SIMPLETONS IN SANTA SUITS
Four-time Walkley Award winning political commentator and Churchill Fellow, has returned to the fray over concern that the integrity of news dissemination is continually being threatened by a partisan media.
The belief that only bogan fools vote Labor or Green gains credence when you notice those who leave university with a law or medical degree. GPs and solicitors are among the dumbest people I have known and they all have dutifully joined Labor or the Greens. Is it any wonder Whitlam and his successors all wanted free university education.
Let’s take the High Court. It has unwittingly thrown Australia into a Constitutional wilderness, as I said it would do right here way back on October 13. http://pickeringpost.com/story/high-court-courts-chaos/7666.
That mob of misfits either hasn’t a clue or purposefully wants to destroy the joint.
The sole Green in the Lower House, Adam Bandt, suggested today that Labor and the Greens will turn up to work next week anyway to set about passing legislation in the Government’s absence.
Adam Bandt’s first port of call after uni was as a lawyer for Slater & Gordon so I guess he, along with Julia Gillard and others, can be excused for being that stupid. Both were S & G lawyers so is it any wonder this Labor law firm is fighting insolvency?
The High Court was asked to rule on the legitimacy of Government's $100 million funding of the SSM “survey”, it ruled the Government could so do.
But the Government had declared SSM legislation was to be contingent on the “survey” outcome… and that should have changed the ballgame for the High Court because legislation can only be contingent on a referendum not even on a plebiscite, let alone a flawed, voluntary, postal “survey”.
A non-compulsory postal vote that can be mailed at any time over a period of three months is unconstitutional if the Government has stated its intention to legislate on the result. A postal survey carries no right to legislate, especially when, after less than one week the voting result had already been decided.
The money and time spent on advertising over the following two months was an utter waste, and the result certainly no guide as to the public’s wont.
Katter has also suggested legislation can be carried without the Government.... idiot!
For any “survey”, plebiscite or referendum to have legitimacy, voting must be carried out on a certain pre-allocated day, allowing for the effluxion of the weeks that have been set aside for campaigning by all sides.
By the time the dishonest “Marriage Equality” campaign was completed after one week, the majority of eager responders had already voted. The argument against same sex marriage had just begun to gain strength, but it was all too late... and they knew it.
There was plenty the High Court could have ruled on whether within or without an imaginary terms of reference. But had the High Court even bothered warning of the likely illegitimacy of a three-month long “survey”, the Government would have been obliged to take a different course, despite that it could have legislated for SSM anyway.
Maybe the High Court was busy doing crosswords when the question of dual citizenship needed their attention. People were kicked out of Parliament for having British parentage but these dopey buggers on the Bench didn’t notice that every Parliamentarian had (and always has) sworn an oath of allegiance to the UK monarchy and its followers, which makes a mockery of dual allegiances.
Were these High Court galahs and expensive counsels for the applicants sound asleep? The High Court was ruling on something that had already been determined, and they didn’t even notice. At the very least its ruling clearly contradicted the Constitution that it is responsible for defending.
Yes it could have if the "survey" was carried out Constitutionally
I suspect that the SSM question framed and conducted properly (and legally) would almost certainly have produced an entirely different result.
The Parliamentary idiots who believe they can legislate in the Government’s absence after the Speaker has changed the sitting dates, are playing with their dongers. Of course there's a good chance they'll change their minds when they realise they could be faced with their share of the $1 million a day it costs to run the joint.
This chaos has only just begun. But who gives a stuff?
Fair dinkum, is there anything that’s not unprecedented about this Government?