WE ‘LOL’ online all the time but today I literally Laughed Out Loud when I saw who was standing behind Anthony Albanese as he solemnly discussed alleged lawlessness, megalomania and abuse of power during the covid pandemic. It was like Hunter Biden nodding along in Washington National Cathedral during a sermon on the seven deadly sins. When a man tells you who he really is, believe him. The Prime Minister’s increasingly Biden-esque obsession with his predecessor and the past speaks to me of a paranoid impostor who fears he isn’t up to the job. We already knew Albanese was a lightweight before he became Labor leader in 2019. In his quarter of a century as a federal MP before becoming PM, he never shone in a role. “Albo” is far more psychologically comfortable “fighting Tories” than he is being the decider on whose desk the dollar coin rolls to a stop. So far – and prima facie – the worst thing that can and should be said of Scott Morrison’s 2021 decision to have himself sworn-in as an adjunct minister in several portfolios during the virus panic is that it was condescending. We can handle the truth, Colonel Jessop.
When there was a genuine fear covid could take out a few, or even several, key personnel in the government, a succession/continuity arrangement to secure administrative functionality was rational. My guess is the public wasn’t apprised of it for two reasons: so as not to create extra alarm and because the all-wedging all-the-time Opposition Leader would have lied about its purposes. Had Julia Gillard done it, Patrica Karvelas would extol the multi-tasking and demand a statue in the parliamentary foyer.
I have no standing brief to defend Scott Morrison but the pearl-clutching overkill at The Australian in particular and “calls” for him to be shooed out of Parliament in disgrace are idiotic, vicious and designed to further Albanese’s – and the love media’s – painfully obvious ambition: to criminalise political opposition along US Democrat lines. That’s really what “ending the culture wars,” federal ICAC and the Voice are all about. Voters struggling to feed their families and pay their electricity bills don’t really care about backbencher Scott Morrison’s judgement. They do care about a Prime Minister who lied to them about lowering their cost of living. For Dan Andrews fanboy and Third Chamber sneak Albanese to talk of “tin pot dictatorships” and the “unprecedented trashing of our democracy” is extravagant rhetoric for a government whose number one priority on winning office was abolishing the national construction watchdog at the $5,000,000 behest of the CFMEU. Bobby Kennedy grilled the bejesus out of Teamster associates for less.
On the subject of the Hunter Biden laptop:
Neuroscientist, author, and podcaster Sam Harris made the rounds on Twitter Thursday in the form of a video clip in which he admitted that suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop story was a “left-wing conspiracy” but it didn’t matter because of the danger Donald Trump brought to the presidency.
Guilty as charged?
Prepo, you are pretty facile. If you truly think that republicans live in a great big conspiracy world and that there is nothing to see around the results of the 2020 election, there is no risk to a proper investigation. Not just Barr says he saw no evidence and all the other hand waiving you cling to.
It might even pry off a huge chunk of trump supporters. But no, constant but look there ism from you just reflecting the greater dems position. And then ah oh no voter id isn’t needed because i have a bs study that says there is nothing to see.
No one cares, voter id shuts down a lot of the claims from the Republicans and isn’t opposed by anyone other than Dem hard liners.
You are boringly predictable because you can’t think for yourself. You’re a captive a useful idiot.
Had you been around in bolshevik russia you would have run a reeducation camp.
Bucco, I gave you a serious reason why your “let’s have an independent investigation into voter fraud” idea was impractical in a nation which allows its scores of states to set their own rules about voting can be carried out. (And one as prone to believing conspiracy as the Right there currently is.)
I gave you a link to a paper with heaps of links to studies and reports going back more than a decade that show fraudulent voter identity rarely happens. I opined in a subsequent post that its not hard to understand that it is the poor who are at biggest risk of exclusion from voting if voter ID is toughened up.
These are all serious points, and if you want to complain about my complaint about the Right and conspiracy belief – the polling shows its true.
All you come up with in response is “you’re so facile” and I can’t “think for myself”.
You know what – that’s the problem with people who disbelieve climate change and fall for conspiracies of all kinds. They think they are “thinking for themselves” and deride expertise; in fact, they are in most cases being conned by charlatans or those who deliberately want to mislead on factual matters for their own purposes.
You posted a cherry picked article from a left biased activist organisation that uses loaded terms and deliberately ignores evidence that doesn’t fit it’s preferred narrative. You don’t work there do you prepo, on second thoughts, its less biased than you.
Your arguments are wooden, your sources are homogeneously left leaning you constantly resort to abuse before you’ve even explored an alternative.
Face it, you’re pretty boring. I doubt you have any friends that don’t share your ideological purity.
Perverse Preposterous
Bucco, I gave you a serious reason why your “let’s have an independent investigation into voter fraud” idea was impractical in a nation which allows its scores of states to set their own rules about voting can be carried out.
So your solution seems to be “Let everyone do whatever they like, because fraud detection is sooooooooooo difficult”.. A Third World solution at best (or, really, worst).
I gave you a link to a paper with heaps of links to studies and reports going back more than a decade that show fraudulent voter identity rarely happens.
I have a bridge for sale, and a Nigerian friend who can help you with finance.
that’s the problem with people who disbelieve climate change and fall for conspiracies of all kinds.
ROFLMAO, back to the left’s favourite religion of Klimate Change. Yet you will not respond to questions that should be easy for you on Klimate Change.
And exactly what are your credentials in klimate science? Or is it all blind faith in the eggspurts?
The Brennan centre’s largest funder is George Soros.
Buccaneer
Why am I not surprised, and also not surprised that Perverse Preposterous gives them almost religious adoration?
So essentially he’s gone from being absolutely emphatic that election fraud doesn’t happen in America (except possibly by the Russians on Trump’s behalf), to “oh, but it’s too impractical or hard to investigate even if it does.”
Any relation to John Brennan, ex-head of the CIA and Democrat and Obama lickspittle?
LOL.
What difference does it make who funds a place that compiles a list of other people’s research and reporting on investigating the number of voter id cases that take place in reality, not just in the fevered minds of Republicans?
The problem with you making a serious counter argument is that all of the reporting you can come up with about the problem is probably of the type that reads like this:
“Independent researchers Vote for God and Country have found a way there may have been more than 15 million voter fraud cases, all of them against Trump!”
Buccaneer: there have been multiple court cases by trumps people. In no case have they been able to produce evidence of voting issues. In most cars the actions were denied flat for lack of any substance.
Your opinion relies on the idea of something that has been flatly disproven by all the parties except trump and his acolytes. Trump relies on a future where there is no law or democratic process but the trump process. Monarchy or dictatorship.
May I remind you that Trump promulgated fraud as a potential excuse before the election, and when the government guy who had oversight refused to endorse Trump’ claims post election, he was sacked via Twitter!:
But no, for Bucco and others here, you would prefer a pointless “independent” probably 50 state investigation into conspiracy claims that were immediately actually being addressed as being without foundation. Just because some gullible Trumpsters saw content on a moronic website like Gateway Pundit and thought “And that looks suspicious to me” – or “looks like fraud to me”.
There was no “good faith” claims of fraud; it was all bad faith claims as part of a plan Trump always had as to how he could save his ego if he lost the election.
You don’t reward such bad faith claims by taking them seriously when there is no serious evidence on which to even start an investigation.
Perverse Preposterous
What difference does it make who funds a place that compiles a list of other people’s research and reporting on investigating the number of voter id cases that take place in reality, not just in the fevered minds of Republicans?
What kind of ill-educated idiot has never heard the adage “Who pays the piper calls the tune”?
all of the reporting you can come up with about the problem is probably of the type that reads like this:
This is the best you can come up with? Get back to your job, your employer might get some value from you, you offer none here. You are too lazy to even research your opponents’ arguments to enable you to provide a measured response.
Passing Wind
In no case have they been able to produce evidence of voting issues. In most cars the actions were denied flat for lack of any substance.
Crap.
has been flatly disproven
An unusual way to spell “rejected out of hand”.
Perverse Preposterous
were immediately actually being addressed as being without foundation
Hmmm. The Queen of Hearts approach to jurisprudence. Rejection first, look (not very hard) for evidence later.
According to Perpo, voters being able to have faith they vote in free and fair elections is pointless, because, array of liefty dribble. You haven’t quoted a single independent resource and are now reduced to lifting quotes. How self unaware can you be.
Admit it, democracy is just a nuisance to you.
Here’s a fairly lengthy report on some of Trump’s pre-election fraud claims, and how even then, when officials checked on what happened, they were blatant misrepresentations of what had actually happened.
His followers who believed that widespread fraud happened are just victims of a charlatan – Trump – willing to make any excuse to protect his ego if he lost.
Bet you wouldn’t say that if it was a conservative benefactor or patron, unlike the far-left activist Soros.
Perverse Preposterous
ROFLMAU (US) ABC News quoting “eggspurts”. Try again.
Blowie & Bucco, you’re being ridiculous – I link to an article which links to dozens of relevant reports and studies done by others, and it’s all dismissed because of organisation that put the links together? You have zero credibility when you argue like that.
Hey, lets see what a Right wing source says about voter fraud? Here’s the Heritage Foundation, can’t get any more sympathetic to your pathetic side than that. Here’s a headline from May 2020:
LOL.
1,285 cases over four years is all a Right wing foundation that would throw itself in front of a bullet for Trump has managed to compile???
Give it up: the fraud claims were a bad faith joke dismissed by plenty of Republicans in positions of authority who did check them out as they arose.
And there is no evidence that voter ID is a big issue, and Democrats rightly worry that it is in fact a way for Republicans to disenfranchise a part of the typical Democrat voter base.
These are just realities you can’t cope with.
Perverse Preposterous
And there is no evidence that voter ID is a big issue, and Democrats rightly worry that it is in fact a way for Republicans to disenfranchise a part of the typical Democrat voter base.
Suuuure they do. yet they do not do voter ID campaigns in the same way as they do enrolment campaigns. Logically, they should do both together. Get rid of ID as an issue, and support that “part of the typical Democrat voter base”?
If it’s such a non issue, why would you oppose it?
A Monmouth poll from June 21 found 80% of voters support voter id, including 62% of dem voters.
That makes you an extremist who would prefer to have a significant portion of the us population feel uneasy about whether their vote counts.
And here’s an article about the Heritage Fraud Database that argues it unfairly exaggerates the numbers in any event!
I know it polls well, but it’s one of those issues that is like a motherhood statement – it sounds initially OK in theory, but you have to really get to the details before you can really say how people feel about how it will work in practice. Polling on issues like that rarely can get into adequate details, so is misleading.
I think it’s clear I’ve won the arguments today, by virtue of my well reasoned arguments and good googling skills. My Soros funded time slot has ended, so signing off now….
Pronounces himself the winner, I think that says pretty much everything, must have been an off day for everyone else then, by your own admission
The last link doesn’t even work, what a maroon. You’ve just provided evidence of why you’re deluded
Perverse Preposterous
I know it polls well, but it’s one of those issues that is like a motherhood statement – it sounds initially OK in theory, but you have to really get to the details before you can really say how people feel about how it will work in practice. Polling on issues like that rarely can get into adequate details, so is misleading.
Preposterous even by your perverse standards.
Would you agree that if polling supports the leftist position, that is “The will of the people”. If polling supports non-leftist positions (such as the desirability of voter ID), that is “Cheap populism”?
Because it sure sounds as if you do.
Perverse Preposterous
I think it’s clear I’ve won the arguments today, by virtue of my well reasoned arguments and good googling skills.
Uncle George always likes to see value for his money. that is why he also has a review system, where he consults selected people with whom you engage.
Don’t take out any long term loans.
PS, he is particularly displeased with hired trolls who simply repeat the daily talking points, without any value adding.
Here’s the link from yesterday that didn’t work.
https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2020/10/20/trumps-absentee-ballot-fraud-claims-not-supported-evidence/5969447002/
I think if you honest people, you might be big enough to admit that if a highly motivated to prove election fraud foundation can only come with that piddling number of fraud cases, it’s not a real problem.
Perverse Preposterous
“an investigation by USA TODAY, Columbia Journalism Investigations and the PBS series “Frontline” found.”
PBS and Columbia J’ism! ROFLMAO.
The number of times you don’t counter with facts, but just shoot the messenger, is very high Blowie
.
Perverse Preposterous
I have learned that it is the only way to argue with leftists, who are impervious to facts which don’t meet the “party line”.
Do you seriously regard PBS and Columbia Journalism as “highly motivated to prove election fraud”?
I was referring to the Heritage Foundation, you twit.
Perverse Preposterous
The health insurance mandate in the 2010 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, is an idea hatched in 1989 by Stuart Butler at Heritage in a publication titled “Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans”.[26] This was also the model for Mitt Romney’s health care plan in Massachusetts.[27]
Solidly conservative, might you say? Romney’s health care plan was an early financial blowout. If the Foundation was serious, it would have taken that on board before being so hot for Obamacare. (Or were the potential financial benefits to the health insurance industry the cause of their enthusiasm?)
For those with open eyes, the failures of supposedly “conservative” organisations in the past 20 or 30 years have shown how many organisations have succumbed to the desire to be part of the establishment.
As for the miniscule fraud numbers “discovered” by the Foundation, they seem unconvincing in a nation that brought the word “Gerrymander” to the vocabulary. Do you seriously believe that in a nation with voters exceeding 120 million in national elections, with a “robust” political culture, that that is all? If so, then I suspect that what you are smoking might not be tobacco.
Compare with the very high numbers favouring voter ID – those on the ground do not share your opinion.
But let’s accept your argument. Logically, there is no more need for the DoJ Voting Rights Division. Do you agree?
You’ve been caught out representing a left biased organisation whose main mission is to discredit voter fraud and was founded and continues to be funded by Doris money as independent.
Now rather than quote the right wing source you use a lefty article that verbals the source.
Still a maroon