Scotty from Marketing

[old man emu]

Wrong-button Dutton 

[Marty_d]

9 hours ago, willedoo said:

They could dress Mr. Potato Head in a Star Trek uniform and launch him off to unknown galaxies.

Preferably without a spaceship.  If we could find a big enough rubber band he might make it to space.

[old man emu]

The latest from Mr "Truth in Government":

Desperate to avoid the toxic fallout from the resignation of his friend and mentor Brian Houston from Hillsong, Scott Morrison has told an astonishing lie today, claiming he hasn’t been to Hillsong for “15 years” when pressed on the scandal by journalists.

 

https://www.crikey.com.au/2022/03/24/havent-been-at-hillsong-morrison-houston-fallout/

 

https://videos.dailymail.co.uk/video/mol/2022/03/24/3440346323065521923/640x360_MP4_3440346323065521923.mp4

[Jerry_Atrick]

I don't know why anyone would lie like that. I can't say I hold any organised religion in high esteem, but wouldn't it have been better to say, "That is a worrying development. In my association with the church, I never saw anything that could associate it with this alleged behaviour. We should be careful not to draw an opinion until justice has had a chance to run its course. However, should it be found that Mr Hillsong is guilty, I would be the first to condemn him for his actions and bringing disrepute to the church." Or words to that effect..

 

The idea would be to disassociate the institution from the individual.. Of course, if I maybe knew about it and it could become public knowledge, yeah.. I would deny being part of it, too...

 

 

 

 

[old man emu]

1 minute ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

I don't know why anyone would lie like that.

Quite simply because ScoMo is a scoundrel. If you refer to a man as a scoundrel, you mean that he behaves very badly towards other people especially by deceiving them. 

 

As you say, ScoMo  could have said "In my association with the church, I never saw anything that could associate it with this alleged behaviour. We should be careful not to draw an opinion until justice has had a chance to run its course." That's fair enough. So many other members of the Church could honestly say that.

 

However, this: "should it be found that Mr Hillsong is guilty, I would be the first to condemn him for his actions and bringing disrepute to the church", is the epitome of rebuking the teachings of Christ. A true follower of Christ can condemn the actions of another, but would never cease to show Christ's love towards the person. Condemning a person outright for his actions is, in Christian terms, "playing the man, not the ball"

 

Anyway, who believes anything that ScoMo says?

[onetrack]

The First Law of Politics says that any perverse action by another person you know intimately means you must immediately deny any knowledge of their action/s, distance yourself faster from them than if they'd suddenly produced a firearm, and throw them under the bus at every opportunity, to ensure the nasty smell they've developed, can't linger around you. Politics and prostitution are very closely related.

 

Edited March 25, 2022 by onetrack

[Marty_d]

2 hours ago, onetrack said:

The First Law of Politics says that any perverse action by another person you know intimately means you must immediately deny any knowledge of their action/s, distance yourself faster from them than if they'd suddenly produced a firearm, and throw them under the bus at every opportunity, to ensure the nasty smell they've developed, can't linger around you. Politics and prostitution are very closely related.

 

The difference is, prostitutes are honest about what they're selling.

[Jerry_Atrick]

22 hours ago, old man emu said:

A true follower of Christ can condemn the actions of another, but would never cease to show Christ's love towards the person.

Maybe a slight play on words - but no, I don't believe it is playing the man and not the ball.. and even if it were, so what, when it comes to abusing others. .

 

Condemn may mean to put to severe punishment, even death, but it also means: express complete disapproval of; censure. "most leaders roundly condemned the attack".  It is the latter context in which I meant.

 

[edit]

redacted

Edited March 25, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[Jerry_Atrick]

Although a couple of months old, a salient assessment of SFM:

 

[old man emu]

8 minutes ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

Condemn may mean to put to severe punishment, even death, but it also means: express complete disapproval of; censure. "most leaders roundly condemned the attack".  It is the latter context in which I meant.

After re-reading what ScoMo said, I see your point. Looks like ScoMo did in fact "play the ball", but can you see how easy it is to mistake what is written when one reads the words and applies bias to them?

 

Your example relating to rape shows the dichotomy between the spiritual and temporal. The spiritual recognises the inherent good in a person, while the temporal recognises the bad in actions. That's why judges used first to sentence a person to death for actions in this world, then give hope that the condemned's spirit would receive life thereafter.

[Jerry_Atrick]

38 minutes ago, old man emu said:

That's why judges used first to sentence a person to death for actions in this world, then give hope that the condemned's spirit would receive life thereafter.

Maybe, but I see this as a contradiction on two fronts (assuming the sentencing is within an Abrahamic culture). Firstly, if one sins for which they don't repent, then they are damned to an eternity in hell. Surely, this non repentance is only temporal, because spiritually, we are all good? While there are many who have repented when their life was going to be cut short, there are a good many who didn't. Isn't the judge then sentencing knowing there is a darned good chance they won't receive a decent life thereafter?

 

Secondly,why would spirituality not recognise bad actions? Are they somehow prohibited in spiritual-space? Surely, in order to get to hell, one has to have performed bad actions, and therefore, ol' St. Pete sends them down to Lucifer's lair? But, what even is good v. bad? While, in some cases, it is very apparent, in other cases, the lines are very blurred and come down to individual values. A good example is the Herald of Free Enterprise, where the barge doors were left open, or accidentally opened, and the ferry sank. It was a tragedy, but in law we discussed one event to determine guilt.

 

As I recall, people were escaping by climbing either a flagpole or one of the chimney stacks, or some such high structure. At one stage, someone to to the top and was about to jump to safety, when he or she froze with fear.. presumably, with Thalassophobia. This person was blocking the others behind from being rescued. Someone pushed the person off, into the water, and was presumably downed. The person who did the pushing was identified and apparently charged, but all charges were droped because the body wasn't found, and there was no way to determine if the person had died, as no one knew who the person was who was pushed off.

 

Let's assume the person died.. Was it the right thing to do to kill someone to save others? Seems reasonable, but we don't have capital punishment for offenders, some of whom are released and go on to kill, sometimes many. Which is right?

 

I don't believe that judges condemned offenders to death in the hope that they  would find a better afterlife. I believe they condemned them to death because at the time, it was considered the appropriate punishment for the crime.. and as one American said to me many moons ago, to remove them from the gene pool. He used the analogy that if one has a rabid dog, one puts it down. And he is a devout Christian..

Edited March 25, 2022 by Jerry_Atrick

[willedoo]

This is how much submarine Australia gets for 5.5 Billion Dollars (and no, it's not hiding under the water):

 

[rgmwa]

Morrison could have just renegotiated the deal and bought the French nuclear sub instead of trying to redesign it to diesel electric at great expense. We would have had a decent nuclear sub relatively quickly and everybody would probably have been happy except the US. What a debacle.

[Marty_d]

So to help our case with Solomon Islands and stop them from falling into the arms of the Chinese, the Australian government is giving them an extra 65 million.

 

Fantastic!  I hear you say.  In the Solomons, with an annual salary of $12,000, that can hire 100 teachers... for 54 years!

 

But no.  It's being spent on a new Australian High Commission building in Honiara.

 

So even with the paltry amount of foreign aid we give (less than 50c per person per day), we don't target it to do any good.

[Jerry_Atrick]

Well, I am resurrecting this thread, because it is hardly fair to lump the conversation about SFM's BS under the election or Albo..

 

We now know he basically performed a secret land grab and said it was necessary due to the pandemic. Whether he trusted his  ministers or not is not really the question. There are two questions in my mind:

1. Why the secrecy about it. Yes, it would have been a politically difficult thing to do, but if it were that justifiable that the leader of the nation should have the same powers as vested in those ministers, then surely, like Dan Andrews overcame significant oppostion to his lockdowns and emerged the more popular for it (until, that is, he started to come to near falling on other swords), it would have prevailed anyway, and he would have been more popular as a result.

 

2. As a minister of these portfolios, twop people would have had the same power and access to the same information as each other. How could the minister not know that SFM was a co-minister. How could a minister not know that decisions were being taken without that minister's involvement? Reeks of either BS in by the other ministers - or - a corrupt public service - at least at what used to be called the director general level.

 

We know that the AFP are on the take with the dirty government work they do - just looks at the whistleblowers' cases. Although at the NSW level, the NSW Trade & Industry department head, Brown, basically came a cropper in her testimony to the Barilaro appoitnment parliamentary inquiry - I wonder if she will also be referred to ICAC for her role in it.  So, these other ministries are more than likely toi have the scum floated to the top to aid and abet such misconduct.

 

OK.. John Howard has left a legacy of strong gun laws, which is a credit to him.. But this article shows the true integrity of the man: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-16/john-howard-says-scott-morrison-should-remain-in-parliament/101339690

 

To quote:

"Former prime minister John Howard says Scott Morrison should not resign as a Liberal MP because it is not in the interests of the Liberal Party to have a by-election."

 

Really? Keep him in because of maintaining the perceived interest of the LP.. Short sighted, vested interested, and no integrity is what I read.. just what a new Teal independent needs to win another safe LP seat.

[facthunter]

It's OK to have a BUY election anytime. Nev

[onetrack]

John Howard is a has-been, and needs to keep his mouth shut over Sco-Mo's antics and lies, and keep out of commenting on it. To state that Sco-Mo shouldn't resign because it's not in the interests of the Liberal Party shows the heirarchy of the Liberal Party have learnt exactly nothing from their election drubbing.

 

They're going to go the way of the Liberal Party in W.A., which has gone from being the ruling Govt party in 2017, to a virtually non-existent Party (just 2 seats) after the last State Election.

The Liberals in W.A. were devastated by their massive election loss in 2017, but the 2021 State election saw Mark McGowan and Labor, win 98% of the votes!

 

The Liberals here in the West still can't understand what they're doing wrong, and are trying to blame everything but their own party hierarchy, policies and preselection methods. The Liberals need a root-and-branch pruning, starting with the sacking of all the Party hierarchy. They're like dopey Americans trying to address gun control, blaming everything but the obvious problem.

[rgmwa]

Judging by his self-righteous and self-serving press conference today he has no intention of resigning.

[facthunter]

He won't cope with being a non-entity. Nev

[old man emu]

14 hours ago, Jerry_Atrick said:

two people would have had the same power and access to the same information as each other

I heard it explained this way: 

1. Each Minister is responsible for a number of pieces of legislation grouped together because they are related. The Treasurer does not oversee legislation relating to what the Minister for Science oversees, and vice versa. The group of related legislation is called a portfolio, so you get a Ministerial Portfolio.

2. There's lots and lots of legislation in the portfolio. So the Minister can delegate the responsibility for overseeing sub-groups to a Junior Minister. Therefore, you have two people with authority acting on matters from the same Ministerial Portfolio. That makes sense.

3. The Minister is still accountable for all decisions made relating to the Minister's portfolio and reporting to the Parliament.

4. By being sworn into those various Ministries, Scomo became a Junior Minister. administratively answering to the Minister. 

 

So now we can drag in the Ministers whose portfolios where  Scomo did things and ask, "Did you, with the ultimate responsibility for your portfolio, approve the actions of your Junior Minister?"

 

It is interesting that the gas field Scomo scuttled runs adjacent to his seat, the Eastern Suburbs Liberal heartlands, and Abbott's old seat that is held by an independent, Ziggi Someone. If that approval had remained the news would have devastated the Liberals in Sydney.

 

Then we come to the role Hansard played. Apparently, it is normal practice for Hansard to publish a daily list of Ministers and Junior Ministers. Did Scomo's name ever appear as a Junior Minister in any Hansard list?

[willedoo]

The press reporting changes all the time. Initially, they were saying that Secret Scotty found an administrative work-around to swear himself in. Now some of them are saying the GG swore him in.

[facthunter]

The Unholy alliance with the Nats will be sorely tested (details of which we are never privy to), THIS has a bit to run yet.  Would you buy a used car from this person? 3rd big job he's stuffed in a row.  Nev

[red750]

They say it's not technically illegal, just extremely bad form. The GG says it's not his responsibility to notify the Cabinet, parliament or public, and was unaware that Scomo was keeping quiet, even to the ministers he was usurping. Josh Frydenberg is ‘furious’ at Morrison’s treasury swipe.

 

He also claims he made no unilateral actions while holding those positions.

[facthunter]

Maybe for the first instances but not thereafter. What about the Gas exploration off the NSW coast? That's Keith Pitts  NP. responsibility and Morrison says HE (Morrison) did the right thing. Maybe so but the Issue is who has the rudder?. Such appointments are always gazetted at the time. A Court Case has already been revived over this. It's NOT going to go away.  Nev

[red750]

https://fb.watch/eZFkyDoL8x/