Thursday, 21 July 2016

Our freedom of speech has been robbed by leftist corporations like the ABC

Protestors gathered outside the ABC as Pauline
Hanson was interviewed on Q&A
We have lost our freedom of speech. If a senator-elect cannot enter a broadcasting studio that is funded by the government, without being hassled and haggled by members of the public, then we can no longer state that we have the freedom of speech that we are so proud of. Sure, some believe that Hanson is extreme, and that Pauline doesn’t deserve to be in parliament, but 900,000 people voted for her, and calling Hanson an idiot is calling nine hundred thousand voters idiots, and if that is going to be the case, then why don’t the people calling Hanson an idiot be condemned as idiots because they voted Labour, or the Green?

It is a well known fact that the ABC cannot be trusted to provide views from both sides. On the Q&A that sparked media attention, there was only one other real conservative, and he doesn’t have the hard backbone of Hanson. Simon Birmingham, the minister for education, found his way into the program, and took the back seat, relieved to find no pressure on him. He may or may not support Hanson, but on Monday night, he was relieved to find that the aggressive attention that usually is focused on Liberal members was focused on Hanson, and not him.

Why is it that the ABC cannot display an equal viewpoint. Do they not realise that the Government is a Liberal one, and they can take funding away from the broadcasting corporation quickly. Or maybe they realise that Turnbull is a weak individual who doesn’t have the backbone to be unpopular and cut the funding, money which we could be using on something other than Left bias and communist viewpoints.

If our national broadcasting studios cannot be approached by conservative members of parliament without protests then the Australian Broadcasting Corporations should be renamed to the Left Broadcasting Corporations. At least, then the conservative members of society will not have to face the fact that a bias and aggressive media outlet is a government-funded corporation.
Image result for Q&A abc 
Maybe a lack of funding will make the ABC work harder then they already do. At the moment, they don’t have to work for anything. The news the Telegraph gets out to viewers costs them; the ABC’s news doesn’t cost them a thing.

If we can no longer have a freedom of speech, then there is no point in a national media outlet, and we can stop wasting our money on bias, socialist media that the ABC provides. Why should Fairfax have to work hard for their viewers and then the ABC goes around, advertisement free, running bias stories.

Just recently, the ABC broadcast a story about the Hamas and Israelites. They broke a story at the end about how the Israelites had killed 500 boys and girls in an attack on Hamas rebels. They ended with a picture of innocent children in the frame. While this story may be true, they are trying to make Israel seem like the bad guys. Killing 500 boys and girls. That’s terrible. How about telling the audience about what the Hamas rebels have done in the last 12 months? But then the Israelites wouldn’t seem so bad, would they? So we mustn’t do that!

Image result for Q&A abcThe next story they broke was the story of how Sydney Property developers had donated 20 000 dollars to the ACT branch of the Liberal Party, and requested for it to be given to the NSW party branch. The broadcasting outlet only managed to slip in that they ACT is only allowed to give 15 000 dollars annually to the NSW branch, so not all of the money would have been transferred. Once again, they failed to mention the real bad guys in this scene, the Eddie obeid scandal, only focusing on the proposed ‘bad guys’.

Can the ABC not realise that they are breaking the law? That by law, they are charged to offer a level playing field for all political sides and beliefs, but they totally forget this, even managing to bring politics into the Israel and Hamas ordeal. They need to get a move on to bring an equal viewpoint, or the funding will be cut again. They are now facing a Liberal Government, and after Turnbull’s loss, the party room will be watching him very closely, and monitoring his every proclamation. They will have their funding cut (as they should) by the Liberal Government if they do not offer a fairer and less socialist viewpoint on the major issues.

Wednesday, 20 July 2016

Turnbull's ministry fails the conservative base

Malcolm Turnbull smiles as he arrives at Government House
Malcolm Turnbull at Government House
After a crushing victory, where Turnbull managed to just scrape by, losing around 14 seats that Tony Abbott fought for at the 2013 election. After key plotters lost their seats like Peter Hendy and Wyatt Roy, Turnbull doesn’t seem to have gotten the message. The conservative base that the liberal party is there to serve wants to see Abbott raised to Prime Minister again, or at least into the ministry, but being the self-conscious egomaniacal politician that he is, he won’t listen to his base, and he will just have to learn again at the next election, if he makes it that far.

The ministry is the biggest since Paul Keating, and Turnbull seems to have stuffed it up. The Health minister is still in her position, Small Business has been moved to the outer ministry and Abbott has no position in the ministry.

The Health Minister
Barnaby Joyce is sworn in at Government House.
Barnaby Joyce, Deputy Prime Minister is sworn in
Sussan Ley managed to snatch back her portfolio of Health after failing her election campaign. While the Labour party campaigned ruthlessly to ‘save’ Medicare, in the Medi-scare campaign, but the silence was deafening on the Liberal side, and more particularly, no response was made from the Department of Health, or if there was one, it was too weak to combat anything the Labour Party pulled out of the hat.

Small Business
For a government that proclaims that small business will grow into big business, and will provide ‘growth and jobs’, it doesn’t seem so important after the election to Turnbull. Actually, it isn’t important enough to be included in the biggest ministry since the Keating era, so was Turnbull lying, or is he uncommitted to Small Business, traditionally the cornerstone of the Liberal Party base and the cornerstone of the economy and economical growth. Turnbull really seems to have stuffed up the election campaign. After making a big deal over the Australian Building and Construction Commission, he failed to mention it in his campaign, and then, after using his three word slogan (which he said he wouldn’t use) ‘jobs and growth’, he fails to make it a major portfolio, and makes it part of the junior ministry. Turnbull either needs to be kicked out, or kick out his advisors.
Sussan Ley has kept her portfolio of Health

The Abbott deal
Tony Abbott is a former Prime Minister, a position Malcolm Turnbull wouldn’t have a clue how to win (we’ve seen that at this election campaign) yet Abbott, the man that Turnbull got all of his policies from, fails to arrive at a portfolio. There were many opportunities for Abbott to arrive in ministry. The Health Department. Sussan Ley failed at this election, and was part of the loss of so many seats. She failed to rebut the lies proposed by the Labour party, yet she still stays in her portfolio. Turnbull is trying to avoid harming any other members of the Party. Instead of putting Abbott into a portfolio he deserves, he shoves him at the back of the party, too scared to let him loose. He has already upset most of the party, and doesn’t want to upset the party further, but by taking this weak route, he is actually upsetting the base of the Liberal Party. Those who voted for Abbott in 2013, and only voted Liberal this year because Australia can’t afford to fall into Labour hands.

Abbott did earn the position of Prime Minister. He would have won this election, would have won by more than Turnbull, and would have been a democratically elected prime minister, not a cheating backstabbing liar who doesn’t stand for any of the traditional Liberal values. Turnbull didn’t earn the position of Prime Minister, Tony Abbott did, and Turnbull is just riding the back of the Abbott wave. Maybe Turnbull will learn at the next election. That is, of course, if he makes it that far.

So Turnbull’s ministry is really a stuff-up. There are no real conservative liberals, the Turnbull backers, the left of the liberal party, are in the ministry, and only few in the ministry really deserve the position they are in. Other Turnbull-backers paid a high price for backing him, losing their seat at this election. Maybe Wyatt Roy and Peter Hendy will be more-wise in their choice in future, or even better, leave politics and leave us alone!


Tuesday, 19 July 2016

Batting for the wrong side.

Yesterday, Kevin Rudd made the desperate plea to the Australian Government, led by Malcolm Turnbull, for him to be endorsed by Australia for the position of UN Secretary-General, the position that will be campaigned for later this year with the ending of the current secretary late 2016.

The plea was accepted by Foreign Minister Julie Bishop and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull in a manner which most conservatives, the base of the Liberal party, would be disappointed and angered. Andrew Bolt, a hard-core conservative was certainly disappointed that Julie Bishop even seemed to entertain the idea. On Radio 2GB last night, while speaking with Steve Price, he explained his reasons for his disapproval of Kevin Rudd, who has caused so much lasting pain and harm financially for Australia.
The Current UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon
will leave in December 2016

Bolt stated that his main reasons were
-Rudd’s administration was the worst it could possibly be and
-It would mean that the UN would get even more muddled in Australia’s affairs.
Administration is one of the points that the UN should be worried about. Ever since he left parliament in 2013, Kevin Rudd took off for another country, not interested in the affairs of Australia, or about the people of Australia he proclaimed so many times that he was taking care of. Now, after seeing the ramifications of Rudd’s work as Prime Minister, surely the government, who proposes to be serving those of the right-wing of politics, would deny Rudd straight out. Surely there have to be better candidates than the man who knocked over the first domino towards half a million dollars of debt?

The UN is already muddling in Australia’s affairs, crying over minor human rights record inflictions that do not compare to that of other countries. So already, the UN, which has never served a purpose, is wasting its time. This global organisation, which so many leftist countries are in bed with, has not contributed towards any major problem in the world with their knee jerk reaction. The problem with endorsing Rudd is that the man would put his leftist ideas into action with his role as Secretary-General, increasing Foreign Aid amounts and energy goals for the future. He would not serve Australia, but just harm us more.

Image result for kevin rudd united nations
Kevin Rudd has asked
for endorsement by the
Australian Government
A writer for the Australian joined Bolt and Price on 2GB, with a different viewpoint. He stated that Rudd could not do any worse than the current Secretary-General is doing, that the UN is a useless organisation, and that it would make little difference if he was to gain the role or not. He also stated that he was one of the only, if not the only Australian candidate for Australian endorsement, but surely, in this age of political correctness and multiculturalist views, we could expect that this would not be the answer. The columnist ended saying ‘But it doesn’t matter. It isn’t as if it [The UN] is a major organisation’.
This just about sums up the United Nation’s work in the past decade. 

But why would Bishop even entertain the idea when Rudd has not only been harmful to Australia, but vicious to the leader she is so loyal to, Malcolm Turnbull. It has been recalled that during his time as opposition, when ‘valiantly’ fighting against the leftist ideas imposing into society, Rudd whispered loudly enough to reach the media chambers ‘just resign, just resign, just resign’ in a hateful tone. Whether Rudd would admit to such weak attack, is unclear, but why should the Liberal Government entertain the idea of supporting a socialist like Rudd.

The Liberal party, headed by the socialist’s in the party, need to stop batting for the wrong side, and start putting Australia back on the track to economic management and stability.