If you limited it even further to "some" and "may be" you might actually have something non-invective to say.Originally Posted by Bally
(You may think I'm a cow for saying this.)
 |
  |
 |
Thanks useful information: 19
If you limited it even further to "some" and "may be" you might actually have something non-invective to say.
(You may think I'm a cow for saying this.)
Last edited by ameerat42; 08-01-2013 at 10:09am.
CC, Image editing OK.
How did I know that if I was called a bloody liar by one of the good old boys, once again, and I called the good old boy out for it, once again, I'd be the only goose in the shite, once again and a very, very bad old boy indeed, once again?
Does anyone actually live in the real world where you called out for what you say about another or do they just save it for safe, anonymous internet forums?
I am not going to take sides here. I posted that ANY future personal attack will be dealt with. EVERY member is being asked to show some respect. The line is being drawn HERE by me, for EVERYONE.
"It is one thing to make a picture of what a person looks like, it is another thing to make a portrait of who they are" - Paul Caponigro
Constructive Critique of my photographs is always appreciated
Nikon, etc!
RICK
My Photography
This is an interesting perspective really. Do most Australian's vote for a person, party or simply an ideology based on their perception of what they feel a party stands for? I would suggest that the majority of Australians are not terribly astute politically, fairly shallow in their approach to politics and extremely uninformed about how our political system operates in reality. Many of them do in fact vote for a person, and that's a concern in the case of Abbott.
I have perhaps a clearer insight into the political process than most as my wife is a part-time lobbyist, and her involvement has opened my eyes to a lot of unpalatable facts about how our system of government actually operates.
Our politicians are not free to represent us, and our government is influenced unduly by the USA. Vested interests influence everything, and electoral cycles govern the decisions of both parties rather than the more fundamental issues of right, wrong or ethical and moral values. Actions portrayed as being for our good are often for the good of the party instead and nothing is as simple as it might seem. Essentially, the whole political process has evolved in a way which is often corrupt and frequently short-sighted.
At the end of the day, all we can do is to do as Wikileaks has done, and that is to encourage transparency, and to keep exposing the reality of situations rather than be duped by the sanitised versions we read in the paper. If we make politicians more accountable for their actions, then we might just move slowly towards a half-way decent government.
"If you want to be a better photographer, stand in front of more interesting stuff.” — Jim Richardson
Threadstarter
I live in a marginal seat (Makin) so the local candidate is very important and we vote based on that.
When our previous member held the seat she was very active for her constituents (probably because it was VERY marginal),
but the current bloke is a useless party hack tosser.
@Norwest - growing up with an Ethnic heritage (Dad emigrated here after WWII) in the 60's meant lots name calling, we got over it.
The fact is the proposed laws go way too far and in general I'd rather be called nasty names than lose freedom.
Dad often talked about living under Nazi rule - it sucked. I'm not saying this law is near that, but it is definitely in the wrong direction.
regards, Kym Gallery Honest & Direct Constructive Critique Appreciated! ©
Digital & film, Bits of glass covering 10mm to 500mm, and other stuff
We have had two different representatives, both very pleasant, and both totally in tune with our particular issues (ratifying a cluster munitions treaty and supporting voluntary euthanasia). Despite being 100% on our side on the issues, neither could have any impact upon the party line which was determined by the select few at the top. This is one of the problems with our system - members have to toe the party line irrespective of their own views. It makes a mockery of the representational system. It's a bit like Peter Garrett and the change in his resolve once he was elected. Initially a man with a mission, then just another "yes" man to the party.
Kym, it would seem that not everyone in your electorate votes for good candidates.
Bobt - I agree with you that we are quite apathetic as regards to politics. Perhaps we are saved by the Australian mistrust of authority. This tends to make us suspicious of anyone wanting lots of power. Other countries tend to idolize the rich, famous or powerful. Look at the way Americans treat celebrities. An Australian has to go overseas to become famous in Australia. That probably isn't good, but on the other hand we distrust anyone who wants too much power. This law is unlikely to get in, in its current form because of that mistrust. England has a much more obedient electorate, so they do, more often, get silly laws in. Of course, sometimes politicians or bureaucrats do just make mistakes and we get silly laws that way. I suspect that the English law was due to stupid politicians rather than any evil intent. I could of course be wrong with that one.
I'm in the Parkes electorate, where Gertrude the Goat could stand for the National Party and still gain 70%, where they were forced kicking and screaming to remove official racial segregation from council by-laws as late as the early seventies, where education is still considered to be wasted on women when they should be chained to kitchen and where there's a longing for a return to the the good old days of Menzies and reds under the beds.
I'm in Richmond which has Justine Elliot and I'm on the border of page which has Janelle Saffin. I believe that Janelle is very good, Justine less so, but I have only been here for 4 years and I have little hard evidence either way. Perhaps I'm one of those sheep. This is a strange area as it is country, but it is a labour stronghold. Perhaps because the conservation movement has its roots here. Whatever the reasons, most people I meet are left of centre. Coal seam gas is a very big issue here, with people from left and right fighting against it. Unfortunately, it gets little press elsewhere and the state government seems all for it.
CSG is also a big issue here, being on the great artesian basin which we require to survive for both farming and drinking water. The state government recently making changes to both the areas allowed, which now takes in most prime agricultural land and an easing of the statutory requirements.
Ameerat42, if I limited it to some and maybe it would be less accurate and not convey exactly what I meant which was most.
Would that mean that most people on this forum are also sheep? Or is present company excluded?
It wooden matter. Some of us would still be tarred by that brush.
Now what's this all about? Oh, defamation. Well I've never sought fame, so to be defamed???
m.
After reading the stories it appears to be a big load of rubbish. It will be too hard to police, and fill our courts with unnecessary arguments.
And if it was to come in as law, I'd have to say goodbye to AP. Because I don't think I'd be allowed to take photos in jail. And I'd be limited on internet access, because I might be viewing offencive material, and someone may walk past. What a joke..
Geoff
Honesty is best policy.
CC is always welcome
Nikon D3000 ... Nikon D90... Nikon D700 Various lenses, Home studio equipment and all the associated stuff
Flickr
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
