all, I am one of them...

Of course this leaves a minority, vocal as they are, who do not want an election. These are your Greens supports, extreme left wing socialists, and, of course, their mouthpieces in the liberal media, the likes of your Tony Jones and the usual suspects at the ABC. After forcing the Prime Minister into submission and gaining control of the government it is understandable that they would not want to relinquish their illegitimate rein over the parliament. Bob Brown, Geoff Lemon, Sarah Hanson-Young and Co. would probably much prefer that we never again go to an election, that we sacrifice our democratic right so as to advance their glorious green revolution. These pinko wanna-be revolutionaries are denying us our democratic right to vote on what Gillard herself has called one of the most historic and far reaching reforms in our nation’s history, all because they claim that she has a mandate to do so. This argument is flawed in several ways...

Let us assume, for a minute, that the PM does have a mandate. If she does then you cannot claim that it is a mandate from the people. Quite the contrary, actually, her ‘mandate’ is from the Greens and Independents, those few crossbenchers who, in and of themselves, only represent a tiny fraction of this nation’s population. That is not to say, mind you, that I believe that those in the electorates of New England, Melbourne or Lyne should not have a voice; I am simply arguing that this is a democracy, and a far reaching reform that will affect so many, such as the Carbon Tax, should not be permitted to pass on the backs of so few. If Gillard does have a mandate it is certainly not one obtained through democratic means...

The next point I would like to make concerns the so called Multi-Party Climate Change Committee which conceived and gave birth to this horrific beast of a tax. ‘Multi-Party’ is a bit of a stretch, only two parties are represented (after all, Windsor and Oakeshott abandoned both their party and its values, it appears...); essentially it is an invitation only affair, and the only way to get an invite is agree to whatever it is Comrade Brown wants. How can such a dictatorial system, built on exclusion and consensus by coercion ever produce legislation that will be in the best interest of the people, as opposed to the vested interests of those only concerned with their grip on power?

Let us continue to assume that Gillard does have a mandate which was achieved through dodgy backdoor deals and soviet style committees; all of this political horse-trading is, essentially, irrelevant, as the mandate itself, regardless of how it is formed in the parliament, is invalid. Gillard and the Labor party’s re-election platform was built on the undeniable foundation of there being NO CARBON TAX under their future governance. You cannot just change your mind post hoc because then any mandate which you may have actually secured is now invalid, therefore requiring you to obtain a new one. And how does one acquire a brand new, shiny mandate (I love that new mandate smell...)? Simple: an election where you are entirely upfront with the voters about your intentions should you win another term. This is all assuming that the PM has a mandate which, of course, I disagree with...

As you can see from the definition which I proved at the start of this post, a mandate is an official command, a commission awarded by those who elect parliamentarians; i.e. the voting public. Neither party secured enough seats to form government. Therefore neither side was commissioned by us – the people – to lead with our blessing and authority. Minority governments do not, by definition, have a mandate from the people. While they can function and fulfil the everyday requirements of government they should not be allowed to manipulate the system to pass dangerous, damaging legislation through the parliament for the sole goals of maintaining power and looking after their vested interests. If a minority government wants to initiate a reforming agenda, then that is fine... but first it needs to get the approval of the people by following the democratic process.

If you want a mandate, Prime Minister, then you have to get it from us, not Brown or his lackeys; only then will you be able to pass this legislation in good faith and save your otherwise damned political soul...

So, Prime Minister, how is the whole ‘moving forward’ thing going?

It has been over a year now since that fateful June day where former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stumbled out of a caucus meeting with a series of fatal stab wounds to the back. Swiftly stepping over the weeping Rudd the first female PM proceed to slither into the role, intent on doing the job her way... and by her way I mean the way her Union masters wanted her to do it. Around a month later she would subject the Australian people to an unbelievably cruel fate, a heinous, nefarious act the likes of which those who survived it won’t soon forget. On the 16th of July 2010 the Australian people were forced to endure arguably one of the worst political speeches in history; the notorious ‘moving forward’ speech.

For those of you who had the great fortune to miss the speech, let me give you some context. The then-newly anointed puppet PM had been in the job for barely a month and decided that it would be best to go to an election quickly as to prevent the voters enough time to work out what a complete failure she was (and still is, I might add...). So, on the 17th, she took the short drive down to the Govern-General’s residence and asked the GG to dissolve parliament. Following this, her election announcement to the nation, a brief speech where the PM uttered the immortal phrase not once, not twice, but in excess of TWENTY TIMES! Now I am an avid follower of politics and have seen many speeches and announcements in my time. Some are interesting, the rare one inspirational, but more are just boring with a casual hint of condescension; this speech made me physically ill. Politicians have made me laugh (Oh Katter, who in their right mind would join your party?), some have made me shake my head in confusion (I’m looking at you, Barnaby) but Prime Minister Gillard is the only one to make me dry wretch. It was the disturbing combination of her irritating voice, painfully slow pace and, most of all, the condescension; she spoke to the nation in much the same way that a teacher would speak to a remedial class of mentally impaired, English as a second language students. As a campaign slogan, ‘moving forward’ is relatively good, especially in comparison to Tony Abbott’s ‘Stand-up for Real Action’ (and the god-awful song which accompanied it), it was just delivered incredibly poorly... Regardless, this detracts from the point I’m trying to make...


There is something missing from this cartoon... of that's right, the puppet strings...
(Source: The Australian... now there is a quality broadsheet!)

At this point you are probably thinking to yourself, “John, we know all this! The election was under a year ago and we have sat through the deconstruction and analysis; you’re not telling us anything we don’t already know!” That is true, but the last poll to come out got me thinking... Julia, and the Labor party in general, were desperate – oh so desperate! – to break from the Rudd era that their entire re-election platform was, essentially, “We’re not Rudd”. K-Rudd had become so toxic that they were willing to ‘move forward’ (which is code for ‘run as fast as you can away from the little nerd!’), sacrificing the man who had been one of the most popular prime ministers in recent history for the relatively untested Gillard. So now, with Labor’s primary vote at a shame-inducing, backbench-revolting level of a wimpy 29%, is Gillard thinking that perhaps ‘moving forward’ was a bit of a mistake? Instead of promising to ‘move Australia forward’, is the PM wishing that she could ‘move Labor backwards’? Back to a time when their brand was not damaged beyond repair? Back to a time when they could form coherent policies that actually worked? Back further still, to a time when they could win elections by themselves, without needing to reach out to the extremists in the Greens, further damaging their brand? Is it time for the factional leaders to move the party back to K-Rudd?


Sorry K-Rudd, it's true, there's no coming back for you...

Of course, it is incredibly unlikely that Kevin will ever be moving his stuff back into the Lodge (I think the Adelaide Crows have a greater chance of winning the flag this year than Kevin has of getting his old job back...). Labor is doomed to lose the next election, and many more subsequent elections in the years which will follow. After riding high on the Kevin07 campaign, the party which spent over a decade in the wilderness has managed to handicap itself so badly that, regardless of what move it makes next, it cannot win. It has lost all of its major pieces and has backed itself into an untenable position. Tony ‘the Bishop’ Abbott just needs to keep his mouth shut and he will be able to knock of the Red Queen with very little effort at the 2013 election.

Mate in two years...

I weep for the future...

Do I despair because Destructive Global Warming is just days away from flooding every major city and killing millions, or even billions? Don’t be ridiculous...

Do I fear that we have reached – nay, passed – peak oil and that a global war is on the verge of erupting over the precious few resources which remain? [scoffs] Hardly!

Food shortages? Give me a break... [mumbled while enjoying a thick, juicy steak]

Power consumption? Energy security? I don’t think so!

Then what, exactly, is it that causes my hope for the future to dim to nary a pessimistic glint, a depressing dull glow of gloom and anguish on the horizon? I weep for the future not because of Global Warming but, rather, a phenomenon I have labelled as Global Dumbing. This shocking occurrence is typified by a trending down of global intelligence. Sceptical? Are you a ‘Dumbing Denier’? Well consider this: Research shows that intelligence is influenced by genetics – FACT. Trends also indicate that within western society that there is a negative correlation between education level obtained and family size – FACT. Anecdotal evidence would indicate that the more time one spends on tertiary education, the more likely they are to be career oriented (or, alternatively, those who are more intellectually gifted complete tertiary education and, courtesy of that cognitive capacity, recognise that having a family and children is a colossal waste of time and money...). The statistics indicate that a tertiary educated couple will, on average, only have one child, thereby not even replacing the parents in the next generation.

What effect does this decreased birth-rate of the intellectually superior have? Global Dumbing, that’s what! A gradual decline of the population’s collective intellect where scientific advancement will grind to a halt and the ability to think analytically and critically will evaporate. Soon the world will be overrun with troglodytic half-wits who think burnouts are amusing and that wearing your pyjamas to the local convenience store is appropriate. Oh, what a horrible future it will be! The great literary classics will be relegated to history. Universities will only have students enrolling in their Bachelor of Arts program; worse yet, they will all be majoring in liberal majors like Social Justice [shivers]! Collingwood’s membership would skyrocket and the sales of Holden Utes would explode! Mullets would make a comeback! Julia Gillard’s popularity would be through the roof! OH THE HUMANITY!


Finding 'Global Dumbing' a bit hard to follow? Perhaps that says more about you than you think...


How is this related to politics, I hear you ask? Simple, as you need only look as far as your T.V. or newspaper (and it had best be a News Ltd. publication!) and you will see countless hordes of ignorant serfs being trotted out by Labor and their Union overlords to shore up the Carbon Tax cheer squad. But the unwitting pawns of Gillard and Howes aside, I am far more concerned with the physical embodiment of the Global Dumbing trend: Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young. When discussing the Carbon Tax's impact on small mining towns in her state of South Australia, Senator Hanson-Young stated that in the future they “won’t exist”, epitomising the Greens’ war on the Australian people.

So what, exactly, is the point that I am attempting to make here? Well I will sign off by posing this question for your consideration: Who is dumber? The Labor Party for willing to be in a coalition with – let alone the same room! – a bunch of radical extremists who delight in destroying our economy or the people who voted for them in the first place...

Those who live in greenhouses should not throw rhetoric

The ‘Red Menace’ of yesteryear has evolved into a decisively smug shade of Green. Forget the Reds under your bed for I am far more concerned about the Greens in their Priuses or, worse yet, on their soapboxes. The other day I came home only to find the unsightly visage of none other than Senator Bob Brown gracing my T.V.


“Tony Abbott is a puppet of big business!” He decried, much like a self-proclaimed prophet standing on the hill preaching to the true believers and curious bystanders who always gather to gawk at the mentally ill. “Tobacco companies! Mining giants! Multinational conglomerates! All have Tony Abbott and the devilish Coalition bowing at their feet! Follow them if you wish to descend into a tobacco and pollution haze of greed and corruption!” Ok, so the often sighted criticism of yours truly being slightly prone to hyperbole may, at times, be somewhat appropriate. This, however, is not one of those times... anyway, moving forward...


Every time I have the great misfortunate of gazing upon Senator Brown’s sickly face it is undoubtedly accompanied with either a self-congratulatory pat on the back or a rampant tirade about how the Coalition are the whipping boys of evil corporate forces, the likes of which who plot against him personally and, more broadly, anyone sporting a liberal agenda. Senator Brown’s paranoia over New Ltd. aside, the good senator does seem to derive a great sense of satisfaction pointing out that the Coalition does receive large donations from ‘vested interests’ (oh how Bob loathes donations, all the while gladly accepting them himself...). The clear inference being that large organisations can throw some money Tony’s way and –Hey Presto! – you have the Opposition opposing for opposition’s sake.


Plain packaging getting you down? No problem! For a nominal fee Tony ‘Action Man’ Abbott will take up the charge and defend your wicked organisation’s vile intellectual property rights...


So this got me thinking. Political parties, by necessity, collect donations to fund their election campaigns, etcetera. It makes sense, therefore, that non-political entities will support parties which champion causes which will lead to beneficial outcomes for them. The unions support the ALP because they believe that Labor will be a voice for the ‘working man/woman’. By extension, business groups will support the Coalition as their core values centre around lower taxation and limited government interference (i.e. the idea of ‘small government’). So far, this all seems fair; no ethical alarm bells sounding... Of course, a supporter becomes a vested interest when their contribution influences actual policy outcomes. For example, ensuring that one of your mates who supported your campaign lands a sweet government contract or that government funds are going to a sector which is a generous donor, even if the allocation of funds is to the determent of the Australian people.


This is the heart of Senator Brown’s criticism of the Coalition. The Coalition accepts money from the coal industry by the form of donations. Tony Abbott and the Coalition oppose the Carbon tax. Ipso facto, Tony Abbott is a slave to the vested interests of the coal sector. In the less astute mind of your typical Green support this may send those aforementioned ethical alarm bells into motion, screeching in a tone almost as annoying as the voice of Sarah Hanson-Young. To your average voter on the street this may raise an eyebrow and warrant a second consideration of the issue, but for the most part nothing more. This avenue of attack, ironically, is now one of the key vulnerabilities of the Greens who, up until now, have largely escaped the harsh spotlight of critical evaluation (nice work, liberal media!). If, however, the Greens want to play in the big league, then there are some serious questions that need to be asked...


The first dark corner which our spotlight must be shone is funding; where exactly is the Green’s money coming from? The renewable energy sector, of course! The green, environmental sustainability sector throws large sacks of cash in Senator Brown’s direction, supposedly because the Green’s want to move Australia to a low emissions economy. Is this really what the Green’s are trying to achieve, though...?


That brings us to the second corner on which we must shed some illumination: the Carbon Tax. Emissions reducing saviour or false prophet aimed at swelling the pockets of those nasty ‘vested interests’? The $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation (colloquially referred to as ‘Green Bank’) is essentially tax-payer dollars being funnelled to approved green initiatives (direct action, anyone?). Now Green Bank is the creation of Bob Brown and was the key sweetener to getting the Greens on board to support this wildly unpopular legislation. Who decides what warrants an acceptable ‘green initiative’ worthy of those hard-earned tax-payer dollars? Why Senator Brown and his ilk, of course! And who do you think those funds are likely to go to? The Green’s largest and most generous financial backers, perhaps? Did I hear someone say “conflict of interest?”


Does anyone seriously believe that those who financially supported the Greens will not be the first in line to collect their recycled-plastic Government funded ‘Green Visa’ from Green Bank, with the Australian tax-payer picking up the tab? Is this not a blatant case of mates helping mates, of vested interests coming before national interests? If you are unconvinced, just considered Senator Brown’s reaction to the use of Green Bank funds to assist in the development of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) technology. Clearly not the reaction of a man considering all of the options in the nation’s best interest... Is there an allegiance you are putting ahead of the interests of the people, Senator?

A note to a Carbon Lemon...

I have been spending a lot of time thinking about the Carbon Tax since Sunday (and for quite some time previous to that fateful day) and I have, exercising great restraint, resisted the urge to jump on my computer and start ranting. No, I thought to myself, I will sit back and actually THINK about what has been proposed, consider the alternatives and not just rage against the most incompetent Government/Prime Minister this country has ever had the misfortune of having... and, for the most part, this is what I have done... until I came across this particular article . Now on my path to comprehend both the Carbon Tax and the public sentiment around it, I have read and watched a lot on the topic from both sides of the argument. While I already have a view on the matter, I believe that my opinion and understanding of the subject matter should be tested against the views and attitudes of others. Otherwise, how can I say that my position has been well thought out and considered if I have only been looking at views which coincide with my own? If the method was good enough for Socrates then it is good enough for me. However this article by ABC contributor Geoff Lemon – the ABC pushing a leftist agenda, shocking! – left me speechless. I’ve included the link again here and would suggest that you look it over. Feel free to tell me if I’m overreacting when I say that this article, and the comments it generated, have me questioning the intellect of my fellow Australians...


Geoff’s argument is that because Australian citizens do not live in abject poverty, then the Government should tax them into the third world squalor he seems to want to inflict on the hard working families of Australia. All so that he could witness “...the squawking indignant right-to-luxury crowd learning how to live in the dust, scraping out dried plants from the earth and hoarding their remnants from the Beforetime.” I can just imagine Geoff with the other Lemons, notably Bob Brown and Sarah Hanson-Young, sitting on their high horses, overseeing the destruction of the great Australian economy – and with it, the great Australian dream – just so that they could finally justify their pointless existence.

The left seem to think that their argument that ‘Australia can afford to do it, so we should do it’ is a valid one; nothing could be further from the truth. Just because you can do something does not make it a good idea! I do not need both of my lungs to live, but that does not mean that I should go and have one removed just so that I limit my output of CO2. Why would I subject myself to painful, ultimately unnecessary surgery, if it is not absolutely required? Likewise, why should the Government take a sledgehammer to the economy and subject the people of Australia to the subsequent economic pain when there will be no benefit to the environment? I hate to rain on the Greenies’ parade but Australia only emits 1.47% of global emissions! To give some perspective, at current emissions levels, it would take Australia 13 years to release the same amount of carbon that China emits in a single year. I’m going to repeat that for all of those who actually think that Australia cutting emissions would actually achieve anything: What it takes for us to emit in a year China does in under a month. Perhaps Geoff Lemon and his friends in the Greens should be waging war with their comrades in China, as opposed to the Australian people...

This widespread view held by the socialist element within our community is, ultimately, a selfish one. They want to shut down ‘evil big business’ simply so that they can have that warm fuzzy feeling akin to the joy they feel when riding the [free range] unicorns at Uncle Bob’s Unicorn Refuge, where the majestic creatures eat pollution and fart out rainbows and candy for all the children. What they fail to understand (an inability to comprehend basic ideas is common amongst Bachelor of Arts students...) is that evil big businesses actually EMPLOY PEOPLE! Not everyone gets their income from Centrelink; some people have these things called ‘jobs’. Furthermore, these organisations also invest in Australia, as opposed to fiendishly exporting all of the profits to devilish ‘foreign’ investors. Just a sidenote: it always fascinates me how the Greens want to let every single refugee into the country and slam Australians who do not share their view as being racist, yet Bob Brown seems very xenophobic when it comes to foreigners who have money and, God forbid, want to invest it in Australia’s growth...

I was hoping to complete this post without it deteriorating into a rant... oh well... I’ll just make the promise “that there will be no partisan rhetoric under any post I write”. On second thought I retract that promise, especially after what has been going on with the Prime Minister and how angry people get when lied to (justifiably so, I might add). So I will conclude by saying this to Geoff Lemon: You are wrong, Australian families and the broader economy as a whole is hurting and we do not need this tax. While you may be happy to pay this tax do not be so quick to judge those that do not share your enthusiasm for another ill-conceived – and what will ultimately be a poorly executed – initiative from a Government that fails at everything is attempts... [Damn rhetoric, how did you sneak in there...?!]

An Introduction...

Hello, my name is John Citizen, and I am a conservative. Of course this means that I am inherently an evil profit driven capitalist who will step on the little guy just to make a quick dollar (sometimes not even for a dollar, but just because it brings joy to my black heart...). In my spare time I plot the downfall of the world with colleagues over a brandy in the parlour room, reclining back in my sumptuous leather chair by a roaring fire fuelled by endangered animals and the toys of poor refugee children... by the way, the brandy tastes so much better when mixed with the tears of the aforementioned children...

This may come as a shock to you left-wing hippies but the above was actually satire. Shocking, to be sure, a conservative who is making a satirical comment as opposed to being the subject of one. What you will undoubtedly find even more confronting is that I do not look even remotely like the Monopoly Man AND I do not hate freedom or adorable puppies. Unbelievable but true. I am a proud conservative who is under 100 years old (unlike the stereotypical evil capitalist puppet master) and, before you ask, no, I do not own a monocle or get free parking... damn you Pennybags! Share that sweet free parking with the rest of us!

So what is the point of this blog? Simple, really: offer an alternative view to the prevailing nonsense served up daily by the liberal media. For the most part the voice of the young, grassroots conservative activist is overlooked and silenced by the insistent protest chanting from the Greenie agitator plebs who obviously do not understand what the word ‘employment’ means. To their credit, though, they do appear to have an intimate working knowledge of the Centrelink system... So here I am, a conservative with a jewel encrusted axe to grind...

So I say to you, my fellow conservatives, slam down those brandies, hold on to your monocles and top hats, we are going for that monopoly! And then no one will be able to stop us... [the cruel laugh of the elitist conservative cabal echoed out as they sat around their boardroom table, enjoying the latest News Ltd. publication... now there is some balanced reporting!]