|
Look at all those dumbshit greens falling for Keatings third way bullshit.
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 04:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
You can buy Bolt Glasses now
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 05:14
|
|
|
Gough Suppressant posted:Look at all those dumbshit greens falling for Keatings third way bullshit. My Social Enterprise lecturer has such a loving hard on for the "Third way", which features heavily in the text book and we had to include it somehow in our group assessment. We interviewed Brisbane Youth Service for the assessment, and they hadn't even heard of the term.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
IslamoNazi posted:You can buy Bolt Glasses now What happens if you look at a while person? Genocide.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 05:16
|
|
|
Welcome to Sydney gently caress stains   The last one says cctv posted:Smile for the CCTV monitored 24/7
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:04
|
|
|
If you're busting for a piss $200 is probably worth it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:12
|
|
|
Can I get a job looking at a camera 24/7?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
Anidav posted:Can I get a job looking at a camera 24/7? You'd have to leave Queensland
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:23
|
|
|
IslamoNazi posted:You'd have to leave Queensland Uh, aren't they building another casino?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:26
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:Uh, aren't they building another casino? Nah, Queensland have occupied some NSW territory and are building a casino. Sydney wouldn't be that dumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
IslamoNazi posted:Nah, Queensland have occupied some NSW territory and are building a casino. Sydney wouldn't be that dumb. I meant QLD. Casinos need people to watch cameras 24-7
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:32
|
|
|
Lizard Combatant posted:I meant QLD. Casinos need people to watch cameras 24-7 That doesn't stop the idea of Queensland occupying Sydney land as being amusing though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:38
|
|
|
How much to piss on a police officer?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 09:54
|
|
|
emergency room treatment is covered by the state, citizen. legal aid will provide you a lawyer (maybe). and after that your meals and lodging will be free for up to 7 years!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
so what I'm saying here is do it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:emergency room treatment is covered by the state, citizen. legal aid will provide you a lawyer (maybe). and after that your meals and lodging will be free for up to 7 years!
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 10:14
|
|
|
Do NOT call your local police station and ask if it's only $200 to piss on a cop "accidentally". edit: I still don't know if that is all it will cost you but they don't like the question, at all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 10:43
|
|
|
Gough Suppressant posted:Look at all those dumbshit greens falling for Keatings third way bullshit. To be fair, what are your options? Jim Cairns is the only one I can think of who wasn't right-wing.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 10:54
|
|
Waaaah the Christians are out to get me
|
I'd go Swannie over Keating since he hosed over students less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:12
|
|
|
Yeah. Also swans response to the GFC was unabashedly Keynesian despite the shrieking media and opposition he faced in implementing it
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
I only recently moved to queensland, but I'm seeing lots of ads spruiking the government reducing medical waiting times to zero and similar. Since I assume like everything else in this state Newman has actually hosed everything up and they're full of lies, can anyone help me with information about why this is a crock of poo poo?
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:23
|
|
|
iajanus posted:I only recently moved to queensland, but I'm seeing lots of ads spruiking the government reducing medical waiting times to zero and similar. Since I assume like everything else in this state Newman has actually hosed everything up and they're full of lies, can anyone help me with information about why this is a crock of poo poo? Some elective surgeries will be free under medicare as of February if you have to wait longer than "medically recommended". Probably it will be scrapped as soon as the government figures out it is ridiculously expensive, or they will drastically reduce the list of surgeries which qualify. EDIT: You also do not get to choose your backup hospital. EDIT THE SECOND: Obviously this strategy relies on some hospitals not being totally booked out at any given time. Turks fucked around with this message at 11:35 on Dec 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:31
|
|
|
I'm more curious how they reduced the delayed surgeries from over 90% to zero (or whatever bullshit numbers they spout). It sounds like some deliberate changing of definitions, but I'd love to know how they did it so I can call them out to my new coworkers who are fairly politically dense.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:43
|
|
|
iajanus posted:I'm more curious how they reduced the delayed surgeries from over 90% to zero (or whatever bullshit numbers they spout). It sounds like some deliberate changing of definitions, but I'd love to know how they did it so I can call them out to my new coworkers who are fairly politically dense. I like this little exchange in the comments: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
Well as I said, the policy hasn't even been implemented yet. It starts Feb 1 2015 so we'll have to wait to see how much of a failure it is. Also they only count the wait time from after you have seen a specialist to recommend the surgery, even if you pretty much know beforehand that you'll need it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 11:59
|
|
|
Another Tory leader way too smart to need a media advisor
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 12:06
|
|
|
Yeap, four pillar economy, lying and manure and two of those pillars.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 12:12
|
|
|
NTRabbit posted:Another Tory leader way too smart to need a media advisor Parsing that, that's the "Campbell Newman - Politician" like page, which is run by his staff. Not the "Campbell Newman - Arsehole" individual page. I could be wrong, but that's how I read it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 14:28
|
|
|
tithin posted:Parsing that, that's the "Campbell Newman - Politician" like page, which is run by his staff. Not the "Campbell Newman - Arsehole" individual page. It was wrong of me to assume a Tory politician could operate a computer, let alone a social media account 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 14:33
|
|
|
Tbf, the '- Team [Politician]' thing looks to be something that might become standard on social media for politicians who want to be seen as mavericks. Gillard did '- Team Julia/JG' on twitter and Rudd did the same. Adam Bandt's facebook page does it a shitload to differentiate between the posts he authors himself and the ones done by staff, and the standard posts made by the party's actual media team. Bandt's office does it, Ludlam's sort of does it but without the 'team' thing because I guess he trusts his staff more, since a lot of different things are posted on his 'personal' fb which aren't copied to the like page, and vice versa. It's not that you need to have a competent media team so much as having competent office staff who aren't completely tone deaf and loving ignorant. So, not Young Liberals from Queensland. Posting stuff under '- Team Whatever' is quite cynical in the sense that having your staff post stuff publicly under your name but also not in your name gives you immediate personal cover for whatever dumb poo poo comes out of your office, even if it is your privately stated opinion, because it's said to not come from you personally. You can just say 'yeah I disciplined/sacked that dumb staffer', even though you were the one who chose them and knew exactly who they were while they were working for you bc if you don't know the character of your staff you're an oblivious, absent and lovely boss. And that's why I expect it to become standard over the next year or two. Fruity Gordo fucked around with this message at 16:40 on Dec 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
John Kaye's staff append their initials to the end of the posts they write on his Facebook. Also, someone on Adam Bandt's staff really likes Mean Girls.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
I don't like being cynical but honestly with the amount of blatant lying that the media often lets politicians get away with, if a politician actually had to fire a staffer over something it would at least be a loving result no matter how meaning less in the scheme of things. In any case people usually do seem to know when a staffer falls on their sword, and while it gives some plausible deniability to people who were going to vote for them anyway, most undecideds would probably come away with some idea it was bullshit if they heard about it. They may not care sure, but I don't think any people are giving many politicians the befit of the doubt these days. Anyway I wouldn't be surprised if soon any politician of significance just hires a PR companies to handle their social media for them. Less likely to gently caress up somehow you would think, and not loving up on social media is probably the best result most politicians could reasonably hope for.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
You say that, but just wait until you get your character erroneously assassinated in Andrew Bolt's blog and have your elected volunteer position threatened because the people above you don't think to give you the benefit of the doubt. Throwing people under the bus for minor infractions for political expediency is very easy to do when you have power, and extremely lovely for the people you do it to, and even the Greens are not exempt. The only reason I was protected from being summarily rolled was bc of grassroots support and structural autonomy, and that does not exist in any other party. The Greens have structures in place to prevent shenanigans, but even those structures and processes are shaky when there is no precedent and directives come from above about how to act. You're never going to have that standard applied to volunteers for the ALP or KKK, so there's really not point advocating for it. Hoping that young hacks get owned more is hoping to be awesome at pissing into the wind. Everyone knows that my huge thing is that your behaviour in your private life reflects your values and therefore knowledge of the broad strokes of your private conduct is in the public interest if you are elected as a political representative. In that sense, the character of the people you trust to run your office is important, because if they act outrageously in their capacity as a worker that reflects badly on you. They are not public figures, though. Politicians are public figures and if they're fine with loving with people's livelihoods on the basis of a hosed up tweet after they've worked together for months, then, fucken shenanigans. Especially when they're living hosed up private lives. Fruity Gordo fucked around with this message at 19:00 on Dec 27, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
Fruity Gordo posted:Everyone knows that my huge thing is that your behaviour in your private life reflects your values and therefore knowledge of the broad strokes of your private conduct is in the public interest if you are elected as a political representative. In that sense, the character of the people you trust to run your office is important, because if they act outrageously in their capacity as a worker that reflects badly on you. They are not public figures, though. Politicians are public figures and if they're fine with loving with people's livelihoods on the basis of a hosed up tweet after they've worked together for months, then, fucken shenanigans. Especially when they're living hosed up private lives. All power in this world now comes with a "Limited Liability" clause, pollies and the executive world are closer than ever and are coming more and more to resemble each other. So, perhaps naturally, the same protections are assumed in both positions, adapted for the circumstances.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 23:25
|
|
|
Fruity Gordo posted:You say that, but just wait until you get your character erroneously assassinated in Andrew Bolt's blog and have your elected volunteer position threatened because the people above you don't think to give you the benefit of the doubt. Throwing people under the bus for minor infractions for political expediency is very easy to do when you have power, and extremely lovely for the people you do it to, and even the Greens are not exempt. The only reason I was protected from being summarily rolled was bc of grassroots support and structural autonomy, and that does not exist in any other party. The Greens have structures in place to prevent shenanigans, but even those structures and processes are shaky when there is no precedent and directives come from above about how to act.  Hope you're ok
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 23:39
|
|
|
http://www.realestate.com.au/property-unit-nsw-redfern-118261723 Bizzare
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
Sydney housing prices are the most hosed. Brisbane is hosed too, but slightly less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
That is a very popular area with young professionals (plus little on-street parking due to visitor traffic and it has two parking spaces).
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 01:04
|
|
|
Fruity Gordo posted:You say that, but just wait until you get your character erroneously assassinated in Andrew Bolt's blog and have your elected volunteer position threatened because the people above you don't think to give you the benefit of the doubt. Throwing people under the bus for minor infractions for political expediency is very easy to do when you have power, and extremely lovely for the people you do it to, and even the Greens are not exempt. The only reason I was protected from being summarily rolled was bc of grassroots support and structural autonomy, and that does not exist in any other party. The Greens have structures in place to prevent shenanigans, but even those structures and processes are shaky when there is no precedent and directives come from above about how to act. Is there a story behind this you're able to share?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 01:09
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Fruity Gordo posted:Everyone knows that my huge thing is that your behaviour in your private life reflects your values and therefore knowledge of the broad strokes of your private conduct is in the public interest if you are elected as a political representative. In that sense, the character of the people you trust to run your office is important, because if they act outrageously in their capacity as a worker that reflects badly on you. They are not public figures, though. Politicians are public figures and if they're fine with loving with people's livelihoods on the basis of a hosed up tweet after they've worked together for months, then, fucken shenanigans. Especially when they're living hosed up private lives. So, would this logic apply also to Peta Credlin, while being a major Tory pile of poo poo is also not an elected political representative? Would it be poor taste to "gently caress" with her private life? Or we can be brutally honest on this and accept that politics is a mugs game and when you are going into politics, be it as an elected representative or a party volunteer/staffer, it's very possible that someone will make a target out of your comments. Even more so when you have a reputation for saying things that, in the public eye, are of extremely poor taste and can paint you as an irrational, over-emotional person.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 01:15
|
|