-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AusPoliGAF |OT| Boats? What Boats?
- Thread starter Bernbaum
- Start date
- Status
someone with a better understanding of law than me needs to make an OT listing all the different ways the TPP is going to fuck us over universally.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1122824
Except you can't look up TPP on this site without getting MGS threads :q
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1122824
Except you can't look up TPP on this site without getting MGS threads :q
Elaugaufein
Member
That was pretty obvious from the point they wouldn't give him a token victory on even 1 of his publicly approved moderate stances. I'm pretty sure it would have been fairly easy to do a free vote on SSM but arrange things that there weren't enough votes to pass (since the ALP is free voting as well).
Yup. But clearly Labor can't capitalise on *that*, with Shorten losing preferred PM by 40(!) points. Just get Albo in.
Hmm not looking good for the LNP that the honeymoon seems to have ended after basically no gaffes or slip ups over the recess.
The Nationals really fucked the Coalition by castrating Turnbull's popular public stances. Oh well, let's see what this week of parliament brings us.
The Nationals really fucked the Coalition by castrating Turnbull's popular public stances. Oh well, let's see what this week of parliament brings us.
D.Lo
Member
Yep that and Abbott already running around slandering people has a bit of a 'here we go again' stench.
Still can't see Turnbull losing against Shorten. Imagine a Shorten led election campaign, it will make Gillard look like Hawke.
I think Labor can win in spite of Shorten honestly. We'll see.
Regardless, there's going to be a sizeable swing against the government at this point, and the Senate is going to get even more 'feral'.
D.Lo
Member
It's not just that Shorten is a shit communicator.
It's not just that he is at least partially responsible for the massive political blunder letting Abbott getting into power by rolling Rudd.
It's not just that he so obviously represents career cronyism and all that's bad about the union influence on the Labor party.
It's that his policies are complete soundbite dogshit. He's Abbott lite.
That defence of RICH people getting part pension while having millions in assets just so they can say 'Tony Abbott wants to take away your pension' is typical.
It's not just that he is at least partially responsible for the massive political blunder letting Abbott getting into power by rolling Rudd.
It's not just that he so obviously represents career cronyism and all that's bad about the union influence on the Labor party.
It's that his policies are complete soundbite dogshit. He's Abbott lite.
That defence of RICH people getting part pension while having millions in assets just so they can say 'Tony Abbott wants to take away your pension' is typical.
What other polls? Most of them are a week or more old at this point right? Deflating honeymoon bounce makes sense to me.
Actually the best context I've ever seen this posted in was The Dangers Of Multithreaded Programming And Shared StateAustralian_politics.gif
zzzzz. Missed the poll name, thought it was Essential. That being said, it seems a little weird for the honeymoon to deflate this quickly, especially given that almost everything out of this PM'ship so far has been really quite positive.
roosters93
Member
malsplain
genius
Who wants to write my poltics essay for me
Identify an area of social policy over which Coalition and Labor governments have taken different policy approaches? What have been the cumulative consequences of these differences in terms of policy implementation and outcomes in this policy area?
kthxbai
seems pretty easy tho
and this question follows the trend I've been seeing lately of profs putting a question mark on something that isn't a question lol
bobnowhere
Member
Lols, Tony and Joe sitting next to each other on the backbench.
Coalition trying to get ahead and frame the conversation on the TPP. I suspect that might be difficult if the nastier stuff rises to the fore.
Cool kids always sit towards the back of class.
Cool kids always sit towards the back of class.
Right before they get kicked out.
roosters93
Member
^ what's that even referring to? think I'm out of the loop
would have probably chosen same-sex marriage but focused on that pretty heavily in class so to avoiding retreading too much I'll probably go with welfare
would have probably chosen same-sex marriage but focused on that pretty heavily in class so to avoiding retreading too much I'll probably go with welfare
thispersonvotes.mp4
What even is this numpty's point? There's no hypocrisy here. The Melbourne Royal Children's Hospital didn't "steal" the child (unless you view it as belonging to the Border Force; a chilling proposition); they deliberately kept it with the mother so they wouldn't get sent back into detention.
Am I missing something or is this letter exactly as dumb a "GOTCHA YOU HYPOCRITE LEFTISTS" as I think it is?
If you care about refugees so much, why isn't there a refugee in every square meter of your house?
Checkmate!
I do hope with the rise of Turnbull and fall of Abbott we can stop this race to the bottom on who can treat refugees worst but I fear it'll happen all over again when the next Coalition leader goes to an election.
Going back a bit here, apologies.
My point was more once the required legislation is passed here, how often have we withdrawn and amended or revoked that legislation? Not very often would be the answer. So to me, saying we can amend things after the fact doesn't really hold much weight.
Eh, that seems a really poorly argued piece to me. It basically amounts to them not liking a reason someone has given for not supporting a piece of speech. If you want to criticise a store for not stocking an item for political or personal reasons you are far out in loony territory to me.
Ah, apologies for missing the joke, I had my grumpy pants on
My point was more once the required legislation is passed here, how often have we withdrawn and amended or revoked that legislation? Not very often would be the answer. So to me, saying we can amend things after the fact doesn't really hold much weight.Nah, just cut down my posting on GAF in general.
Eh, that seems a really poorly argued piece to me. It basically amounts to them not liking a reason someone has given for not supporting a piece of speech. If you want to criticise a store for not stocking an item for political or personal reasons you are far out in loony territory to me.
roosters93
Member
cheers
what a loony
good on the doctors and co for taking extraordinary measures
So, wow.
"Federal MP and mining magnate Clive Palmer has pledged to establish a legal fund to help asylum seekers and refugees at Manus Island and Nauru, calling on the federal government to "end this shame"."
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...fugees-suffering-torture-20151013-gk7ohl.html
Like I said a bit further up, it comes down to power. Say if Steam choose not to host a game for political reasons, it's worth asking why. They have a fair chunk of market power.
"Federal MP and mining magnate Clive Palmer has pledged to establish a legal fund to help asylum seekers and refugees at Manus Island and Nauru, calling on the federal government to "end this shame"."
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...fugees-suffering-torture-20151013-gk7ohl.html
Like I said a bit further up, it comes down to power. Say if Steam choose not to host a game for political reasons, it's worth asking why. They have a fair chunk of market power.
I sometimes get the impression there is a real person underneath all the attention seeking and bluster. Only sometimes.
Sure, but that's not what that piece is saying.
It makes the standing of the book store clear in the second paragraph. If a store is known for it's ridiculously comprehensive selection", refusing to stock a book like this is a significant statement. I think the argument by the author that this constitutes "shutting down dissenters rather than taking them on in rigorous debate" is sound in this case. I think the suggestion by the author at the bottom would have been a better move than not stocking it altogether.
That said, I don't really agree with the author that the "critical importance of free speech" is necessarily fundamental to progressive politics. And I don't think I agree that it's wrong in all cases to "shut down dissenters..." (etc).
If that books store had a near monopoly it would be an equivalent point to the steam example. It doesn't. There are hundreds of thousands of books that store does not stock and it is one of a multitude of book sellers.
Not really surprising. I'd recommend everyone check out the Grundle Clivosaurus Quarterly Essay.
A failed attempt to suppress speech is still at attempt. If you dislike the suppression of speech you should criticise both successful attempts and failed attempts. Yes, the book is a product available through other avenues, but the author is addressing people of the left for whom "they're a business, they can do what they want" is considered roundly false, but who also consider free speech fundamental to their beliefs. This has nothing to do with the effect on "the consumer". Fuck the consumer.
*whines* But ten dollars
The way I read it this is less about suppressing speech and telling Newman to go fuck himself since he was nowhere to be seen when bookstores needed him to survive but now that he has a book to flog he feels entitled to shelf space.
bobnowhere
Member
Yeah Morrison has been poor so far, really looks out of his depth. Looks like he'll turn out to be a textbook example of the Peter Principle.
roosters93
Member
Hmm. Does the $40 sub get you that? This wording is confusing: "Print subscriptions now include full digital access to the website, iPhone, iPad and Android apps. Enjoy the latest edition, and over a decade's worth of agenda-setting literature. "
Is that saying the digital subscription doesn't, or the digital sub always did and the print one does now too? I assume the latter, but man. Maybe I'm just easily confused. $40 seems pretty good for all of that though.
I mean, if you're a "premier book store in capital city with a ridiculously comprehensive selection", these are the same thing, right?
I'm not saying they're not justified in suppressing his speech, but saying his speech isn't being suppressed because he's a dick is wrong imo. I think the problem is when people want certain noble principles, like free speech in this case, to always apply across the board in every instance, when reality is more complex than that and free speech has to sit in with a bunch of other noble principles that sometimes clash.
I'm not arguing that his speech isn't being suppressed. It's a side-effect of what they're doing but it still is. But they also don't owe him that platform.
it says "complete online access" on their digital page. i have an ongoing print sub so i can't tell what the deal is for digital subscribers but it may be worth emailing them to make sure
i do know that digital subs of the saturday paper & the monthly come with the complete archive of old issues for their respective publication
e: from the faq
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked