UNIONS AND THE ALP

Last night I went to the Unions NSW general meting to hear the outgoing ALP NSW Bob Carr give a farewell speech. The content of it was rather predictable, you know, "proud to be a Labor premier", "Thanks for your support", "The Liberals hate Unions" and "the Olympics were a success because of Unions."

Of course Unions NSW didn’t mention the fact that the NSW ALP passed those horrendous changes to OH&S laws that the union movement was vehemently opposed to, though at one time this was implied. There was also no mention that the reason why the Olympic Park site was built to the government’s satisfaction was because the workers were stopped from using one of their most fundamental rights, the right to strike.

I am a Unionist through and through, and I have much respect for John Robertson (Union NSW Secretary), Unions NSW and the ACTU. But sometimes the ALP arse-kissing of the union movement really shits me, and last night was one of those occasions. Boob Carr got a standing ovation from everybody. Well everybody but me. I just sat there with my extreme disillusionment with the ALP.

Some people say the ALP are the lesser evil then the Liberals. That is true. However Stalin was the lesser evil than Hitler, but that didn’t make him a nice guy did it? Besides there is a more positive alternative: The Greens.

PROPOSED IR CHANGES DON’T GO FAR ENOUGH

As Australians are aware (or should be aware) the Federal Government is looking to change our Industrial Relation laws to allow "greater personal choice" and help "create jobs". One of the proposals is to eliminate unfair dismissal for people who work for employers that employ less than 100 people. However even this doesn’t go far enough for our treasurer Peter Costello. He wants to scrap unfair dismissal laws for everybody.

Now initially I was opposed to these changes, but Peter Costello has made me seen the light. We need to get rid of unfair dismissal laws to help create jobs and implement the government’s other proposals to allow greater persona choice.

But why stop there. I have some other suggestions as to changes the government should implement to "create employment" and allow "greater personal choice".

Firstly get rid of occupational health and safety laws. These uniform, bureaucratic impositions on business are a significant cost that stops employers from hiring people because of the cost of "providing a safe workplace", at least as it is defined by bureaucrats. Getting rid of OH & S laws would great more jobs by lessening costs on business. Besides, if the history of the industrial revolution has taught as anything it has been that employers can be trusted to provide safe workplaces. I mean, if we can trust employers not to fire people on the basis of the family responsibilities or because they are pregnant when we get rid of unfair dismissal laws then surely we can trust them to provide a safe workplace without legislation? And even if a couple more people die in the workplace each year, the benefits of higher employment for the community will outweigh this.

Secondly, get rid of child labour laws. Children should have the right to personally choose if they want to work at the age of 5, or at least their parents should have the choice of sending them to work. Plus, because the cost of living for a child is less than that for an adult, employers can pay them less, thereby meaning that there will be even more money employers have available for more jobs. And if children are working instead of going to school, then the government wouldn’t have to spend as much money on education. As a result the government could give poor hard working high income earners a tax cut, which could be invested in business and create even more jobs.

Thirdly, while we are on the issue of tax, we need to change the current tax system. Currently the more you earn, the higher you get taxed. This discourages people from working hard and encourages them to be lazy. If the tax rates were reversed so that the lower your income, the higher your tax rates, this would encourage people to work harder and earn more money, instead of our current system which discourages hard work. The only people who would suffer from such a system is the lazy.

Fourthly, we should allow people the personal choice of selling themselves into indentured servitude. This is about personal choice; two equal parties, an employer and an employee negotiating the terms of employment, like in AWAs. If someone during their negotiations with their employer, with whom they are on an equal bargaining position, decides they want to sell themselves into indentured servitude, who are we to say they can’t do this? Sure some people say this is tantamount to slavery, but really, was slavery really all that bad anyway? I mean the entire Western capitalist economy was built on it.

Now sure, should these changes attempt to be introduced, some people may be opposed to it. A small percentage of these people may get up in arms about it and actually try to stop it. But this will only be a small minority. The majority of people opposed to these changes, so long as Big Brother and Australian Idle are on TV, or they can go shopping to buy useless crap they don’t need, will only whinge about the changes, but not do anything about them. That’s the beauty of living in a consumerist society.

RACE HATE CRIMES

Recently there has been a disturbing trend of race hate crimes committed against people who don't belong to the dominant racial group in society. However these crimes have not been committed by vigilante groups, but by the government in the name of "protecting" the people of that country. What do I mean?

* The imprisonment of Australian resident Cornelia Rau in Australia by the government for the "crime" of being able to speak a language other than English.

* The illegal deportation of Australian citizen Vivian Alvarez Solon by the Australian Government for the "crime" of not being white.

* Most recently the shooting of a Brazilian man Jean Charles de Menezes by the British police for the "crime" of not being white enough and being a foreigner.

Remember these "foreigners" are a threat to the nice respectable predominantly Anglo-Celtic culture and society. Just like Jews were a threat to German culture and society in the 1930s.

Oh, and I don't know about you, but I think Australia and the UK are perfectly justified in participating in the invasion of another country in part because of the way they treat their minorities. There is absolutely nothing hypocritical about this.

THE BIG QUESTION

As I have mentioned previously, I am an atheist. Because of, or despite this (depending on your point of view), something I constantly ponder is the meaning of life: Why do we exist and what are we supposed to do with our existence?

I know, but as my profile says, I have too much time on my hands, a lot of which is due to the fact that I am an insomniac.

As an atheist, I don’t believe the meaning of life is to ensure a better after/next life. In some ways I envy the religious for the simplicity of this, because I really do have trouble exactly what the meaning of life is, and as such what one should do with their life. I have however worked out some of what are not the goals of human existence. These are:

* The goal in life is NOT to earn the most money possible

* It is also not to own the biggest house, yacht, car or own the most material possessions.

* To be the most famous person in the world is also not the goal of life.

* Fucking the most people possible I am sure is not the reason we exist on this planet

* Similarly getting drunk, stoned, coked off your face etc. as often as possible is not our reason for being.

* Sitting around doing nothing I am certain is also not why we exist for.

This is all I have come up with in my many hours and days of pondering existence. Does anybody else have any idea of what things we do not exist on this planet for, or, heaven forbid (pun intended) what we DO exist for?

WHY THE TV SHOW BIG BROTHER IS EVIL

As I indicated in my last post, I hate Big Brother. No wait hate isn’t strong enough. I despise it more than any other television program ever produced. Why you may ask?

Currently I’m reading a book called Bear V Shark by Chris Bachelder, a satire based on people’s need for a competitive spectacle, no matter how moronic it is (like Big Brother). In the book the spectacle is a fight between a bear and a shark. The family who the book revolves around wins tickets to see the fight live because of an essay their son wrote on it. The essay says:

"In today’s society there is a lot of bad news. Just for an example of this is tornadoes, assassinations, tainted food and killer bees. Other examples are pollution, bad roads, heroin, teen pregnancy and rabies. Most problems aren’t anyone’s fault, most of them (like killer bees) are natural and can’t be controlled by human destiny.

It can be difficult to be happy with all this bad news around. For instance, people are grumpy and many of them commit suicide. Men tend to choose guns and women choose pills. I say choose life!

Bear V. Shark allows people to forget about their own problems and the troubles in the world and just be happy. Bear v. Shark gives people a reason to be excited about their day. Instead of sad about gang violence or a collapsing infrastructure people can be upbeat because they are happy. Their minds are on something else. Say, which side are you on? Are you for the bear of the shark? And what about those fins anyway?

In closing, my gardener is Dutch and he doesn’t have a culture. But America is great because it has a culture and Bear v. Shark helps us have a culture."

This sums up the role of Big Brother.

The reality is that the problems we, the broader world, face are man made (even killer bees, they were introduced into South America by people) and can be fixed. But this would cost money, money which government and business doesn’t want to spend. As a result people should be angry.

So what does government and business do? They create crap like Big Brother to keep people occupied so that their minds are focused on the competitive spectacle of Big Brother. Their anger is focused on who they don’t want to win on the show.

This is instead of thinking about the world’s problems and being angry with the government and business, and demanding they do something about it. Big Brother is a form of brainwashing. It even has commercial breaks where the companies you should be angry at try to sell you even more crap you don’t need that will just fuck the world up even more.

And it promotes greed: what are the contestants playing for, one million dollars. And the winner gets it not for doing something that is of some benefit (no matter how small) to society. No they get it based on the popularity of the personality assigned to them by the production company. Because you see, Big Brother isn’t "reality" television, it is in fact scripted, another part of the brainwashing.

Sadly shit like Big Brother has become the dominant "culture" for the majority of people in the Western world, when the reality is it should be reviled for the brain-washing crap that it is.

That is why I despise Big Brother; because it helps maintain the world’s current injustices.

Oh, by the way, I am a bear man.

WITHHOLD MY OPINION - NEVER!

While stuck at home on Friday, because my boss made me stay home because I was sick, I was reading Volume 15 of The Onion Ad Nauseam. The Onion is a satirical newspaper, on which Australia's The Chaser was based.

In volume 15 there is an article entitled 95 Per cent of Opinions withheld on Visit to Family. The article says:

A full 95% of the opinions held by Justin Wilmot, 26, were kept to himself Sunday during a father's day visit with his family.

"No one in my family gets my worldview, so I find it easier just to smile and nod and agree with everything." .....

....Among the Subjects Wilmot declined to weigh in on during the weekend get-together: New tropical sprite, Survivor, the selfishness of childless couples, Iraq, Golf, AM talk back radio, and his brother-in-law's fantastic idea for a calling card side business.

Now as anybody who knows me will tell you, I NEVER withhold my opinion; regardless of whether I am talking with family, friends, or I overhear complete strangers talking on the street. That's just the sort of easy to get along with guy that I am. I respect people's right to their state opinions, and in return they should respect my right to state my opinions.

So what are some of the things that I have an opinion on that I have stated to people recently when they have been discussed?

• Big Brother: No one with any semblance of intelligence would watch this show. People who watch it should not be allowed to have children and contaminate the Human Race's Gene pool.
• People who claim to be left-wing justifying their smoking: you're paying multi-national corporation to kill you, and those around you. There are no health benefits to it (unlike moderate alcohol consumption), and the only reason it "relaxes" you is because you are addicted to the chemicals in it, which your body is craving. You're not left-wing, you are a moron.
• The Australian film industry produces shit films: Sure if you like watching mind-numbing, banal, insipid pap like Episode 3, Meet the Fockers or War of the Worlds I can see why you might say this. However if you have the ability to think for yourself instead of letting Hollywood studios and their multi-million dollar advertising budgets think for you, you would realise these films are shit, while films like The Finished People, Letters to Ali, Somersault and Peaches are infinitely better then those crap Hollywood films.
• The government's "concessions" to refugees: The DIMIA minister now has the discretion to release detainees. In fact the DIMIA minister has had this discretion all along and you didnlt know it, essentially because you believe the government's propaganda.
• The IR changes will create jobs: And the proof of this is where, other than up your arse you fascist fuck?
• The ALP is still a progressive left wing party: yes, and John Howard is a small L liberal, and Santa Claus delivers presents on Christmas Eve. Actually the last one may still be true. Non-union enterprise agreements, introducing mandatory detention, eliminating a centralised wage fixing system , deregulating the banks etc. These aren't the actions of a left wing or even centrist party, these are the actions of a hard line right wing party.

Well, I feel a lot better. However if anybody reads this I am sure it will piss off even more people than I already have. So be it. The truth can often alienate.

HOWARD LETS THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG

The proposed IR setbacks (I refuse to call them reforms, as to reform something means to make it better, and these changes do no such thing) have been in the news a lot lately in Australia. The government has recently criticised the ACTU for "scare-mongering" over their claims that the proposed changes will reduce wages, stability and safety in the workplace. The government claims their reforms will do no such things, but, wait for this, increase wages.

However at his IR speech to the Sydney Institute on Monday John Adolf, sorry I mean Winston, Howard let the cat out of the bag. He said:

"In a global economy that increasingly values specialisation and flexibility, perseverance with workplace reform is essential if we are to narrow this productivity gap further and respond to challenges such as the rise of China and India as great economic powers."

Why are China and India "more productive"? Well, more productive isn't what he really means. What he really what means is they can produce things much cheaper than Australia. Why? Because of the ridiculously low wages they pay and the lack of costs associated with providing a safe workplace. So how will the government's proposed changes make us more competitive with India and China? Simple, by reducing wages and safety in the workplace.

Be under no illusions people, these changes are designed first and foremost to reduce people's wages and workplace safety.

"TERRORISM"

We should have no doubts that the actions of those who committed the bombings in London were the actions of criminal murderers.

At the same time we mus remember that the action so of the US, UK, Australian and other countries military in Iraq "fighting for freedom" were also the actions of criminal murderers.

The historian Norman Davies sums it up best:

"The distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters has nothing to do with the nature of their activities and everything to do with the viewpoint of their enemies or admirers."

THE JOYS OF A CATHOLIC EDUCATION

Getting together with some old school friends recently made me reminisce about my education, MY 13 YEARS OF CATHOLIC SCHOOL EDUCATION.

Now I know that my mother had my best intentions at heart by sending me to a Catholic school, and up until the age of 16 I was a very devout Catholic.

However at the age of 16 (call it teenage rebellion if you will) I started to question certain tenants of my then religious faith. So much so that I managed to change my mild mannered religion teacher into an angry vitriolic demagogue when I stated that religion was about maintaining the socio-economic status-quo; keeping the rich rich, and the poor poor. Doing a Marxist analysis of a poem had a similar affect on my English teacher.

Now it would be very easy (and probably accurate) to blame my many problems on my Catholic education. However, my Catholic education has in fact had a major impact on who I am, and what I do, for better or worse. How? Well that is what I will now tell.

1. It made me reject the spiritual aspects of Christianity/Catholicism: I consider myself to be a devout Atheist.

2. However the social aspects of Catholicism are what shape my life. You know the commitment to the equality of all people, and the right of all people to a dignified and peaceful existence. It has influenced my politics, my occupation and my activism.

3. There is a part of me that still views sex as being forbidden and wrong

4. However that doesn't stop me on those rare occasions when I am in church (for weddings, baptisms etc.) wondering what some of the female parishioners would be like in bed, and whether if I was screwing them, they would be blasphemous and scream "Oh God" or "Jesus Christ."

5. When I get together with my old school friends, all our jokes have homo-erotic overtones (it was an all boys Catholic School)

6. It has taught me how hypocritical many people can be; some Catholics/Christians claim that homosexuality is an abomination because this is what the Bible says. However they don't think that eating shellfish (lobsters, crabs etc.) is an abomination, even though the Bible actually says this more definitively.

7. It made me realise that the New Testament is right up there with the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and The Merchant of Venice for it's viral anti-Semitism.

8. It taught me never to trust women. Think about it, Eve, Delilah, Lot's wife and so on.

9. It made me realise that even intelligent and decent people can be brainwashed with the right PR and saturation advertising.

10. That religion is about maintaining the socio-economic status quo; keeping the rich rich and the poor poor. That's why all the major religions have wealthy supporters whose wealth is in opposition to their religion, yet religious leaders do not criticise them for this.

GREAT ARTISTS: KRZYSZTOF KIESLOWSKI

Undoubtedly one of the greatest artists, not just of the 20th century, but of history, is the late great Polish Writer-Director Krzysztof Kieslowski. Part of the reason I personally admire him was his world view. He said:

"I bear a grudge, or am bitter towards the life which surrounded me and will surround me, and which is the way it is, where everything is wretched, where there's no truth, only illusion."

That pretty much sums up my view of the world.

Anyway, most people in the west know him for his films Trois Coulers: Blue, Bialy, Rouge (Three Colours: Blue, White and Red) and La Double Vie de Veronique (The Double Life of Veronique), all of which are modern masterpieces.

However undoubtedly his masterwork was Dekalog (The Decalogue). Produced for Polish television in 1988, the series consists of 10 films of about one hour in length loosely based on the ten commandments. Now while this may sound like some evangelical Christian work, Dekalog focuses on the human relationships and actions, and not on the spiritual aspect of the ten commandments. Unfortunately Dekalogg is not available in Australia, but it can be purchased on DVD in the US and UK. I recommend the UK version as the subtitle translation is better.

Undoubtedly the highlight is Piec Dekalog (Thou Shall not Kill). This was expanded into a feature film Krotki Film O Zabijaniu (A short Film about Killing), which thankfully has recently been released on DVD in Australia. It shows the brutal murder of a taxi driver by a young man, his trial, and then the brutal execution of the young man by the state for his crimes. The movie draws a parallel between the two deaths by showing both deaths in excruciating detail. It's message is simple but powerful: the killing of anybody is a crime, regardless of whether it is done by an individual, a political group or by the state.

The impact of the film was so dramatic in Poland that the government of the day introduced a five-year moratorium on capital punishment as a result. At a time when we are flooded with big the world for the better.

Other great films of this master are Przypadek (Blind Chance), Bez Konca (No End) and Amator (Camera Buff).

Krzysztof Kieslowski. Writer. Director. Visionary. Artist.

STOP PRESS: PROTEST

For anybody reading this in Sydney (maybe it shuld be anybody reading this full stop? a snap protest is being held when Amanda Vanstone opens the new premises of the Refugee Review Tribunal.

Please bring along banners, placards, and yourself :

Friday, 10.15am at 83 Clarence Street, Sydney.  (the opening is advertised for 10.30 so better to be at the front for Amanda. The premises are on the 8th floor.)

They may be opening new premises for the RRT, but there is nothing new about the government's abhorrent refugee policies.

CONFRONTING RACISM

My dearest readers (if there are any people out there who I haven't pissed off yet and as such are still reading this), how many of you are exposed to racism? Now when I say exposed to it, I don't actually mean you are the victim of it, but see racism being perpetrated upon others? If so, what do you do about it? Anything?

Last night on the train ride home I was confronted with a racist. Now I am not the sort of person who just lets things go. It's why I will often get into arguments, shoving matches and sometimes fights.

The train was packed, as is often the case, there were a lot of people of East or South-East Asian backgrounds, a couple of whom were young children who were crying and whingeing, as all children do. However a redneck got on the train, and proceeded to start yelling "Shut up and go back to China." Now initially the train was so packed I couldn’t see who this was. However after a few people got off, the individual in question moved past me and continued to say "Shut the Fuck up and go back to China." He also muttered under his breath "I should kick them in the c*nt."

At this point I stepped in and said to him, "Why don't you shut the fuck up you piece of redneck, convict scum." Now, my comment may also be viewed as being racist, but I said it for a reason. I do not believe that all people of Anglo-Celtic background are convicts or scum. The reason I said this was that people like him have likely never been racially vilified. As such they do not know what this feels like. By racially vilifying him, hopefully he will know what his actions makes others feel like, and as such not do it any more. Naive? Maybe.

He replied "What did you say?"

I repeated,"Why don't you shut the fuck up you piece of redneck, convict scum."

As he had moved past me, being the tough guy that he was he said, "Why don't you come here and say it." Now people, when somebody says that, they do not actually wish to fight. Similarly when someone pushes you, they are not really looking for a fist fight. When people come to and start punching, then they are looking for a fight. Trust me, I know.

So I went right up to him, looked him in the eyes and repeated, "Why don't you shut the fuck up you piece of redneck, convict scum."

His response "You're such a tough guy."

To which I responded "I'm not the one abusing women and children and threatening to assault them under my breath, you low life."

Some further pleasantries were exchanged where it turns out he had actually been in prison (a sixth sense on my part?), and he was proud of this. I was tempted to make a joke about him dropping the soap in the shower a few too many times, but I refrained. Suffice to say he let me know what he thought of me again, and I let him know what I thought of him, before I moved off.

So what did my actions achieve, if anything?

1. He did not make any more racist comments on the train after I challenged him. This in itself is reason enough for doing what I did.

2. He will think likely think twice about making such comments again on the train for fear of somebody challenging him on it and showing what a coward he is.

3. Maybe, just maybe, as mentioned above, after I turned the tables on him he may reconsider his position, unlikely as it may be.

The reason for mentioning this? We all have a duty to challenge racism. There is a slippery slope out there: if you allow racist comments in public this can lead to racist law and policy, that can lead to racist violence and murder. Please remember this people. When confronted with racism, don’t sit there quietly, challenge it.

MYTHS ABOUT ASYLUM SEEKERS DEBUNKED

For those of you who are lucky/unlucky enough to be living in Australia, I have no doubt that you are aware of how our lovely government and opposition detain asylum seekers and refugees in conditions that even a convicted murderer are not subjected to. Of course the conditions are better then what you would face as an Australian national should the US government decide to lock you up in Guantanamo Bay, but that's a different story.

Now when people defend this abhorrent policy of our government, they often espouse certain neo-fascist myths to support there position. I will attempt to debunk some of these myths.

1.They are illegals!

Well actually no, under a number of treaties relating to refugees that Australia has signed and incorporated into Australian law, including the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (COR) and the 1967 amendment the Protocol Relating to Refugees, asylum seekers are legally allowed to seek refuge in signatory countries. Such as Australia. Thus they are not illegals; all they are doing is asking Australia to actually adhere to international law, international law that Australia has incorporated into it's law.

2. They are queue jumpers!

I know you shouldn't answer a question with a question, but What Queue? In many of the places these people are coming from there is no readily available Australian Embassy to apply for asylum, or their access to the embassy is restricted. Even when they can get to an Australian embassy, this embassy may be monitored by their government and visiting it can put their life at risk. However most importantly, even if they can visit the Australian Embassy, there is no guarantee that they will be added to the "queue"; there is no requirement for the embassy or the Australian government to process their claim. They only way they can get the Australian government to process their claim is by coming to Australia and applying for asylum, thus the reason why people do this.

3. They must criminals because they don't have or get rid of their passports!

When you are a person trying to escape your country of origin because you are wanted by the government for political activities, or because you are a member of a persecuted minority, the last thing you would want to carry on you, or be sent back to your country of origin with, is your passport outlining all your personal details so that the oppressive government you are fleeing finds it easier to identify and torture/imprison/kill you. It's common sense. They don't have or get rid of their passports for safety reasons.

4. Who cares if other countries have found some people to be refugees that Australia rejected as refugees. We have different laws!

Again as signatory to certain conventions relating to refugees we are bound by certain definitions of refugees and are bound to provide asylum to people who fit this definition. The fact that people who have had their asylum claims in Australia rejected have subsequently received asylum in countries such as New Zealand and Canada means that Australia is breaching internationally accepted laws relating to refugees.

5. If we let the bastards in they will take our jobs!

This argument relates to all immigrants, not just refugees. Studies show that for every 9 immigrants that come to Australia there are 10 jobs created. So even if the 9 immigrants are all of working age, their is still a net growth of one job. Thus immigrants create jobs, not take them.

That 's all for now. I will debunk other myths on asylum seekers in a future post. However if you are in NSW, please visit the RAC NSW website at www.racnsw.org and become involved . If you live in another Australian state or territory, visit the RAC NSW links page at http://www.racnsw.org/links.php for details on groups where you live

FAMILY

Often people will say to me I am an angry young man. I vehemently disagree with this. I no longer consider myself young.

However there is one thing, no matter how angry, or sad I may be, that always puts a smile on my face. My six month old nephew. On the weekend I visited my sister, brother-in-law and my little nephew. As corny as it sounds, nothing quiet excites me like the prospect of seeing him. I never get tired or nursing him or kissing him, and when he starts to cry it really tears at my heart. However when I make him smile or goo, there is nothing so adorable in the world.

When I tell this to people, their reaction is either one of disbelief, or a look indicating they wish their family was like that. And I have to say this is a really sad indication of just what a horrible materialistic and uncaring society we have become. Everyone in my family, regardless of age or gender, feels the same way about my little Nephew; there is always a constant tug of war over who will nurse him. I may not always agree with my family, but I love and cherish them more than anything else. Sadly, many people on the left often aren't close to their families which mystifies me: if you can't feel a connection with your own flesh and blood, how can you feel a connection with the greater mass of people?

I also love watching my father with my nephew. My father was never an overly affectionate person. This isn't to say that he doesn't love his family; he does very much. However when your formative years are spent living under Hitler, Stalin, through a civil war, and your mother dies when you are quite young, this will obviously harden you. However like me, he obsolutely adores my nephew, and constantly wants to nurse and kiss him.

Like most people, as a child I had major run ins with my father. However I now realise that, even though I still may not agree with some of what he said and did, he always had my best intention at heart. He suffered through so much as a child, and he wanted to ensure we didn't have to suffer as well.

These days I get along better with my father than any of my brothers and sisters. In fact I am the only person he will take directions off in the car. Much of this comes down to our common love of history and football (soccer to you anglo-celts out there).

So if anybody other than computer programs scanning websites to get email addresses to spam is reading this: cherish you family as they are the people who care most about you.

Separated at Birth

One of these is a cruel, evil man who shows a total utter disdain for human life. He has total utter contempt for internationally accepted standards of decency and the law. He uses his power and position to exploit people for his own gain resulting in immense suffering and hardship for these people. The other one is a cartoon character. Philip Ruddock and Montgomery Burns; separated at birth?

THE APOCALYPSE IS UPON US

Yes the day that all progressive, caring, intelligent human beings in Australia have been dreading is upon us. Today is the day Howard and his SS cadre gain control of the senate. The attack on anybody who is not a money-grubbing fascist begins.

So why are we in Australia in this mess? Well obviously because people voted for Howard.

But why did people vote for that evil dip-shit? Most people who know anything about politics would say the issue of interest rates; the government ran a scare campaign stating that if you voted for the ALP interest rates would go up.

So why was this an issue? Because house prices have risen so dramatically.

Why have they risen so dramatically? Well, we have the ALP to blame for this. Two sets of two words; Negative gearing, and Tax cuts.

Negative gearing is a scheme that allows people with "excess cash" (obviously this rules out anybody who works an honest, decent job) to invest in property and offset any losses they may suffer as a result by reducing their taxable income. Or some such evil shit. Now when they were in power the ALP actually got rid of negative gearing for a while. That is until the multi-millionares who pass money under the table to them told them to bring it back . Which they did.

Now when in power the ALP also dramatically cut taxes for high income earners, and also dramatically cut the company tax rate. This meant that the bourgeoisie, wine drinking fascist fucks had more excess cash to throw around and invest. And property seemed like a good option; it gives you a tangible asset, it rarely loses value, it tends to steadily increase in value, and at times it dramatically increases in value.

Thus you had all these yuppie fucks looking to buy property. As a result of this increase in demand, because we live in a market economy, house prices increased, and increased and increased. When the Libs came into power they further cut taxes for high income earners, further exaberbating the problem, so that your average person looking to buy a house needed to borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars from the bank. As a result these people have huge mortagage repayments to make each week/month. Thus if interest rates go up by even a small amount, so does their mortgage repayments. Thus the reason why interest rates were a huge issue.

Sure the ALP could have tried to counter this nonsensical arguement that interest rates under them would increase, but they had more important things to do, like making sure the heathens didn't get votes.

What do you mean, you may be asking. Well what I am refering to is the ALP's forestry policy in Tasmania launched a week before the election. Like most things with the ALP, it was half-arsed, not going far enough to protect the Tasmanian forests. It also would not gain them any votes on a two party preferred basis. People who want to protect the forests will vote green, and in almost all cases give their preferences to the ALP.

So why do it? Well the reality is that the ALP is not a left of centre party; the party is run by the right, and the NSW Catholic right is very powerful in the party. That's not to say that there aren't some decent peple in the ALP; they just don't influence policy.

Now the ALP right, and particularly the NSW Catholic RIght are very socially conservative; they hate gays and are opposed to gay marriages, and want to restrict abortions. As such the Greens are immoral and unchristian to them. They are thus the enemy, and as such they wanted to stop them from getting votes.

That's when they hit upon the idea, "Hey, let's adopt a half-arsed policy that gives the impression we care about saving Tasmania's rainforests, so that environmentalists will vote for us and not those satanic Greens, who if they get enough seats in parliament will try and legalise human sacrifices to satan." Thus the scenes of Mark Latham launching the policy a week before the election.

Except most environmentalists are smart and didn't buy the ALP's nonsense. However the half arsed policy was enough to piss off some people in Tasmania. The result was that people who would traditionally vote for the ALP in Tasmania voted for the Liberals. Thus a senate seat In Tasmania that the ALP should have held, they lost to the Liberals, helping to deliver the coalition a senate majority, and putting the Australian people in the shit they are now in.

The fucking ALP. A bunch of fucking useless rednecks.