Finally a journalist who gets it spot on about Sarah Palin

Then she was drafted by McCain, sparking some indignation in the RNC.  She promptly charged the flailing campaign with her energy and her personality, attracting  huge numbers of people to GOP rallies, and most likely some new voters. But she got no support from the sclerotic RNC managers -- and the great fighter pilot couldn't shoot straight. Then he bailed out on her after the election, and she received no thanks for her valiant effort; not only was she simply dumped, but reviled and mocked by the insiders and elitists she had worked with.  

Post-election, repulsively hammered by the Democrats, abetted by her enemies  in the Alaskan GOP ranks, and their Eastern Beltway buddies, she has pressed on, in ways that none of them ever would have anticipated.

Should anybody be surprised that she would have nothing but contempt for the party whose key figures continue to question her competence  and ability to govern? That she has publicly disowned them, pledged to work outside them? She owes the Republican organization nothing.  She not only knows that she does not need them to gain a strong voter segment, but that they would hang her high if she remained in the fold.  

This excerpt is from a brilliant article on the phenomenon that is Sarah Palin.

Eloquent and blisteringly candid. For mine, the article of the year.

***

VideoSong for the week 31/7/09

Today, 31 July, is the birthday of Roland Kent LaVoie, better known to music lovers as Lobo.

This reached number 5 in the charts in 1971. Great song. Enjoy it, and have a bonza weekend.

Yet another statistic no one will live to prove

If you spent just one minute reading every website in existence, you’d be kept busy for 31,000 years. Without any sleep.

***

Heartwarming story of diver saved by whale

Read it here.

***

Coffee's on the boil at 'bucks and Maccas

The headline is 'Starbucks, McDonalds carve coffee niches'.

McDonald's officially launched its McCafe line of premium coffee drinks with an advertising blitz earlier this year, sparking investor worries that its aggressive push would hammer sales at Starbucks the more upscale chain that acquainted mainstream America with fancy coffee drinks like lattes and cappuccinos.

Weak and insipid lattes and cappuccinos, I would add.

I have tried Maccas McCafe coffee and their percolated regular stuff, and I just find it lacking taste and strength. Also, unlike their burgers, the quality of Maccas' coffee is very inconsistent.

As for Starbucks, the last one I went into was in Auckland in 2006, and I was given a cup of something that could have been either tea or coffee.

The best cup of coffee outside of Australia I ever had was in a lovely little coffee shop in an arcade in Christchurch, New Zealand. Unfortunately for me I only discovered this place on my last day in the city. The coffee (a cappuccino) was rich, not a bit bitter, and I remember never wanting it to end. When I took my last mouthful, I found a little piece of melting chocolate in the bottom of the cup. Heavenly.

And the worst? At breakfast in some hotel in Venice, I was served disgusting, stewed muck that was probably made with canal water.

An unabashed coffee snob, mass-produced, chain store stuff is not for me. Give me a cosy coffee shop with a barista who actually drinks it, every time.

***

Johnson set to play in 3rd test

Against my prediction, Aussie pace bowler Mitchell Johnson looks set to play in the third test at Edgbaston; however, I think the writer of this article could have phrased this a little more tactfully:

Australia are poised to make one of the biggest selection gambles in Ashes history by playing the mentally-suspect Mitchell Johnson in front of the most hostile cricketing crowd in England.

Turnbull: no challengers, but plenty of challenges

Malcolm Turnbull has two big problems.

I know what you’re thinking: ‘only two problems? Get off the grass!’ Ok, he has more than that, but I only have time to deal with two.

First of all he represents the electorate of Wentworth. This in itself is not a problem - fine electorate. Been there many times. What is a problem is that Wentworth is marginal; and it is populated by a veritable ute-load of special interest groups, enviro-Nazis, Greens and other left wing nut-jobs. So Malcolm has to be very careful what he says on any issue that is environmentally sensitive for fear of offending one or all of the aforementioned; which is why his incessant prevaricating and flip-flopping on the ETS issue is annoying to so many conservatives.

Second, Turnbull must stop agreeing and bargaining with the government on policies - which, if implemented, will be either hideously expensive or job-destroying (or both, like the ETS) - simply to avoid giving Rudd a trigger for a double dissolution election. 

Start representing the principles on which the Liberal Party was founded, Malcolm, and put forward your own policies. I couldn’t care less if some tree-hugging pinko in your electorate is deplored at your defiance of them, and you shouldn’t either. Have some courage! Grass-roots conservatives will applaud you for offering real and effective opposition to the worst government we've seen since Whitlam.

---

Privately I cringed when Malcolm Turnbull was elected leader of the Liberal Party, but only because I knew his representing a knife-edge seat would not allow him the freedom to speak out on issues with the candour that is so important for a politician leading the alternative government.

I believe it is too great a risk to take for the Liberal party to elect someone as party leader who represents a marginal electorate, and I think all future nominees (and I stress the word 'future') for Liberal Party leadership must hold their seat by a margin of eight percent or more. Otherwise the party risks having their leader toppled by the Labor Party, or worse, a minor party or Independent. An occurrance that would be deathly to party unity and cohesion. 

With this in mind, below I have listed the current Federal Liberal MPs who hold their electorates by eight percent or greater, and I have summarised what I believe their chances are of being a successful Liberal Party leader.

If you don’t see any familiar names in the list (Joe Hockey, for example) it is because they just don’t make the 8% cut. No apologies.

Obviously, once the redistributions in Queensland and NSW are finalised, some of those pollies listed could be bumped off the list, and others added.

Most electoral pendulums on the net were displaying the margins prior to the 2007 election, rather than post. My table is based on a post-2007 electoral pendulum, however, I have lost the link to the website. When I find it, I will let you know where I got my rakings from. I assure you I didn’t just pluck these names, and the order of their appearance, out of the air.

Turnbull’s current approval points wouldn’t even win him a ball in a nine-hole Stableford competition. Whilst he is certainly in the rough at the moment, reading some commentators’ remarks, one is left feeling that Malcolm faces the golfing equivalent of an unplayable lie. I simply fail to see an apparent challenger to him leaping out from this list, so, while he certainy needs to work on his technique, I don’t think he needs to pick up his clubs and go home just yet.

The following table lists those Liberal MPs with margins of 8% or greater, in ascending order of margin: 

Member	Electorate	Potential as challenger for Liberal Party Leadership
Ian Macfarlane	Groom (Qld)	No. Will be seen as too rural. Not a good media performer.
Greg Hunt	Flinders (Vic)	No. The Libs need a fresh approach to the environment, and Hunt woud bring too much baggage to the job courtesy of his current role as spokesperson for climate change.
Dennis Jensen	Tangney (WA)	No. Lost pre-selection for his seat.
Margaret May	McPherson (Qld)	No. I don't know enough about her. Current spokesperson for Ageing, but that probably wouldn't help her cause.
Philip Ruddock	Berowra (NSW)	No. Parliamentary elder and Howard era remnant. Probably time to go.
Judi Moylan	Pearce (WA)	No. Lovely to listen to, but her left-wing views, particularly on immigration, make her a good candidate for the ALP.
Mal Washer	Moore (WA)	No. The good doctor does not have youth on his side and I doubt whether many outside of WA have heard of him.
Sophie Mirabella	Indi (Vic)	Roughie. Has a high profile thanks to Belinda Neale's outburst. Originally from Melbourne, so is familiar with city issues.
Patrick Secker	Barker (SA)	No. I'm pretty sure I saw him jogging down King's Avenue in Canberra once. Apart from that, he is such an unknown quantity that I am not even able to profile him.
Tony Abbott	Warringah (NSW)	No. He is too right-wing and too divisive. The question is, can Abbott unite a party of two distinct halves, and discipline them so that they’re reading off the same sheet of music, whilst at the same time charming the electorate. A big ask.
Petro Georgiou	Kooyong (Vic)	No. Is retiring at next election - thankfully.
Stuart Robert	Fadden (Qld)	No. Elected in 2007. Needs more parliamentary experience.
Sussan Ley	Farrer (NSW)	A dark horse. Knocked off the National candidate in a 3-cornered contest in Tim Fischer's old seat. Downside: how well she can relate to city voters is untested.
Alex Hawke	Mitchell (NSW)	No. Inexperienced and lacks charisma. Should never have been pre-selected, but he is a right-winger in the middle of Sydney's bible belt, so how could they go past him.
Bronwyn Bishop	Mackellar (NSW)	No. Her best parliamentary years are well and truly behind her.
Brendan Nelson	Bradfield (NSW)	No. Is retiring at the next election.
Julie Bishop	Curtin (WA)	No. Was totally ineffectual as Treasury spokesperson. As leader she would be worse. At least she stepped down from her last job with dignity.
Steve Ciobo	Moncrieff (Qld)	No. Shadow spokesperson for small business, et al. If he wants to be a contender we need to hear from him. We never do.
Wilson Tuckey	O'Connor (WA)	No. His time in parliament is inversely proportionate to his achievements. He should either retire at the next election or Turnbull should get more involved in pre-selections and step in here.
Sharman Stone	Murray (Vic)	Very possible. Represents the safest Liberal seat in Australia, so is free to speak on contentious issues unfettered. Intelligent and experienced politician. Downside: same as Ley.

Getting too liberal with course choices

The '15 strangest college courses in America' makes for some truly bizarre reading. 

'College' in America is the equivalent of year 11 and 12 in Australia, but I doubt Aussie high schools would be brave enough to offer such cerebral challenges as 'underwater basketweaving' or 'zombies in popular media', but - you never know.

***

Apparently Turnbull has his back to the wall - again

Both Andrew Bolt...

Newspoll in The Australian today shows Kevin Rudd increasing his lead over Malcolm Turnbull as preferred leader, scoring 66 per cent to a catatonic 16. And Labor can bank on increasing its lead over the hapless Coalition at the next election, leading now 57 to 43.

and Tim Blair...

Bad news for the nation’s wealthiest warmy: 

snip

Kevin Rudd’s support has leapt to 66 per cent. Game over for Malcwarm. 

...reckon it's call the undertaker time for Malcolm. Absolute tosh. Conspicuous by its absence from both pieces is the name of a suggested replacement for Turnbull. As I have said, there isn't one.

Meanwhile, I am going searching for a right wing blogger out there who agrees with me about Turnbull. I'm starting to feel lonely.

***

Sarah Palin hands over Alaska governorship

Transfer of power in Alaska has taken place today in Fairbanks, with outgoing governor Sarah Palin handing over the reins to Sean Parnell.

Please go to YouTube for part 2 of this speech.

Rudd moots giving sixteen and 17-year-olds the vote

Kevin Rudd, in what I see as a cynical attempt to cash-in on the kudos he has with cuspal Gen Y and Gen Zs, has mooted that sixteen and 17-year-olds could be given a voluntary right to vote in federal elections, under changes to be canvassed by the government later this year.

Australian National University adjunct professor of political science John Warhurst in today's Australian:

"I don't have a firm opinion one way or the other. But the way society is moving ... I think it's time to look again at the age when people can start voting. It may be that a voluntary vote is the way to go."

Professor Warhurst said there was a case for letting young people vote at a time when they were studying civics education.

However, he was inclined to support lowering the age to 17 rather than 16.

snip

…Liberal frontbencher Nick Minchin, who has strongly supported voluntary voting, said it would be a mistake to lower the voting age to 16 or 17.

I can’t remember the last time I agreed with something John Warhurst has said, but in this case, along with Nick Minchin, I do agree that voluntary voting is the way to go. But not voluntary voting just for sixteen and 17-year-olds, but for all Australians eligible to vote.

Could I please stress now, that, as I’m sure most of you would know, voting is not compulsory in Australia, what is compulsory is attending the polling booth and having your name crossed off. After that, you can do whatever you like.

Aside from the aforementioned cynicism at play here, I err on the side of agreeing with Nick Minchin when he said that "It's a privilege in a democracy to vote, and should come with adulthood."

Leave the voting age at 18, and, like most of the world, make crossing one's name off at the polling booth voluntary.

***

Video for the Week 24/7/09

I hope you all have a nice weekend, and I leave you with Tekla Badarzewska-Baranowska's 'The Maiden's Prayer'. The composer was only 17 when she wrote it, and it was published in 1851 in Warsaw. It enjoyed phenomenal success, becoming one of the biggest-selling pieces of piano music ever written.

There are so many dodgy versions of it on YouTube, but here, thankfully, is an exception.

***

Should the GG & PM move away from Sydney?

I thought it was knock-off time, but I only just stumbled upon this article in the Herald Sun by KPMG demographer, Bernard Salt.

Mr Salt seems to be arguing not against the Prime Minister (or the GG) having a second official residence – he just doesn’t think it should be in Sydney.

I actaully believe the Prime Minister should have three official residences (generous soul, aren't I?)

Anyway, I have always had quite strong views on this – views which may surprise some people – but I will outline them, briefly, here.

• Government House in Canberra should be the home of the Prime Minister in Canberra, not the Governor General.
  
• The Governor General’s home should remain Admiralty House in Sydney.
  
• The Lodge in Canberra should be the home of the Federal Treasurer. (Some believe The Lodge should be the home of the ACT Chief Minister. I disagree.)
  
• Kirribilli House in Sydney should be the home of the NSW premier.
  
• A suitable country home should be acquired by the Commonwealth as a country retreat for the Prime Minister.
  
• The Prime Minister should have an apartment or modest dwelling as his/her Sydney base.
  

You will notice that none of my proposals call for the building of a new residence, rather the acquisition of a rural property plus a Sydney home, for the Prime Minister. Both of which, in the current market, should easily be acquired for less than $5million in total. I'm sure this would closely match, if not be cheaper, than the cost of building a new residence - as has long been mooted - for the PM in Canberra.

My proposal also does away with the GG being based in Canberra. This will probably be contrary to some obscure sub-clause in the Constitution, but, for the moment, so what.

I strongly disagree with Mr Salt that the Prime Minister and Governor General should have no official residence in Sydney. I have stated, Admiralty House should be the principal place of residence for the Governor General, and the Prime Minister should have a more modest base in Sydney than the current arrangement.

***

Hey, Barack, we're baroke!

Love this story on the changing sentiment in America as witnessed through the bumper stickers now selling over there.

The title of this post is one, and here are some more examples:

Barack Obama: A new chapter in American history, Chapter 13.

The audacity of hype.

If Obama's stimulus was working, I'd be working.

and, my favourite

How's that hopey, changey thing working out for you?

***

Tony Abbott says coalition must vote for ETS (oh gawd)

Tony Abbott obviously didn't get a chance to read my previous blog before he wrote this article published in today's Australian.

Far from being an arrogant assertion of his own views, Turnbull's assessment that the government's emissions trading scheme should ultimately be allowed to pass is his attempt to save the Coalition from a fight it can't win. He knows that voters are unlikely to be argued into changing their minds. It will be the cost and complexity of emissions trading and the absence of anything much out of the ordinary about climate that will slowly engender second thoughts.

Tony, Turnbull 'knows that voters are unlikely to be argued into changing their minds', because the Liberals have left it too bloody late. That climate change is one of the biggest con jobs ever perpetrated on the global community is not a new development, Tony. Why didn't you and your colleagues see through the propaganda and start arguing against this new world religion before the last election?

Andrew Bolt summarises the predicament:

Abbott is asking the Liberals to support a pretend fix to a pretend problem that will actually throw thousands of people out of work and cost us billions. Even Abbott freely admits - as union leaders privately do - that the ETS will cost jobs. The only excuse for the Liberals backing this Labor disaster is that by buying, say, an extra six months of time before a normal election that the party will somehow drag itself to a winning position.

It's about time the Coalition, and the Liberals in particular, grew some backbone, not to mention some common sense. They should not vote for the ETS. Thousands of conservative supporters and members of which I am one, want to see some courage from the opposition, not a betrayal of principles.

A former US political journalist once wrote:

To go against the dominant thinking of your friends, of most of the people you see every day, is perhaps the most difficult act of heroism you can perform.

***

Emissions Trading Scheme is policy response to a non-problem

After reading this short introduction, I will submit for you two quotations by The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, a highly intelligent, well-read and reasonable voice on the subject of climate change. However, because Monckton is of the anti-global warming side, and because he offers such articulate and well-researched rebuttals to the global warming alarmists, politicians are petrified of him.

As an illustration, Lord Monckton was invited by the Republicans to testify in front of a US congressional committee earlier this year – opposite Al Gore. When the Democrats heard that the Republicans’ nominee on the committee was going to be Monckton, the Democrats banned Monckton from testifying, ordering the Republicans to choose someone else. (So much for free speech and an open and transparent Congress under Obama.)

Here are the two quotes from Lord Monckton:

The global warming thing is a bid by the left-leaning political class…to take over control, absolute control, of the way our lives are run …They want to be able to micro-manage every aspect of our lives with an authoritarian, totalitarian, centralist state. – Interview on The Savage Nation - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=30zrKTWjJ3k

---

Climate Change is a non-problem. The correct policy to address a non-problem is to have the courage to do nothing.

Australian politicians preparing to vote on an Emissions Trading Scheme, should read those two quotations and then do not nothing, but some research. (Unfortunately, if you do something for long enough when you should have done nothing, then you have to spend a lot of time and money undoing what shouldn’t have been done.)

Party-aligned Senators need to cast aside their allegiances and have the courage to vote on the ETS according to fact-based science.

I believe people are starting to come around to the myth, the great con that is global warming and its prolific and invasive roots, of which an Emissions Trading Scheme is but one. 

There is a groundswell of support out there for politicians who will stand up to the doomsayers with some scientific facts – facts which have been documented and tested if only they care to look for them - and stand up to Rudd, Wong, Garrett (what a joke), and the biggest bully of them all, Al Gore. This is a man who has made millions - as Michael Savage in his interview with Lord Monckton states, ‘from peddling fear and apocalyptic prophesies’, not to mention as the instigator of perhaps the biggest global brainwashing exercise in two generations.

An ETS is a policy invented as a response to a non-problem. If implemented it will cost millions of dollars, and thousands of jobs. It will be the beginning of the end. It should be consigned to the dustbin of history, where it belongs.

***