Saturday, August 21, 2010

Decision is made..

The decision is in, and I'm not happy!

On the House of Reps ballot, no one really impresses me. I have a lot more flexibility on the Senate ballot, so that'll have to be where I get out my frustrations and vote for REAL representatives.


House of Reps (Ryan Electorate)
I'm not hugely impressed by any of my local candidates (in Ryan).

Michael Johnson is well spoken but too conservative for me. He also indicated that he would vote to support Tony Abbott in a hung parliament, a BIG risk in my mind.

The greens response was not as thought out or considered as Michael's but their policies are generally ok.

The labor candidate hasn't impressed me at all, and nationally, they have engaged in a race to the right (or to the bottom) on issues such as asylum seekers and gay marriage. They've failed to deliver on the environment, they've bowed to pressure from the mining companies on taxing our limited resources fairly! - Poor effort guys!

In the House of Reps, Michael Johnson and The Greens should have been equal first place, but neither impress me enough to make me risk my vote. Which is what really shits me about this whole process!

Unfortunately after all of this, I have to vote labor.

The seat is marginal, and I don't want to risk an Abbott parliament. I'd like to have a local member that actually can represent me - but the shitty wedge politics of both major parties is forcing me to choose (this is exactly what they want to happen - the assholes!).


Given the importance of MANY other issues like the NBN, Mining Tax, Workers' entitlements. Their support for Economic stimulus, and spending on Infrastructure projects. I can't risk a vote for Abbott.


I will take the opportunity to harass the shit out of whatever candidate gets in over the next term - I despise both parties for putting me in this position!

The Senate
At least the senate casts a wide net over the whole state, I can choose from MANY more people.

Donald Bambrick, Peter Pyke, John Pyke (different parties - no relation?), E-Jay Lindsay-Park stand out in my mind, they are articulate, well spoken, and seem able to separate the bullshit from the truth.

I'm very impressed by Donald Bambrick, who on issue 4 (gay marriage) acknowledges that he's "Uncomfortable with this" - BUT is able to but his personal discomfort aside to support such legislation in the name of equality!

There are also some really well spoken politicians that are unfortunately batting for the wrong team. Noel Jackson is a well spoken individual, but his policies don't align with mine. Further, the Democratic Labor Party is a bunch of simplistic racist nuts in my opinion - they have some good policies sprinkled with generous servings of nonsense and racial division.

A One Nation senate candidate (Ian Nelson) I spoke to is the same! Quite reasonable and humanitarian, until it comes to the issue of "Dangerous Muslims and Lebanese". He's of course entitled to his opinion, but there's no way he could represent me!

Senate wise, I'll vote as per my Candidate Scores table, numbering every box under the line.

Good luck with whoever you vote for.

Bye.

QLD Senate - Tim Sheen (Australian Sex Party) - Phone Call

Spoke to Tim Sheen (QLD Senate - Australian Sex Party), asked him the 4 questions.

Quick Summary:
  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws]  *Has no considered response yet* 
  2. [The Internet Filter]  Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  *Has no considered response yet*
  4. [Gay marriage] For (#1 issue is separation of church and state)
Tim's main focus was on civil liberties, our discussion was mainly about how the current political system isn't working how it is supposed to with proper oversight and educated decision making.

Tim did discuss the other points (see below):

Monday, August 16, 2010

Not my representative: Intelligent people - Irrational Arguments

I was going to write specifically about a discussion I had with Ian Nelson (QLD Senate - One Nation). 


Instead I've decided to write about what frustrates me about intelligent, extremely passionate people with ideals based on incorrect facts and irrational arguments.


I just got off the phone to a One Nation senate candidate in Queensland - Ian Nelson. We had an excellent discussion about some of the "4 Questions".


The first impression I get is that here is a reasonable man. Like most of the candidates I've spoken to, he's well spoken and intelligent... 

QLD Senate - Larissa Waters (Greens) - Initial Reply

Larissa Waters responded in agreement with the Greens' policies. But did say she would be prepared to cross the floor as allowed by her party if she encountered an issue contrary to her own views.


Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] Against 
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  For
  4. [Gay marriage] For
Email below...



QLD Senate - Libby Connors (Greens) - Initial Reply

Libby Connors responded saying "I am number 2 on the Qld Greens senate ticket and support the Greens policies on all 4 issues"


Quick Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] Against 
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  For
  4. [Gay marriage] For

Email below...

QLD Senate - Jan McLucas (Labor) - Initial Reply

I received a response from the office of Jan McLucas (QLD Senate - Labor), a currently sitting senator. The response contained the usual statements along party lines and links to websites.


Quick Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For 
  2. [The Internet Filter] For
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  For
  4. [Gay marriage] Against (but for more equal rights)
Full response below...

QLD Senate - John Pyke (Limit Pokies Group) - Initial Reply

John Pyke (Limit Pokies Group) has responded - note the AEC candidate details list John Pyke without any party name - but he identifies himself as "Limit Pokies Group". 


John's response on Hardening up Border Protection laws was excellent!

Quick Summary

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws]  Against
  2. [The Internet Filter] For (conditional on it filtering out 'the real nasties')
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  For
  4. [Gay marriage] For Civil Unions (i think)

See the full email below...

QLD Senate - Mark White (Independent) - Initial Reply

Mark White (QLD Senate Candidate) has responded with a detailed response. Mark seems quite articulate on many issues. 

Quick Summary:
  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For 
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against (conditionally against)
  4. [Gay marriage] Against 'marriage' / For 'same rights as any de-facto couple'
Full email below...

Thursday, August 12, 2010

Started to Rate my Ideal Candidates

For my Candidate Scoring Card, I've been trying to work out how to rate these candidate answers!

The difficulty I have is working out based on the short answers which candidates I want to back.

Where the real value of the candidate interactions has been, is in the additional explanation they've given, or how they've responded after being sent the Chimp Manifesto, or challenged on a particular view.

So what I'm looking for in a My ideal candidate:

  • They should be intelligent and capable of understanding the intricacies of difficult concepts and decisions.
  • The should seek

QLD Senate - David Smith (Labor) - Initial Reply

David Smith responded directly, no elaboration:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For 
  2. [The Internet Filter] For
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  For
  4. [Gay marriage] Against

QLD Senate - Brett Mason (LNP) - Initial Reply

Brett Mason (QLD Senate - LNP) responded directly to the questions without elaborating:



  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For 
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against - The compulsory labor one
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against
  4. [Gay marriage] Against

QLD Senate - Donald Bambrick (Independent) - Initial Reply

Donald Bambrick responded but didn't give direct for/against answers. I've had to interpret his for/against based on the wording of his email - read the full reply to see the context and.
  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] *Against - interpreted from extended answer* 
  2. [The Internet Filter] *Against - interpreted from extended answer*
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  *For - interpreted from extended answer*
  4. [Gay marriage] *For - But extended answer*

Full email below...

QLD Senate - Keith Douglas (Australian Fishing and Lifestyle Party) - Initial Reply

Keith Douglas (QLD Senate - Australian Fishing and Lifestyle) has replied. With a longer and more involved response.

Quick Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For 
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against
  4. [Gay marriage] For (no opposition)

Full response below...

QLD Senate - Paul and Mary Spencer (Independent) - Initial Reply

Paul and Mary Spencer (QLD Senate - Independent) responded with a longer response. They did not respond on the Internet Filter question as they do not know about the issue.

Quick Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] Against 
  2. [The Internet Filter] *No Answer*
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against
  4. [Gay marriage] For (extended answer)
Full email linked below...

QLD Senate - E-Jay Lindsay-Park (Independent) - Initial Reply

E-Jay Lindsay-Park, Independent candidate for QLD sent quite a long and considered response, answering most questions directly.

Quick Summary
  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] Extended Answer - For
  2. [The Internet Filter] Extended Answer - Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Extended Answer - For
  4. [Gay marriage] No answer - says they'll "Represent the community"

Full email linked below.

Ryan Candidate - Sandra Bayley (Greens) - Initial Reply

Sandra sent a short response providing the following answers:

Response:

  1. [border protection] Against
  2. [internet filter] Against
  3. [price on carbon] For
  4. [gay marriage] For


I will follow this up later with more emails.

Monday, August 9, 2010

QLD Senate - Noel Jackson (D.L.P. - Democratic Labor Party) - Initial Reply

Quick Summary

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For
  2. [The Internet Filter] For
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against
  4. [Gay marriage] Against
I had quite an involved email exchange with Noel Jackson, after sending the Chimp Manifesto in reply to his answers. Noel seemed to take an interest in interacting with me, and picked up on some inconsistencies in the "Gay Marriage" issue and the history of marriage.


Full email below, and I'll post the other discussions we've had later.

QLD Senate - Mark Smith (Independent) - Didn't answer anything

Mark Smith (QLD Senate - Independent) replied, but well, he didn't really say anything at all other than
"I have covered some f your topics on marksmithforsenator.com and will be updating our site regularly during the election campaign. "
  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] *Can't Find Answer*
  2. [The Internet Filter] *Can't Find Answer*
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  *Can't Find Answer*
  4. [Gay marriage] *Can't Find Answer*
I went to his site, and well there's only a press release about the evils of poker machines - nothing on any of the questions asked - this is still true at time of writing. Can someone let me know if they find any updates on his site!

Brisbane Candidate - Ewan Saunders (Socialist Alliance) - Initial Reply

Pasodoff sent through Ewan Saunders' response for Brisbane Candidate Ewan Saunders (Socialist Alliance).

Quick Summary

  1. [border protection] Against
  2. [internet filter] Against
  3. [price on carbon] Against
  4. [gay marriage] For
Response is short and to the point as requested, full email below...

Brisbane Candidate - Mark A White (Family First) - Initial Reply

Pasodoff has forwarded the initial response for Mark White (Brisbane Candidate, Family First).


Quick Summary:

  1. [border protection] For
  2. [internet filter] Against
  3. [price on carbon] Against
  4. [gay marriage] Against


Mark makes a good point! 
"In line with your request I have answered for/against, which doesnt allow
for explaining why that position or what would make me change my position."


The intention is to follow up all these messages with a specific discussion on logic and reason - but initially the idea is to see who'll give a straight answer, and who can articulate their reasons.

Check the email for the full response.

NSW Senators are Next

Due to popular demand, I've started emailing NSW senators.

Same email, same aim.

I have 49 Senator's emails (from the AEC) - so I hope to get a few responses there.

I'm also going to start trying to track down emails or contact numbers for the ones I've missed in the first pass (due to missing info).

Stay tuned...

Brisbane Candidate - Andrew Bartlett (The Greens) - Initial Reply

Pasodoff has forwarded me the first of his correspondence with his candidates (seat of Brisbane).

Andrew Bartlett (Brisbane Candidate, The Greens) responded for/against and expanded - see the full email for details.

Quick Summary:

  1. [border protection] Against - (Read the full post)
  2. [internet filter] Against
  3. [price on carbon] For
  4. [gay marriage] For

Full email response below...

QLD Senate - Ian Nelson (One Nation) - Initial Reply

Ian Nelson answered the questions straight, no extra details:

Quick Summary

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against
  4. [Gay marriage] Against

QLD Senate - Wendy Francis (Family First) - Initial Reply

All of Wendy Francis' (QLD Senate - Family First) answers were extended, read the full post for details.

Quick Summary:


  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] Against
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against (in current form)
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against (we're not ready)
  4. [Gay marriage] Against



Who cares about science, logic or opinion!




How is it that we're happy to roll with science and stats when it agrees with us. But when it doesn't we dismiss it outright?

We still don't seem to be able to get past arguing about whether something WAS a good idea or not, even when waves of scientists and experts of different varieties chuck their hat in to the ring, no-one seems to care.

Interesting news article: Stiglitz sticks it to Abbott on stimulus 


Former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz has praised federal Labor's management of the nation's economy and its $42 billion stimulus package designed to stave off the worst of the global financial crisis.

But he's less stimulated by the coalition's economic ideas, saying the federal opposition had actually praised the architects of the global financial crisis.

At what point do you say to yourself. "Well, I've held this line long enough, the evidence is mounting that I'm wrong". 



Sunday, August 8, 2010

Ryan Candidate - Allan Vincent (Family First) - Initial Reply


Allan Vincent (Ryan Candidate - Family First) responded with a fair few words on each issue, see the full email below for details.

Quick Summary:

  1. [border protection] Extended Answer - (Read the full post)
  2. [internet filter] For - (Extended Answer)
  3. [price on carbon] Against (extended answer)
  4. [gay marriage] Against (extended answer)

See below for full response...

QLD Senate - Peter Findlay (Family First) - Initial Reply

Peter Findlay (Family First) didn't respond to anything except question 4 about gay marriage.

Quick Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] *No Answer*
  2. [The Internet Filter] *No Answer*
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  *No Answer*
  4. [Gay marriage] Against
He did however give me the "Won't somebody think of the children" line.
The Simpson's - Thinking of the children! :)
My reply to Peter is listed after his response.

Saturday, August 7, 2010

The Politics of Fear

The Politics of Fear

I read well written 'talk' from 2004 by Andy Blunden: "Fixing Australia: The politics of Fear" 

It's long but well researched and worth a read! Blunden talks about scare campaigns, why they work and how we perceive threats.

Today people tend to get alarmed about threats to them personally, or their children. People get afraid of new diseases, food additives, violent attacks by foreigners, sexual predators, and so on, while the very fabric of society which could keep them safe is being withered away...
...People claim something or someone to be a threat because really, they find the person or their lifestyle disgusting and morally reprehensible - and therefore dangerous. We heap shame on to the targets of our attack by painting them as threatening.
Politicians use these fears. Unfortunately, I think this constant harping on non-existent (or low probability) threats is turning otherwise reasonable and fair minded Australians in to rednecks.

QLD Senate - Peter Pyke (Independent*) - Initial Reply

Peter Pyke (Senate - Independent*) replied quickly with a detailed email.

Quick Summary:

  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] Extended Answer - "Tougher, but more intake" (see answer)
  2. [The Internet Filter] Extended Answer - Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Extended Answer - Against
  4. [Gay marriage] For - Registered Partnerships


See full post for the email..

* - Peter Says: "We launched and were about to be registered but someone called an election! That meant registration was cut off, so we decided to field Senate candidates anyway. In Qld, that's me."

QLD Senate - Russell Wattie (Independent) - Initial Reply

Quick Summary:
  1. [Hardening up Border Protection Laws] For
  2. [The Internet Filter] Against
  3. [A Price on Carbon / ETS]  Against
  4. [Gay marriage] For
I sent a reply saying that I disagreed with him on a few points (I got a reply welcoming me to democracy), and later sent the "Chimp Manifesto". I haven't heard back again yet.

Ryan Candidate - Michael Johnson (Independent) - Second Email

I sent a reply back to Michael Johnson (Ryan, Independent) thanking him for his quick response, and had ANOTHER reply within 15 minutes in which he explains his history and goes on to cover his values - while I appreciate the response, and he is super keen, he's has tried to get every bumper sticker in to one paragraph! :)

I am for freedom. I am for the individual. I am for entrepreneurship. I am for private property. I am for the rule of law. I am for separation of church and state. I am for empowering the weak and the meek. I am for equity and equality for opportunity. I am for the underdog and the over-governed. We need more respect and less dictation. I am for liberal values - which sit nicely with Australian values...


The whole email is below:


Friday, August 6, 2010

Ryan Candidate - Michael Johnson (Independent) - Initial Reply

Quick Summary:
  1. [border protection] Extended Answer - (Read the full post)
  2. [internet filter] Against
  3. [price on carbon] Against
  4. [gay marriage] Against

I have had quite a long exchange of emails with Michael, if you read the page on my views you'll see that I disagree with him on a few of these issues.

BUT - I must say, as a political candidate, his responses and his attention have been quite impressive!

I spoke to him on the phone for about an hour, and we've had a few thousand words of correspondence!

My Views

No, it's not an impartial blog.

So I've created a page about my views on these issues - "A Chimp's Manifesto". On this page I cover my views and thinking about the four questions.

I've now had some decent discussions with quite a few senators, and thought it important I expose myself so that any postings have context.

Cheers,
ObM.

Thursday, August 5, 2010

I will post responses!

I have already had someone ask, and yes, I'll be posting the results of my discussions - at the moment I'm having difficulty on deciding the format.

I also want to post the discussions I'm having with these guys - for example, I spoke on the phone last night to Michael Johnson (ex LNP, now independent candidate for Ryan) - we spoke at great length on philosophies and issues.

I need some way of articulating my thoughts about these people.

Emailing Your Candidates

I've sent the following email to my five house of reps candidates in the seat of Ryan (Queensland), and to every senate candidate in Queensland.

If you're so inclined, you might want to send the same questions to the candidates in your electorate, and let me know what responses and discussions you get in to! It would be very interesting to see the differences!

Who are the Candidates in Each Electorate

I'm ashamed to admit, I'm 33 years old, and have been voting for over a decade, but never before have I really stopped to think about who could be representing me.

For me it's always been a simple "pick the party" decision. I'd always wait till I got to the polling both, grab a how-to-vote card off a grey haired old lady, some fat guy, or some kids who'd rather be somewhere else, then just fill in the boxes like a political chimp just itching to get out!

Who should I vote for?

I hate politics! It makes me angry!

Both major parties suck, they spend every day in parliament disagreeing with each-other no matter what the topic is - there's no attempt to find a common ground.

I'll state upfront that I find Tony Abbott a scary individual, but I'm thus far quite unimpressed by Labor or the Greens.

The minor parties generally seem to be either 'single topic', quite extreme in their views, and some of the candidates are simply dumb as shit.

I really don't know who to vote for, so I figured I'd start writing to my potential candidates in my electorate, as well as all of the Senate candidates in Queensland.

I'm asking each candidate to give me a simple agree/disagree with the following four policies:
  1. Hardening up Border Protection Laws
  2. The Internet Filter
  3. A Price on Carbon / ETS
  4. Gay marriage

While these questions are important questions for me, they aren't the most important things. 

I picked these topics because they cover a wide range: humanitarian, technological, environmental and gay.

They are also very polarising issues, with often no straight answer (except for the Internet Filter, which is just plain stupid, expensive, simply won't work and will have unintended consequences).

It'll be interesting to see what they've got to say - if they reply at all! (by the time I got around to posting this entry, I've already had quite a few responses).