Hockey causes “black hole”

The nation has learned that the only thing bigger than Joe Hockeys BS is the giant hole in his budget, after Treasury uncovered a deficit of between $7 and $11 billion.

Independent MP Tony Windsor, who is deciding on which party he’d prefer to make a minority government with, said the move has made him question whether he can support the coalition.

"We probably understand now why (Opposition Leader Tony Abbott) wasn't interested in releasing the numbers," he told ABC Television on Wednesday adding that one of the key factors was trust.

However shadow treasurer, Joe Hockey, expressed surprise at the reaction, saying that nobody told him the numbers had to add up.

“How else are we going to end Labor’s waste?” he asked.

Abbott has come to Hockeys defence, saying that the figures didn’t match up because the Liberal party used a different model to Treasury. Where Treasury relied on actual figures and costings, Abbott got his figures by undercutting the costs announced by the Labor party.

A statement from Abbott’s office further added that the coalition will make good on its promise to deliver an $11 billion boost to the budget bottom line over four years.

“We’ll just have a garage sale or privatise something,” Hockey suggested.

The statement said that even in the worst case scenario, the coalition was still $7 billion better than Labor’s bottom line, and if they wanted to they could turn that $7 billion into $17billion with the clever use of a pen.

Abbott embarrasses himself…again.

The country has been taken aback after Tony Abbott revealed he was “no tech-head”.

The revelation came after the opposition leader was quizzed about the Liberal Party’s plans for the national broadband scheme. Unable to answer basic questions about the development and speed of the network, Abbott said he was no Bill Gates.

However Abbott stood his ground saying that while he didn’t know what 12mbps was or how it compared to Julia Gillard’s 100mbps network, he could confirm that Ms Gillard was not Bill Gates either. He rammed the argument home by saying that Bill Gates was male and married.

Scrambling onto more familiar ground, the opposition leader went on to say that the broadband would be as powerful as the wrath of God, as fast as his reintroduction of Work Choices and that it would smoke Australia. The last comment was heavily applauded by his campaign sponsors fervent admirers, the tobacco industry.

But although Australians remain largely unimpressed, experts suspect that the gaffe may have had more to do with Abbott’s low IQ and general incompetence than with his lack of technical training.

In unrelated news, a small monkey delighted audiences at Taronga Zoo when it explained the simplicities of broadband.

Stop with the PM bullshit already!

So I know that you’re probably over the news that we have a new (female) Prime Minister. But it is big news. Whoever thought that someone with a vagina could rule? Believe me, it’s been a massive shock for loads of news teams, which have been sputtering garbage ever since they found out.

Read more »

I fear:

1. That Tony Abbot will win the next election.
2. That the people of Australia will be so focused on K-Rudd being forced out of his position that they won’t notice all of the good policies – like the mining tax – that still exist within the Labor party. 

Read more »

So much to say

I’m about to explode. I have so many repressed, un-expressed opinions centrifuging in my brain that at any moment they’re bound to start bursting out of my ears, nostrils and hair follicles and screaming at people out of context.

You may scoff, but I’m really afraid that I’ll walk into an interview and before I can introduce myself, my leg hair will shout “wave thank you, damn it!” or “Really? We need to be compassionate with paedophiles?”…and that’s just not professional.

The only way out is to rant:

Read more »

Angry rant

Yes. Okay. I know I rant a lot. In fact most of my blog is just one rant after another, but I've just been catching up on today's news and the stories about the changes to refugee policy have got me in a tizzy.

For those who have been too busy this week to reach for the paper (as important and industrious professionals often are), let me quickly summarise what has been going on.

Basically the Rudd government has changed its policy on refugees coming from Sri Lanka and Afghanistan based on a UNHCR review of the conditions in these countries.

According to the new policy, the processing of refugee claims by Sri Lankans and Afghans will be suspended by three to six months. This was done in a bid to stop the invasion of Australia by the evil masses or people who jump onto boats to speed their way to our shores with the view of destroying our economy....wait. No. That's just what a lot of the media and ignorant Australians will have you believe.

The move -- which is a bit of a turn for Rudd from his previous policies (although his foreign affairs minister is arguing that Rudd's always had a tough stance on refugees. In this he's both right and wrong; it all depends whose standards of "tough" you're looking at, but I'm not going to go into all of that) has received its fair share of criticism from all factions.

Tony Abbott has gotten into the debate in the middle of the "crisis"- as he does - when his Christian spirit could no longer withstand the way the PM was lying/cheating to the electorate/changing his spots. Or, at least, that's what he'd have you believe.

In typical Abbottness he has claimed that the minister is vying for the love of the polls with this band-aid solution. He might be right. I don't know.

Why the PM did what he did and what the opposition leader has to say about it isn't actually the most disturbing part of this debacle.

The most disturbing part is that under the political squabbling over who's got bigger balls when it comes to "getting tough on asylum seekers" or "queue jumpers" (that term must have been coined by a journalist), there are real people trying to get away from real persecution.

I, of course, speak of the 1/10,000th of one per cent of the world's refugees that Australia receives. Yes. That's right according to the CEO of the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, the number of desperate people trying to claim asylum is that small.

We are not being "flooded". We're not even being drizzled.

Of course I'm not suggesting we should overlook the issues of people trafficking and all of the other highly illegal operations of the criminals who profit from the illegal immigration trade or ignore environmental issues around increasing the population of our country, but how about stopping the hate?

Politicians are politicians. They're meant to be the ones who long ago sold their soul for something or other. You expect them to cheat, lie and do everything for self-gain. I'm not even sure why people are so shocked when politicians act like politicians.

What I'm shocked about is how many people, without really thinking about the situation are happy to scream about Australia being invaded by refugees. And how many argue that piling onto a dangerous boat and setting off for a foreign land is actually something that cunning people would rather do than calmly process a visa and get here legally by plane. They argue that this is not a sign of desperation but impatience. Seems a bit silly to me.

I know that there are exceptions to every rule and that there are people who jump the queue out there, but I think most people who take such drastic measures to get to Australia aren't and shouldn't be treated as evil invaders.

Anyway I really have no solutions. I just needed to rant a little. I feel better now. Thanks for listening.

Oh and if you want to do some reading on the subject, have a look at this story. And this one. And, if you have time, read the comments at the bottom of this story.

Worst news report ever?

I probably haven't been around long enough to speak in finite terms, but I think I may have just read one of the worst news reports in living and non-living history.

Not only does it disregard grammar and syntax, but it makes no logical sense. Please read this story and tell me whether you understand what happened.

Now let me break it down for you:
It starts off well with the ultra funky headline "Kevin Rudd halts QT to ambush Tony Abbott on health".

The ambiguity over "QT" allows for so many fun possibilities:

"Kevin Rudd halts quality time to ambush Tony Abbott"

"Kevin Rudd halts quince tart to ambush Tony Abbott"

etc.

To my great disappointment though, in this case "QT" did not mean either of those but stood for "question time". You might think this is a bit obvious, but I'd still argue that journalists shouldn't use ambiguous abbreviations. Save it for texting. It just looks lazy.

Moving on. What is more unclear from the news report is what this "ambush" actually involved.

"Putting the Oppsoition (sic) Leader on the spot after he responded to Mr Rudd's taunts that he explain his position, Mr Abbott quickly recovered to accuse the Rudd government of lying to voters."

Errr...what? Let me slide in a common proper noun to make sense of the above:

"Putting Abbott on the spot after Abbott responded to Mr Rudd's taunts that Abbott explain Abbott's position, Abbott quickly recovered to accuse the Rudd government of lying to voters."

No, that didn't make anything clearer (except that the journalist responsible is in dire need of English lessons).

This is what I think the general message was: When Rudd unexpectedly asked Abbott to explain his position on health, the opposition leader responded by calling Rudd a liar. Mature.

But the story goes on:

"The ambush tactics included Labor MPs extending his time to speak to put the unprepared Liberal leader to the test."

Again, let me translate this into English: Labor MPs extended Abbott's speaking time, in order to put the Liberal leader to the test.

So how did Abbott explain his health proposal?

""What a complete fake!" Mr Abbott yelled across the chamber at the Prime Minister. Forced to withdraw his lying charge as unparliamentary, he accused Mr Rudd of telling "grotesque untruths"."

Firstly, I have to commend the opposition leader for behaving in such a dignified way. Secondly I should make it clear that contrary to what the journalist wrote, the charge wasn't lying. Abbott simply had to withdraw his accusations that the PM was a liar. Thirdly I'd like to share my fondness for the "parliamentary" and "unparliamentary" classifications. I wonder whether there's a list:

Liar - unparliamentary ** Teller of grotesque untruths - parliamentary

Dickhead - unparliamentary ** Man with phallic-shaped noggin - parliamentary

Thief - unparliamentary ** One who borrows without intention of returning- parliamentary

.

Back to the story. To end the defence of his health proposal, Abbott questioned Rudd's ability to deliver on health by using the bungled insulation program as a basis for attack...again.

.

I wonder just how long he's going to hold onto that before people catch on to the fact that insulation and health actually have very little in common.

.

I'd also like to draw your attention to the fact that other than a poor account of a parliamentary tiff , nothing about the content of the meeting was mentioned. At the end of the story we know that the men don't like each other very much, but we still have no idea what was said regarding health. Good Work!

Rudd expects good whacking

The Prime Minister of Australia, Kevin Rudd, yesterday stepped up to the microphone to say that he expects, and deserves, a good whacking.

Despite initial whisperings that the comments were related to some form of underground S&M activity; it was soon revealed that Rudd was speaking of polls and the reaction to undelivered election promises.

"I expect to be whacked in the polls, and I deserve it," he said in an apology to the nation.

He took responsibility over the insulation scheme, Labor's electoral promise shortcomings, those ugly red brick apartment blocks that were built in Australia in the 80s and several Australian television programmes including (but not limited to) Neighbours, Home and Away and Blue Heelers. He went on to say that if it would help in the polls, he was prepared to take the blame for Tiger Wood's indiscretions as well.

Tony Abbott put heat to the fire by describing Rudd as "rattled" several times. Once he tired of the insult, he added that the PM was also a "poopy head".

Abbott's supporters were too busy pumping their fists and shaking their heads at the Mardi Gras to mount strong support. Although, with just a trace of pride in their voices, they said that the previous PM, John Howard, had never apologised for anything.

Rudd looks to Ben Lee for crisis management

In the aftermath of the failed insulation scheme, which has cost thousands of jobs, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd poached some wisdom from singer Ben Lee when he told his MPs "we are all in this together".

The announcement came during an unplanned meeting, during which Rudd asked his MPs to speak to the affected workers.

He suggested that they approach the angry masses with guitar in hand or, alternatively, in a bubble. It had worked for Coke in an earlier advertising campaign to the same Ben Lee tune, he said.

Opposition leader Tony Abbott said that it was appalling for Rudd to use the lyrics and called for both Rudd and Environment Minister responsible for the bungled scheme, Peter Garrett, to be sacked.

He said that the Federal Government "could not even deliver the words to tune, let alone run the country."

"That song was played as part of the Coca Cola advertisement on TV," he added "Coke is Satan's drink."

Abbott's supporters declined to comment, stating that it was their strategy to offer their opinions in hindsight.

Rudd has remained a strong supporter of Garrett. It is believed the Environment Minister has a killer baritone voice.