Premier Mike Rann assaulted

[Gozu]

The comrades are very quiet............

Speaking of comrades it was humorous seeing Cory Bernardi taken to the cleaners by one Janet Albretschen on Q&A tonight.

That's an interesting interpretation of the conversation on qanda, and not what I saw happening..
I don't entirely agree with Cory's views, but that show was just a group of individuals all convinced they were right, and trying to shout each other down.
He was simply a bit more civilised, and was prepared to shut up after stating his position, rather than carry on bullying like the highly biased advertising man.
The show's format offers no possibility of resolving issues or being anything but a slug-fest
Germaine Greer was probably the most reasonable and balanced person on the show..

I can understand from your posts here that you would prefer the abusive and bullying approach to rational debate of the issues.

It's exactly what was happening on climate change. Albretschen despite being a fellow right-winger had a real go at him about the far-right of the Party undermining Turnbull. If you can't remember that I'm sure it will be up on the ABC's website to have a look. I admit I've heard otherwise of Bernardi but he was pretty civilised on the show last night. He didn't start losing the plot like Minchin did. I thought Germaine Greer was excellent and that ad-man was a bit of a clown and yes bullying. He thought the show was all about him (I've never seen him before) and didn't seem to have much behind his points when he wasn't trying desperately to upstage the right-wingers.

Once again you thought wrong, Psyber

[Gozu]

At the absolute worst Rann's been cheating on his wife, so what? That would be a personal & private matter between the people involved and has nothing to do with his ability to do his job.

Maybe so Gozu, but I reckon it will be enough to cost him votes, especially if is true and he continues to plead innocent and deny it...I would say if it is true there will be some worries in the Labor camp

I agree I have no doubt if true it would cost him votes. I can't see how it could possibly be enough for Labor to lose office though. I've said on here before I've never liked Rann so even if it were to cost him his job so be it. I don't respect him at all and to me he's always been a bit like a wolf in sheeps clothing more a Liberal than a Labor man and he's willing to trash a lot of what the Labor Party has always been about purely to continue to hold on to power.

[Psyber]

It's exactly what was happening on climate change. Albretschen despite being a fellow right-winger had a real go at him about the far-right of the Party undermining Turnbull. If you can't remember that I'm sure it will be up on the ABC's website to have a look. I admit I've heard otherwise of Bernardi but he was pretty civilised on the show last night. He didn't start losing the plot like Minchin did. I thought Germaine Greer was excellent and that ad-man was a bit of a clown and yes bullying. He thought the show was all about him (I've never seen him before) and didn't seem to have much behind his points when he wasn't trying desperately to upstage the right-wingers.
Once again you thought wrong, Psyber

Actually, he stated clearly and openly that he was a sceptic about anthropogenic global warming, and that because of this he was personally doubtful about the value or point of the scheme.
IIRC he also said he was part of the democratic debate in the party and that in the end the party, would decide policy democratically after that internal debate.

I have been reading ancient history again lately [including the footnoted quotes from old sources] and the information I've met about the Romans growing grapes in the future "Yorkshire" region in 200AD, and Greenland being green in the 10th century and only becoming too cold to be a viable colony in the mid 12th century, makes me sceptical that "global warming" is anything but a slow recovery towards the normal state of things over a long cycle, after a very cold period between the 12th and mid 19th centuries.

Nevertheless, I join with the speaker - I think it was Germain - who suggested we should be planning to reduce pollution rather than just trade it.
Personally I'd like to get rid of the diesels [and bio-diesels] discharging cancer causing agents into the air, and all the other similar stuff we put into the environment and our food.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
http://www.rag.org.au/buc/cancerrisk.htm
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/conte ... tearea=PED

[Psyber]

At the absolute worst Rann's been cheating on his wife, so what? That would be a personal & private matter between the people involved and has nothing to do with his ability to do his job.

Maybe so Gozu, but I reckon it will be enough to cost him votes, especially if is true and he continues to plead innocent and deny it...I would say if it is true there will be some worries in the Labor camp

IIRC Bob Hawke's support in the polls went up after Blanche's book revealed his series of affairs.
[Bob was smart and had it revealed in as favourable way as possible, before it came out some other way.]

[redandblack]

The comrades are very quiet............

Perhaps they're just enjoying the hyperbole from you lot acting like dogs off a leash.

Not sure if my favourite is the Reichstag comparison or the Goebbels one

Besides, I did contribute, but nobody wanted to remember the Godwin Grech feeding frenzy

or maybe after a period of mouthing off like unexpected and temporary victors, you’ve copped some of your own crap to face. Enjoy the taste of what you’ve been dishing up every week comrade

And it is appalling the amount of my tax money that is used to ply me with propoganda in this State - something that cannot be denied

Well Jimmy, I'm not a frequent visitor to this forum lately and I doubt you'll find anything I've posted where I've been crowing. As for enjoying the taste of what I've been dishing up, it's a bit difficult when I haven't been dishing up anything. Also, I'm not a 'comrade'.

I've followed politics long enough to know that success is short-lived and cyclical.

I have, however, enjoyed your novel interpretation of events.

[southee]

At the absolute worst Rann's been cheating on his wife, so what? That would be a personal & private matter between the people involved and has nothing to do with his ability to do his job.

Maybe so Gozu, but I reckon it will be enough to cost him votes, especially if is true and he continues to plead innocent and deny it...I would say if it is true there will be some worries in the Labor camp

It will cost him bundle loads of votes......funny isn't it.....the media has gone awfully quiet. I wonder why???

Bloody shits me the Labour party have so much control over the media in this state......

[Psyber]

Bloody shits me the Labour party have so much control over the media in this state......

No Southee, the media owners have so much control over the Labor Party in this state - that's why they support them and hush up for them...
[My Labor contact admitted that in SA no party can win without our local media on side.]

[southee]

Bloody shits me the Labour party have so much control over the media in this state......

No Southee, the media owners have so much control over the Labor Party in this state - that's why they support them and hush up for them...
[My Labor contact admitted that in SA no party can win without our local media on side.]

Psyber.....I heard Mike Ranns brother works in the media here, is that true?? (Dont know if you would know or not??)

[Psyber]

I don't know about that one, but I'll try to check next time I see my contact.

[Gozu]

Yeah The Advertiser is biased TOWARDS the ALP

I think Rann's brother works in some sort of PR/media type company.

[Psyber]

Yeah The Advertiser is biased TOWARDS the ALP
I think Rann's brother works in some sort of PR/media type company.

The Advertiser is only biased towards its owner's interests, like all the media, but their ability to sway public opinion influences the parties.

[Gozu]

I agree and yes I know it's used to sway public opinion. News Ltd (The Advertiser) have such a monopoly in this state with no daily competition, The Independent Weekly while a far more balanced and credible paper just doesn't have the financial backing of an Uncle Rupert.

The need to craft messages through The Advertiser couldn't have been more apparent with Rann's backyard happy snaps pic last week (I don't get The Advertiser so only knew about this last night when catching up on last week's Crikey emails which I assume is in part why Jimmy was going nuts about media minders). It was damage control stuff by Rann & his PR crew trying desperately to get on top of things before they spin out of control which can happen with The Advertiser and it's pro-Liberal Party agenda.

[redandblack]

I have to laugh at right-wingers complaining about the Advertiser's bias to Labor. Until recently, the 'Tiser had been outrageously biased to the right for more than 50 years, a fact even Psyber would readily admit, I would guess.

[Psyber]

I have to laugh at right-wingers complaining about the Advertiser's bias to Labor. Until recently, the 'Tiser had been outrageously biased to the right for more than 50 years, a fact even Psyber would readily admit, I would guess.

I can't comment on the last 10 years as I wasn't getting it while in Melbourne.
My current Labor contact, whom I quoted in another thread, said he thought John Olson lost his last election because The Advertiser turned against him.
They had, he said, favoured Dean Brown but not Olson.

I haven't seen them as consistently "biased to the right" as you suggest, but they have tended to lean towards conservatism - I guess it then depends on what you see as "right".
However, they never did publish the real reason Don Dunstan sacked the Commissioner of Police at the time - Salisbury - but helped Don keep the lid on it..
A CIB officer told me much later that Don wanted the file on him as a suspect in a criminal matter.
So, they've obviously swung around a bit over the longer term.
Mind you the ALP was more conservative in its early years when it supported the idea of the While Australia Policy.

[redandblack]

Psyber, Psyber, oh dear.

Another conspiracy theory about Salisbury and Don Dunstan.

For goodness sake, there was a Royal Commission which totally exonerated Dunstan and made it clear that Salisbury was way out of line. To me, the Royal Commission far outweighs a conversation between you and an anonymous policeman supposedly over something which was never mentioned at the tyime or since.

As for the Advertiser, picking out 1 election at the end of a constant 50 or more years of total conservatism just proves the point.

Psyber, open your eyes to the truth, instead of constant anti-left conspiracy theories.

[Psyber]

Psyber, Psyber, oh dear.
Another conspiracy theory about Salisbury and Don Dunstan.
For goodness sake, there was a Royal Commission which totally exonerated Dunstan and made it clear that Salisbury was way out of line. To me, the Royal Commission far outweighs a conversation between you and an anonymous policeman supposedly over something which was never mentioned at the tyime or since.
As for the Advertiser, picking out 1 election at the end of a constant 50 or more years of total conservatism just proves the point.
Psyber, open your eyes to the truth, instead of constant anti-left conspiracy theories.

From my perspective my on line friend, with all due respect, you seem to be hopelessly blinded by your radical bent.
What Royal Commissions find may depend a bit on the appointees, and the crafting of the terms of reference, which a local Barrister friend of mine has also said.
I was talking to two senior CIB officers about another matter when it came up and both supported that version of events, and seemed quite calmly sincere and matter of fact about it.

[redandblack]

Psyber, Psyber, oh dear.
Another conspiracy theory about Salisbury and Don Dunstan.
For goodness sake, there was a Royal Commission which totally exonerated Dunstan and made it clear that Salisbury was way out of line. To me, the Royal Commission far outweighs a conversation between you and an anonymous policeman supposedly over something which was never mentioned at the time or since.

As for the Advertiser, picking out 1 election at the end of a constant 50 or more years of total conservatism just proves the point.
Psyber, open your eyes to the truth, instead of constant anti-left conspiracy theories.

From my perspective my on line friend, with all due respect, you seem to be hopelessly blinded by your radical bent. What Royal Commissions find may depend a bit on the appointees, and the crafting of the terms of reference, which a local Barrister friend of mine has also said.
I was talking to two senior CIB officers about another matter when it came up and both supported that version of events, and seemed quite calmly sincere and matter of fact about it.

Psyber, I don't suppose it has ever occurred to you that someone who has a different view from you might not necessarily be "radical''."

I'm sure that the Royal Commissioners weren't part of a set-up. They found that Salisbury had a duty to report to the SA Government, not the Queen; a finding that I thought was so obviously correct that no-one except a conspiracy theorist or someone blinded by their ideology would disagree with.

As for your CIB people, you would have to accept that, although we've now gone from one officer to two, their allegation has never seen the light of day, despite several conservative governments since then. Apart from your CIB men, no-one has ever mentioned it before, as far as I know. You don't think that your slant on those events might be somewhat more unproven and radical than mine?

PS: The Commissioner was Roma Mitchell and her report is unequivocal. It says exactly what I said, and exposed a sorry chapter in this state's history.

How you could cast aspersions on its conclusions is way beyond me, but I suppose radicals have to hang on to something

[Gozu]

News Ltd (Sunday Mail) at it's best, what are they part of the attacker's defence team now?

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 01,00.html

Of course down towards the bottom of the piece "There is no suggestion of impropriety on the part of either Mr Rann or Ms Chantelois but there have been calls from a number of quarters for the Premier to explain the circumstances surrounding the friendship". Nah no suggestion whatsoever

[Psyber]

R&B - as I said it is perspective. What looks moderate to one looks radical to another.
So yes, it has occurred to me that you look radical lefty to me, and presumably I look radical right to you.
Lots of things get hushed up. Our society is not necessarily less corrupt than others, just less overt about it.
I am more inclined to believe people I know and have had tome to assess the balance and rationality of - in this case a senior CIB man, and his off-sider who backed his statement up, and my barrister friend who commented about crafting terms of reference determining outcomes - than official "findings" engineered by vested interests.

None of these sources were as emotive about the issues as you are being in your wording.
I always doubt the judgement of the emotive..

[redandblack]

R&B - as I said it is perspective. What looks moderate to one looks radical to another.
So yes, it has occurred to me that you look radical lefty to me, and presumably I look radical right to you.
Lots of things get hushed up. Our society is not necessarily less corrupt than others, just less overt about it.
I am more inclined to believe people I know and have had tome to assess the balance and rationality of - in this case a senior CIB man, and his off-sider who backed his statement up, and my barrister friend who commented about crafting terms of reference determining outcomes - than official "findings" engineered by vested interests.

None of these sources were as emotive about the issues as you are being in your wording.
I always doubt the judgement of the emotive..

Well, Psyber, in this case I agree with your first three sentences and also your last, although the last might apply equally in this case.

I also understand you believing your CIB friends, although I would point out that the police and Don Dunstan were hardly best friends and the Salisbury Royal Commission slammed the police. However, I'm sure they're not biased. As for crafting terms of reference, as a fan of 'Yes, Minister', I agree. In this case, though, it wouldn't have mattered what the terms of reference were. The result was clear and damning and the Commissioner was a very respected judge.

The Institute of Criminology is hardly a biased source, so here's their summing up.

http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publications/p ... /ch7t.aspx

Psyber, I respect your viewpoint, but I would submit I'm no more ''emotive'' than you. What I have written sticks as closely to the facts, without emotion, as any of your arguments, which, dare I say, can tend to be tainted by your leanings as well. Perhaps you could resist the temptation to presume that you are the only one here whose thoughts are pure, unarguably correct and superior