12m
What a pain Bolt is. As a media whizz, he's a plagiarist making out Trump is doing not a Serena but an Abbott. As a no idea's man of his own Andrew Bolt is less than original. He's a poor man's Walter Mitty flipping what's been written about Tony Abbott and trying to put Turnbull in his clothes. His problem they don't fit leaving Andrew Bolt looking an idiot.
Turnbull isn't swallowed by revenge he's a lawyer suggesting what lawyers Attorney General and now Julia Bishop have also said Dutton's presence in the Parliament is legally questionable and has always been questionable under Section 44 and an issue that needs to be resolved not by opinion but law and the High Court. Turnbull, unlike Abbott, is not trying to reinvent the Liberal Party at all he's addressing the question in the most Liberal way, by law.
Abbott, on the other hand, tried not only to reinvent the Liberal Party but the whole of Australian Democracy and the way our Parliament functions. He turned politics it into a zero end game and removed service as it's function leaving Australia and Australians with neither a utilitarian nor a practical government. It showed in the little number of Bills he had passed creating the Western worlds most expensive do-nothing government. Gillard also ran a minority government but passed almost twice as many Bills at a record rate providing Australia with service.
The foundation and fundamentals of the Liberal party were to be a broad church of individual opinions with consensus resolved by a majority vote. Abbott shut that down entirely breaking promises, captain's calls and closing down any lines of communication wit nope nope nope to everything. Australian Democracy relies on the Separation of Powers ensuring the freedom of religion, The lack of bias in Immigration due to race or ethnicity and an unbiased judiciary. Abbott wanted that changed and do that he needed to change the very principles on which the Menzies Party rested. His vision, however, rested on a handful of supporters and not the consensus of the majority of party members.
Turnbull's, on the other hand, was quite the opposite and believed in majority rule and welcomed diverse opinion. His current legal response to Dutton's predicament was clear up a legal question that has remained an unresolved sore in the Party and he suggested it be done in a very Liberal and pragmatic way by due process, hand the question to the judiciary and take the politics out of it and do it quickly because the issue is not going to go away.
Everything for Abbott was a World of Political Warcraft in which consensus means absolutely nothing unless totally what Abbott the leader wants. So politics is the never-ending preferred game to play when you don't want an answer, don't want consensus and don't want compromise. Julia Bishop's a lawyer as is the AG who like Turnbull suggested it was on Dutton's own shoulders, his responsibility to clear the issue up not by opinion but by a court ruling which he refuses to do.
Bolt supporting the Delcons doesn't want to face facts, reality or a fair outcome. He doesn't believe the work of government is the passing of bills rather it's the stopping of them and getting nothing done after all consensus is compromise and compromise is a loss. When Bolt says "I wonder can the Liberals be saved by anyone?" he's looking for a king not a government by agreement. We certainly know who he has in mind.
Some of Scott Morrison's own MPs, including one high-profile figure, could turn against him over Peter Dutton's eligibility to sit in parliament.
16m
" Identity politics backfire. Panicked by a fake story of Liberals bulling female MPs, Scott Morrison demands the Liberals preselect a woman for the Wentworth by-election. "Bolt
Bolt uses the word "demands" total bullshit Morrison admitted that the Liberal Party has too few women MPs 25% as compared with the ALPs 48%. However, unlike Abbott he abides by the consensus of the branch and Bolt typically declares it a conservative win proving there is no intention of any Party unity falsely claiming merit won the day when it wasn't at all the case.
" But local Liberals members still pre-select a man for Wentworth, Dave Sharma, preferring to choose candidates for their abilities rather than their gender. In fact, the final run-off was between three men, after two weaker women were eliminated: "Bolt The fact is by endorsing Mr Sharma, Wentworth preselectors heeded the calls of
John Howard and Malcolm Turnbull won the day for consensus and majority rule. Morrison "wished" for a woman and didn't "demand" one at all, as Bolt would like us to believe. So no he wasn't "humiliated" at all.
Bolt argument on quotas and lack of merit don't hold water when Conservatives like Eric Abetz and an anti-quota man sits in Parliament only because of a quota system they are both so against. So Abetz according to Andrew Bolt isn't there on ability at all. They can't have it both ways, can they? Bolt certainly wants it both ways nevertheless and is a great supporter of this dip stick conservative elected to Parliament on a quota system.
The result it seems is that Liberals can't seem to get women into a Party that seems so misogynistic. Or is it that women naturally prefer the ALP because the party treats them as second class. What's Bolt's term " frightbats"
1h
Bolt talks about "group think' then links you to Breitbart or The Spectator, Quadrant, Powerline etc etc etc he certainly knows what "group think" is and they aren't left-wing. Then on any other day, he'll tell you all our cultural institutions are run by the left, Arts, Education, anything slightly resembling HASS Humanities and the Social Sciences the thinking rather than training disciplines is dangerous. However, News Corp the biggest media opinionator in the Anglosphere isn't. If that's not a contradiction what is?
Bolt's fact " The comments were brought to light in a video leaked exclusively to Breitbart News by an anonymous source."Bolt
Why does Andrew Bolt makes no reference to the update in this article guess he hoped a number of his readers don't read more than his banners.
Update — After Breitbart News published this article, a Google spokesperson replied to a request for comment with the following statement:
“At a regularly scheduled all-hands meeting, some Google employees and executives expressed their own personal views in the aftermath of a long and divisive election season. For over 20 years, everyone at Google has been able to freely express their opinions at these meetings. Nothing was said at that meeting, or any other meeting, to suggest that any political bias ever influences the way we build or operate our products. To the contrary, our products are built for everyone, and we design them with extraordinary care to be a trustworthy source of information for everyone, without regard to political viewpoint.”
Is Bolt simply trying to counter arguments of Russian collusion and use of Google and Facebook to promote Trump to SCOTUS? However, counter facts with just innuendo and opinion? He's modern day flat earther struggling against fact checkers and data collectors science and analysers. Opinion are like arseholes everyone's got one but reality then remains unexplained.
You won't hear this from Andrew Bolt
No comments:
Post a Comment