Following on from the thumping Labor lead in last week’s Newspoll, the addition of the latest ReachTEL to the BludgerTrack poll aggregate causes Labor to regain nearly all the ground it lost on the back of last fortnight’s Nielsen. However, with new contrary signals emerging through a shift back to the Coalition in Essential Research, it’s perhaps telling that the two-party trendline (displayed as always on the sidebar) looks as though it’s not sure which way to turn. Labor is now back into majority territory on the national seat projection, having picked up three seats each in New South Wales, Victoria and Queensland and a further one in the territories (i.e. Solomon). It’s interesting to note that the state breakdowns show emphatic swings to Labor except where they govern at state level, at least until next Saturday’s elections. On the primary vote, Labor makes a gain this week directly at the expense of the Coalition, while the Palmer United Party is up slightly on a post-election low last week. There is no new data for leadership ratings this week.
[Should 18C be used against the Chaser boys and what they say about right wingers?]
No. People choose to be a rightwinger. Unless you’re saying that rightwingers are intellectually inferior and therefore don’t have a say in determining their beliefs.
So Bolt is not allowed to say that a fair skinned person is not Aboriginal but the Chaser boys are allowed to say that a right winger engages in bestiality?
The government of the day gets to decide this does it?
[Should 18C be used against the Chaser boys and what they say about right wingers?]
Since when are right wingers a race you twit??
Mad Lib@3300
You would.
FWIW I think Bolt is an idiot and Aboriginal status has nothing to do with genetics or skin colour. However, I don’t want governments deciding what can and cannot be said in Australia. I want the Australian diaspora to proclaim he is an idiot, not take him to court.
ACLEI wants to spy on us:
http://www.itnews.com.au/News/374405,corruption-watchdog-advocates-telco-data-retention.aspx
But it doesn’t know how IP / Internet works!
BK
[Lisa Wilkinson just called Brandis a heterosexual male!]
Is it now defamatory to call someone a yuky “heterosexual”?
Everything,
What is a) so objectionable about the ruling against Bolt, b) are there any other objectionable decisions under section 18C, c) why have the Liberals only found a problem with it now after the passing of the Howard Government, when they had a majority in both houses to pass such a change, d) if the problem is free speech, why are other restrictions on free speech not also being considered, such as defamation law?
Brandis had ample opportunity to address those matter, and was in fact invited to do so, but refused
[So Bolt is not allowed to say that a fair skinned person is not Aboriginal but the Chaser boys are allowed to say that a right winger engages in bestiality?]
They said Chris Kenny f**ks dogs, or something like it.
How this can be construed to mean that all rightwingers f**k dogs is anyone’s guess.
However, this is not analogous to Bolt’s remarks about appearance being a valid interpretive tool for indigenous descent.
[So Bolt is not allowed to say that a fair skinned person is not Aboriginal ]
Particularly not when the court determines that he is WRONG IN FACT when making that assertion you git.
Everything,
So you want defamation laws and regulations regarding truth in advertising similarly repealed?
Mmmmmmm…….Brandis wants freedom of expression and opinion but Rabbott intervenes with threats. re:Chaser boys
[So Bolt is not allowed to say that a fair skinned person is not Aboriginal but the Chaser boys are allowed to say that a right winger engages in bestiality?]
One is obviously serious and a serious threat to society and justice one is rightly banned by legislation and that ban is enforced by a court. Quite properly.
The other is just bad offensive humor and so obviously so even Bolt should be able to see it (oh wait) and that kind of thing has been banned and censored through much of recent history but we grew up a bit.
When the racists grow up we can probably unban racism too.
My humble apologies to geoffery for missing his irony, if I was more familiar with your work I’m sure I’d have picked it up.
[However, I don’t want governments deciding what can and cannot be said in Australia. ]
Should we be repealing laws prohibiting tobacco advertising or event sponsorship?
[Bugler
Posted Monday, March 10, 2014 at 10:01 pm | PERMALINK
Everything,
So you want defamation laws and regulations regarding truth in advertising similarly repealed?]
No, you shouldn’t be able to defame anyone, you shouldn’t be able to incite to violence, you shouldn’t be able to lie to achieve a commercial gain. That is different to saying that people who look white are not “really Aboriginal” but are just using their “Aboriginality” to achieve personal gain. I do see that as a political comment, and one that a large majority of Australians agree with (whether or not they do so consciously).
I can also tell you that I know this from research that I have done myself.
Lisa Wilkinson has skewered Soapy several times.
Everything or Nothing
[The government of the day gets to decide this does it?]
Typical rightist dishonesty.
It was the court that decided Bolt went too far and slapped his wrist.
But your Party’s Intellectual and moral compass, R. Murdoch, can publish endless dishonest lies without any government decisions.
The IMF and the Ukraine
__________
The undertakers from the IMF have been and gone in Kiev..and in a few days the Ukrainians people will hear the very very bad news…of what they have to suffer(like the Greeks but much worse…) to get a Loan
It’s rumoured that there will be massive cuts/prices will rise/widespread sackings,the lot… will follow
Including a 33% rise in energy prices as the Russians want the Ukraine to forgo it’s present substantial price cut in energy… which they receive now from Russia…
The aged pension is only $40 US a week…and it is said this will be cut in half…and render millions to a near starvation wage
That’ll take their minds of the Crimea anyway..and the new neo-fascists in power may have real troubles on their hands
and on the streets
as they say…”Be careful of what your wishes …because they might come true “
Should 18C be used against the reports on Chinese buying Australian property?
[swamprat
Posted Monday, March 10, 2014 at 10:06 pm | PERMALINK
Everything or Nothing
The government of the day gets to decide this does it?
Typical rightist dishonesty.
It was the court that decided Bolt went too far and slapped his wrist.]
The court made a determination based on the law that was recently introduced.
Governments make the laws, the judicial system just enforces them.
Parliaments to be precise!
On Qanda, the “score” on every issue discussed has been 4-1 against Brandis.
Even the Oz lady is agin him on everything. What a wanker!
And Mod Lib says he’s doing well. Ha Ha!
The IMF are mobster’s.
Just saw a tweet from zoomster. 😀
Everything,
[That is different to saying that people who look white are not “really Aboriginal” but are just using their “Aboriginality” to achieve personal gain.]
Which is a point he wouldn’t have had any problem making had he not chosen to falsely name individuals he believed weren’t “really Aboriginal”. How is making false accusations against people, or entire groups, justifiable as political comment. How does this specific case detract from the overall merit of the law as testified by just about every ethnic group in Australia. Were you watching when one panelist mentioned anti-Semetic facebook pages that could only be taken down after applying section 18C?
Someone should tell Mod Lib about the Common Law, and how Stat Law interacts with it.
He just nailed the other members of the panel by saying what I just said here!
If you think 18C is right, why should the reporter who highlighted the increase in Chinese buyers of Australian properties?
I am guessing everyone would be against that, but the question is: why?
[Bugler
…..Were you watching when one panelist mentioned anti-Semetic facebook pages that could only be taken down after applying section 18C?]
What were the details of the anti-Semitic pages?
Were they inciting to violence or were they just saying that Jewish people have too much influence in western political discourse?
If the former then there are other sections that deal with them.
If the latter, then I wouldn’t read those pages, but I accept their right to exist.
Mad Lib@3328
Which Chinese person did he name and cause personal racial offence to?
[Which Chinese person did he name and cause personal racial offence to?]
I haven’t read that article (and wouldn’t have bothered if I had read the headline).
See? If you don’t like it don’t read it.
Mad Lib@3329
So you would not take any action to block Nazis or Fascists until they actually started killing and injuring people?
Spare us the weasel words because that is where you are going.
Rating PMs: when I first became aware of politics Menzies had been Prime Minister forever. Then it was Holt, McEwen briefly and Gorton during the last few years of high school, Gorton & McMahon during Uni, Whitlam the first PM I voted for, then Fraser and Hawke for the rest of young adulthood; Keating, Howard and Rudd during middle age; Gillard, Rudd II and Abbott for ‘pre Old Age’. Hopefully Abbott booted off the national stage before I’m old enough to be ‘elderly’.
My subjective rating from best to worst: Keating, Hawke, Gillard, Rudd, Menzies, Gorton, Fraser, Howard, then a big gap to McMahon and a bigger gap to Abbott – worst PM ever. (McEwen was only there for a few weeks and not rated).
[If you think 18C is right, why should the reporter who highlighted the increase in Chinese buyers of Australian properties?]
Does it qualify under 18C?
[Should 18C be used against the reports on Chinese buying Australian property?]
If it is then Barnaby should be fearful! 😆
Is One Nation a fascist group?
Are you arguing that the Australian government should have legislation preventing a group like One Nation from even existing?
Or should we just say “Let One Nation put itself forward for election and see what the Australian electorate thinks”. Let us remember that Pauline Hanson has run for election on multiple occasions as a “One Nation” candidate.
She has NEVER won under these circumstances, even though she is a household name.
Not once.
That says it all for me. We don’t need a law, we just need to allow Australians to be Australians.
[Bugler
…..Does it qualify under 18C?]
Does it? Who knows……who decides? I don’t want this to be how Australia works.
Hmmm Marcia Langton just got fired up.
Her body language was very interesting. I think she would have donged the bloke who asked the stupid question if she could have.
Should the old man who just asked that question be taken to court under 18C?
[Parliaments to be precise!]
hohum…..
I think your “noble” principles, as usual, are somewhat compromised in that you are defending, as the good capitalist you are, the rights of the Australian Pravda with its 70% media control.
Personally there is something about 18c that troubles me. Not sure what the solution is. But the Tories solution to repeal it leaves me equally uncomfortable
I see. It’s okay to make false claims about groups of people, but if it’s about individuals it’s not okay because freedom. We can ignore the skillful way Bolt managed to break every protection for political discourse provided under 18C but pretend they don’t exist at all when it comes to innocuous and misguided comments about Chinese investors (which didn’t really carry any imputation).
So I presumably also have the right to sell tobacco spruiking health benefits it doesn’t have, or sell carrots while calling them orange turnips, or provide a financial product providing figures that are simply wrong
3336
One Nation did elect a Senator and 11 Qld MLAs (some of whom were around for several terms) in 1998.
@Mod Lib/3336
One Nation was born out of Coalition Party right antics, after rejecting her (Paulen Hanson) as a candidate.
Mad Lib@3339
Stop asking stupid questions.
William must be building up a good case to invoke the stupidity rule to ban you.
Did they racially vilify the Chinese or make a statement of fact that they are purchasing properties in Australia?
Nor, did anyone accuse the Chinese of falsifying their heritage in order to ‘gain advantage’ by deception.
[Does it? Who knows……who decides? I don’t want this to be how Australia works.]
It says in the legislation you clearly haven’t read so in your ignorance have decided it doesn’t say anything and it’s decided by judges on a whim.
And by my post at 3441 I don’t mean to indicate support for Mod Libs juvenile debating points.
[bemused
….William must be building up a good case to invoke the stupidity rule to ban you.]
William must be heartily sick of me, I know, but I am worth half a laugh half the time aren’t I?
zoidlord@3344
They might have dropped her as a candidate, but Howard then surreptitiously adopted most of her policies.
Her sin was to be too overt about her nastiness.