Jump to content

Not content to destroy American politics, Rupert Murdoch's Sky News will destroy Australian politics in ten years


Recommended Posts

Watch out Australia, when Fox News comes, it will slap the shit out of your common sense.

 

Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News will radicalise politics in Australia within a decade just as Fox News has undermined democracy in the United States, Kevin Rudd has told a parliamentary inquiry into media diversity.

“For those concerned about the cumulative impact of Fox News in America on the radicalisation of US politics, the same template is being followed with Sky News in Australia,” Rudd told the Senate in a written submission. “We will see its full impact in a decade’s time.”

 

The former Labor prime minister and his Liberal counterpart, Malcolm Turnbull, will be called to give evidence at the Senate inquiry into media diversity set up last year. The inquiry will examine the dominance of News Corp Australia and its impact on democracy.

The Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young won support for the inquiry following the popularity of Rudd’s petition for a royal commission into the Murdoch media, which was unsuccessful but garnered more than half a million signatures.

The terms of reference for the Senate inquiry do not mention News Corp Australia or Murdoch but call for an examination of the “state of media diversity, independence and reliability in Australia and the impact that this has on public interest journalism and democracy”.

In his submission to the inquiry, which is due to report in August, Rudd says Fox News is a “legitimising echo-chamber for this increasingly far-right, extremist worldview” and is the model for News Corp’s Sky News Australia, which has a line-up of rightwing commentators, including Andrew Bolt, Peta Credlin and Alan Jones, at night.

 

Guardian Australia has reported Sky News videos are growing in popularityonline on YouTube and Facebook, particularly with an international audience, as they pushed Trumpist conspiracy theories including that the US election was illegitimate.

Rudd says Murdoch’s “template for America”, which was to “demonise the agency of government”, is also his “vision for Australia” and that Sky News Australia is a vehicle for this radicalisation.

Rudd has clashed with Sky, recently winning a legal stoush with Credlin who had to apologise for saying his petition was a “data harvesting exercise”.

“It’s a template which Murdoch has believed would maximise his personal, business and ideological interests – by demonising the agency of government; undermining essential government regulation; and most importantly by minimising corporate and personal tax,” Rudd states in his submission.

“Trump achieved all three. It’s also Murdoch’s vision for Australia.”

Rudd outlines seven political and public policy areas that he believes are affected by the dominance of the Murdoch media, due to its ownership of major metropolitan mastheads in every major city except Western Australia and the Australian Capital Territory, as well as magazines and websites.

The areas are the National Broadband Network, debt and deficit, climate change, race, corruption, biased coverage of political parties and free speech.

“Murdoch’s blatant race-baiting has seen it targeted for criticism by a wide variety of ethnic communities across Australia,” he writes.

The former member for Griffith is not a fan of the news media code currently being examined by another parliamentary committee because it will improve News Corp’s bottom line.

“Increased revenue for News Corp from social media ‘clicks’ could create an added incentive to produce sensationalised or deceptive coverage,” Rudd said.

“Digital platforms will also be required to provide advanced notice of algorithmic changes – information that will be largely useless to industry minnows, but of huge benefit to larger players like News Corp which have the resources to process and act on that information.”

Rudd’s major recommendation in his submission is to call a royal commission into the Murdoch media – a proposal already rejected by both sides of politics.

He also recommends parliament legislate a minimal level of funding for the ABC after the public broadcaster lost $783m in funding since the Coalitioncame to power in 2014.

“The government of the day would be allowed to add to this funding level as they see fit but, if they want to cut below this funding level, they should be required to legislate and therefore to obtain approval from the Senate,” the former prime minister states.

In its submission to the inquiry last month the ABC said it cannot fill the void created by the closure of hundreds of newsrooms in suburban and regional Australia.

The first public hearing of the media diversity inquiry is scheduled for the end of next week.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/10/kevin-rudd-says-sky-news-is-using-fox-model-to-radicalise-politics-in-australia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Rupe is 89 - he'll be dead soon.

By all accounts his son & heir is a better person.

Although that's a pretty low bar.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Rupe is 89 - he'll be dead soon.

By all accounts his son & heir is a better person.

Although that's a pretty low bar.

Lachlan is a faithful daddy's man. James is a rebel, resigned from the board and is decidely anti-daddy. The Fox empire will remain in the proper hands, we all know what that means.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Lachlan is a faithful daddy's man. James is a rebel, resigned from the board and is decidely anti-daddy. The Fox empire will remain in the proper hands, we all know what that means.

Yep two men sit atop a pyramid of bullshit impervious to any consequences because they are wealthy beyond your wildest dreams and they can ruin anyone with balls to come after them.

The lies and innuendo are making them richer while they take a blowtorch to truth and integrity.

These people should be accountable to the dumbing down of America but they won’t because the dumb actually revere people so rich.

Sadly Australia is not too far behind.

Truth or alternate truth anyone?

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Navig8tor said:

Yep two men sit atop a pyramid of bullshit impervious to any consequences because they are wealthy beyond your wildest dreams and they can ruin anyone with balls to come after them.

The lies and innuendo are making them richer while they take a blowtorch to truth and integrity.

These people should be accountable to the dumbing down of America but they won’t because the dumb actually revere people so rich.

Sadly Australia is not too far behind.

Truth or alternate truth anyone?

"The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which." -  George Orwell 1945

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is what OZ can look forward to . .  

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2021/2/19/2017030/-The-GOP-just-saw-its-life-flashing-before-its-eyes-so-Fox-News-leaped-into-action

Fox knew fully well that assertions about renewable energy, the Green New Deal, or wind turbines contributing to this catastrophic power breakdown wouldn’t withstand scrutiny. Its leadership knew fully well that such assertions would soon be debunked by other outlets. Yet the network allowed its army of pundits and “opinion journalists” to relentlessly highlight these lies over and over again to its viewership, with nearly the same degree of vigor and intensity it used in creating a false narrative about the 2020 election being “stolen.” 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Navig8tor said:

Yep two men sit atop a pyramid of bullshit impervious to any consequences because they are wealthy beyond your wildest dreams and they can ruin anyone with balls to come after them.

The lies and innuendo are making them richer while they take a blowtorch to truth and integrity.

These people should be accountable to the dumbing down of America but they won’t because the dumb actually revere people so rich.

Sadly Australia is not too far behind.

Truth or alternate truth anyone?

Sounds like your talking about Zuckerberg

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Present gov is supporting Murdoch by legislation to make Google and Facebook pay for news content......

News and Murdoch in the same sentence. :lol:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mid said:

given that Oz in general is about a decade behind 'merica ... Rudd is correct :(

I don’t know if it makes a difference, but Australia is not big on cable and Fox had penetration with that format. Will he have success without it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Mid said:

given that Oz in general is about a decade behind 'merica ... Rudd is correct :(

In terms of social policy, Oz is several decades ahead of the US - at the very least. 

Some of their achievements are downright remarkable. 

How many dish washers in the US do you know who get paid vacations, health care, retirement and more. 

I sure wish Gringolandia was that far behind. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

In terms of social policy, Oz is several decades ahead of the US - at the very least. 

Some of their achievements are downright remarkable. 

How many dish washers in the US do you know who get paid vacations, health care, retirement and more. 

Not any longer... the current government is working hard to get rid of all that...... Part time, contract labour is now the go, which eliminates paid holidays, superanuation responsibilities which theoretically is covered by extra wage rates, but in reality aren’t.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I don’t know if it makes a difference, but Australia is not big on cable and Fox had penetration with that format. Will he have success without it?

IIRC Fox was bundled with many basic cable packages.  The way to kill Fox and the others piggybacking their propaganda on cable packages is to make cable channel choices more granular.  It always bugged the shit out of me that I couldn't choose and pay for exactly the channels I wanted. 

Cable is dying, however.  We have a conversation every month or so about whether or not to ditch it.  We are quite close.  Were it not for F1, it would be gone already.  We dropped cable for a while, then got it back when the company offered to provide the service for less than half price.

The publicly funded channels should always be free everywhere, of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, badlatitude said:

I don’t know if it makes a difference, but Australia is not big on cable and Fox had penetration with that format. Will he have success without it?

cable is doomed - heading the way of the 8 track, audio cassette,VHS and DVD - all toast

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

Present gov is supporting Murdoch by legislation to make Google and Facebook pay for news content......

And, funniest of all, Meli is actually supporting Murdoch, Stokes and Packer!

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gouvernail said:

Perhaps the Aussies should ship Dog and Venom down there to help everybody understand why the new way is the good way. 

Back in your box. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ease the sheet. said:

She's no fan of that triumvirate.

She's making her case in support of Facebook bogans.

I know. That's the funny bit. She got well & truly sucked in by their propaganda and thinks what the Feds are doing to Fakebook & Google is a good thing, yet is totally blind to the obvious consequences of their riposte - until they actually do it, and then the moaning runs at full volume.

Too funny.

Interesting article in the SMH on this today. Funnily enough I managed to both find it & read it without the slightest assistance of either Fakebook or google. Funny that.

Adblock Pro is a big help though.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, dylan winter said:

cable is doomed - heading the way of the 8 track, audio cassette,VHS and DVD - all toast

As long as my building bills me for it, it is piped in here for "free".  By the way, having low utility bills beats the fuck out of turning the planet into a pile of shit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, dylan winter said:

cable is doomed - heading the way of the 8 track, audio cassette,VHS and DVD - all toast

Cable was god in it's time because you couldn't broadcast real time video like Free to Air TV to multiple users over the internet without a billion dollar server farm and a humungous fat pipe. This is because the internet doesn't support multicast traffic, only unicast.  if two or more people want to watch the same video at the same time multicasting only needs to send one stream  whereas unicast requires a video stream per user. Throw a thousand users at a stream and you get the difference.

Then the world moved to time-shifted video (unicast) like Youtube and Netflix, internet bandwidth started to get real and the almighty cable network's days were numbered.

In Aus both coax networks have been bought up by the NBN and are now migrated across as another last mile copper connection for the internet.

Lack of multicast support is one of the biggest drawbacks to the internet, but the complexity in managing it is still beyond our capability.  

  

   

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2021 at 10:18 PM, badlatitude said:

Watch out Australia

Fascists, statists, racists, and neo-Marxists are always the first to demand censorship. 

Which are you?

221f1376491620820ae361b05ffc35e6.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2021 at 4:41 AM, AJ Oliver said:

Rudd is entirely correct . . 

Oz please beware. 

No Rudd is an angry delusional arsehole still bitter about being dumped by his own party and struggling to try and make himself relevant. I met him a few times. A completely self absorbed fuckwit. Rup already has his hands everywhere and there are already plenty platforms for the right wingnuts to spew their bile down here. We won't suffer the same fate as the US because 50% of the population are not morons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

We won't suffer the same fate as the US because 50% of the population are not morons.

What about the other 50% ?? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

No Rudd is an angry delusional arsehole still bitter about being dumped by his own party and struggling to try and make himself relevant. I met him a few times. A completely self absorbed fuckwit.

This.

Didn't stop him sucking up trying to get Australia spending a shit-ton of money and whatever influence we had getting him a gig at the UN. Fortunately even our fuckwit PM at the time refused to touch *that* one with a barge pole.

Anyway, 50% of Aussies *are* below the average in intelligence. It's just that our average is 10 IQ points higher than the USA's point, but give us time and we'll get there too.

Best way of improving IQ - get off of Fakebook and the like. Well, it might not actually *improve* the IQ but it would remove a forum for those below the cutoff mark to spew their rubbish so freely.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just listened to about 30 seconds of FAUX "News" US - Feb 21st. 

During that time the announcer (with a Brit/Oz accent!) referred to the "ChiCom 19" and the "Bloody butcher" Cuomo bros. 

No attempt was made to justify the use of those terms. 

Do you have that on your major tv networks ???  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AJ Oliver said:

I just listened to about 30 seconds of FAUX "News" US - Feb 21st. 

During that time the announcer (with a Brit/Oz accent!) referred to the "ChiCom 19" and the "Bloody butcher" Cuomo bros. 

No attempt was made to justify the use of those terms. 

Do you have that on your major tv networks ???  

NFI. Haven't owned a TV in over 20 years. If I want to waste time watching bullshit that's what YouTube exists for. All the sailing porn you can stand.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of things in Oz’s favour...

we don’t have the large fundamentalist religious base of the USA, so it’s hard to get the fire started if you don’t have millions of “believers” who have already turned away from evidence and fact based thinking.

we have already had a couple of right wing political wankers have a go and flame out, so the far right has already pissed in their own water.

our industrial base is stuffed, so we no longer have people worried about jobs at Ford or GM

we don’t take our politics as seriously as many in the US, and we haven’t conflated our personal worth with our country of origin. We change our our PM whenever we want

we have compulsory voting, so at elections everyone rushes to claim the middle ground

the US constitution and its amendments are a crock of shit, parliamentary democracy is light years ahead in representation and effectiveness.

Murdoch has been trying to take over Oz since 1972,  nothing new to see here.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, olaf hart said:

A couple of things in Oz’s favour...

we don’t have the large fundamentalist religious base of the USA, so it’s hard to get the fire started if you don’t have millions of “believers” who have already turned away from evidence and fact based thinking.

we have already had a couple of right wing political wankers have a go and flame out, so the far right has already pissed in their own water.

our industrial base is stuffed, so we no longer have people worried about jobs at Ford or GM

we don’t take our politics as seriously as many in the US, and we haven’t conflated our personal worth with our country of origin. We change our our PM whenever we want

we have compulsory voting, so at elections everyone rushes to claim the middle ground

the US constitution and its amendments are a crock of shit, parliamentary democracy is light years ahead in representation and effectiveness.

Murdoch has been trying to take over Oz since 1972,  nothing new to see here.

 

Yeah I've made those points repeatedly here. Usual response is deathly silence, sometimes something along the lines of 'we can't do that because....'.

Fact is, the USA *could* change its way of running elections but nobody, Left, Right or middle, actually wants to do it. They have 2 separate paths to a constitutional amendment versus our one, and they won't take either.

So - expect things to just get worse and the moaning to get louder.

The Australian system is vastly superior.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LB 15 said:

No Rudd is an angry delusional arsehole still bitter about being dumped by his own party

At least he isn't delusional enough to claim to be centrist.

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

I support education to dismantle stupidity.

So no need for "gatekeepers" to censor opposing view points or opinions that you don't agree with or find offensive? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

 It's just that our average is 10 IQ points higher than the USA's point, but give us time and we'll get there too.

No it's only 1 IQ point but close enough.

Though I'm not sure the desire to censor opposing views is a consequence of lower IQ's or just control freak brown shirt stupidity.

4 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Anyway, 50% of Aussies *are* below the average in intelligence.

To state the obvious. :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
10 hours ago, LB 15 said:

No Rudd is an angry delusional arsehole still bitter about being dumped by his own party and struggling to try and make himself relevant. I met him a few times. A completely self absorbed fuckwit.

This.

Didn't stop him sucking up trying to get Australia spending a shit-ton of money and whatever influence we had getting him a gig at the UN. Fortunately even our fuckwit PM at the time refused to touch *that* one with a barge pole.

Anyway, 50% of Aussies *are* below the average in intelligence. It's just that our average is 10 IQ points higher than the USA's point, but give us time and we'll get there too.

Best way of improving IQ - get off of Fakebook and the like. Well, it might not actually *improve* the IQ but it would remove a forum for those below the cutoff mark to spew their rubbish so freely.

Either way, hate-spew media is a danger to the socio-economic system. There should be some way of at least counteracting it, while maintaining as much free speech as possible.

I saw an alarming statistic on the news this morning, a story about attempted assassination of a judge. In 2015, the FBI recorded ~ 900 death threats against judges. In 2020, they recorded > 4,000. The murderer in the lead story had a dossier on one of the liberal US Supreme Court Justices in his home, guess what helped motivate and inspire him.

There is a violent right-wing insurgency under way in the US. It's 99% inspired and driven by guys like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones/InfoWars and FoxNews and their elk. If you Ozzies think you're immune to the same thing, I'd suggest at least taking it seriously.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rastro said:

At least he isn't delusional enough to claim to be centrist.

How could a China loving foul mouthed failed Labor Prime Minister claim to be a centrist?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Venom said:

No it's only 1 IQ point but close enough.

Though I'm not sure the desire to censor opposing views is a consequence of lower IQ's or just control freak brown shirt stupidity.

To state the obvious. :D 

One in every 70 US citizens have died of covid in the past 12 months because an orange painted president said that face masks weren’t manly and you call Australians stupid? 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

There is a violent right-wing insurgency under way in the US. It's 99% inspired and driven by guys like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones/InfoWars and FoxNews and their elk. If you Ozzies think you're immune to the same thing, I'd suggest at least taking it seriously.

Agree, but I am no kind of authority at all concerning OZ. 

But Rupert has well and truly ripped the US apart. 

And I have not seen any sort of evidence that the US is stupider than other countries. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Fact is, the USA *could* change its way of running elections but nobody, Left, Right or middle, actually wants to do it. They have 2 separate paths to a constitutional amendment versus our one, and they won't take either.

Well, of course you can write whatever you wish. But you have written almost these exact words previously. 

And previously, I pointed out that you were mistaken . . . and cited US House Bill One, 

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/congress-must-pass-people-act

Perhaps it slipped your mind. 

Fact is that US progressives are intensely interested in election reform. 

have a g'Day !!  

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Well, of course you can write whatever you wish. But you have written almost these exact words previously. 

And previously, I pointed out that you were mistaken . . . and cited US House Bill One, 

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/policy-solutions/congress-must-pass-people-act

Perhaps it slipped your mind. 

Fact is that US progressives are intensely interested in election reform. 

have a g'Day !!  

https://www.ncsl.org/research/about-state-legislatures/amending-the-u-s-constitution.aspx

Excerpt:

In addition to constitutional amendments proposed by Congress, states have the option of petitioning Congress to call a constitutional convention. Legislatures in two-thirds of states must agree, however. While the convention process has yet to be triggered, efforts to do so are not new. In fact, they may be “as old as the republic.” Unofficial sources report convention applications being filed as early as 1789.

end exerpt.

So it can be done if there's sufficient political will on the part of the States regardless of what Congress says or does.

But there isn't sufficient political will. Therefore you get what you get because insufficient people want to go down that path.

Which is what I've said and you haven't managed to refute.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites

It would not take a Constitutional amendment to fix what's wrong with voting in most states. It would take some degree of fairness applied, and without that, a Constitutional amendment would do no good anyway.

It would be really nice if the Supreme Court would suddenly wake up and decide that a citizen's rights do in fact include voting and that states fuck with that at their peril, but I don't see that happening until there is a large turnaround in either the voting population of the SCOTUS or both.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

 

And I have not seen any sort of evidence that the US is stupider than other countries. 

Trump was elected President.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LB 15 said:

How could a China loving foul mouthed failed Labor Prime Minister claim to be a centrist?

 

Legendary!!!

Should be more of it.   So many fuckwits, so little time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

 

And I have not seen any sort of evidence that the US is stupider than other countries. 

Well 3rd world countries anyway. The kind of countries were angry mobs attack the seat of government when they don’t accept the outcome of an election. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

It would not take a Constitutional amendment to fix what's wrong with voting in most states. It would take some degree of fairness applied, and without that, a Constitutional amendment would do no good anyway.

It would be really nice if the Supreme Court would suddenly wake up and decide that a citizen's rights do in fact include voting and that states fuck with that at their peril, but I don't see that happening until there is a large turnaround in either the voting population of the SCOTUS or both.

- DSK

Well, umm, duh - isn't that the *point* of a Constitutional amendment? To ensure that the States AND the Supreme Court have to take notice?

So, as I said, you have a valid mechanism to fix your dysfunctional voting system but you all prefer to fuck about on the fringes rather than tackle the issue seriously.

Therefore, you get what you get and you have to live with it.

Actually I suspect that a huge number of people are terrified of letting that particular cat out of the bag for fear of what else might end up on the table, but it's still a fact that you have the tool to address the problem and you won't use it.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Well, umm, duh - isn't that the *point* of a Constitutional amendment? To ensure that the States AND the Supreme Court have to take notice?

So, as I said, you have a valid mechanism to fix your dysfunctional voting system but you all prefer to fuck about on the fringes rather than tackle the issue seriously.

Therefore, you get what you get and you have to live with it.

Actually I suspect that a huge number of people are terrified of letting that particular cat out of the bag for fear of what else might end up on the table, but it's still a fact that you have the tool to address the problem and you won't use it.

FKT

Seems to me that if they ignore the Constitution now, or if the Supreme Court interprets law in ways that don't make sense in reading the Constitution, they can keep right on doing exactly that no matter how many amendments there are.

And voting is overwhelmingly local. The legal framework varies from state to state and the actual workings of it vary from county to county.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Seems to me that if they ignore the Constitution now, or if the Supreme Court interprets law in ways that don't make sense in reading the Constitution, they can keep right on doing exactly that no matter how many amendments there are.

And voting is overwhelmingly local. The legal framework varies from state to state and the actual workings of it vary from county to county.

- DSK

Sometimes I wonder about you guys.

Taking the first point first, if what you say is correct, that you lack the ability to phrase an amendment that is clear, concise and descriptive so that the Supreme Court cannot ignore it, you're already fucked.

To the second point, you describe how voting is done NOW. Isn't that the point of CHANGING it to make it fairer and more universal? In fact, isn't that the entire reason for a Constitutional Amendment? To take the ability to fuck with the voting system out of the hands of local partisans?

It isn't impossible. You guys lack the vision and the will. Sometimes I think you all are incapable of thinking outside your box and that's half the problem.

FKT

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

To the second point, you describe how voting is done NOW. Isn't that the point of CHANGING it to make it fairer and more universal? In fact, isn't that the entire reason for a Constitutional Amendment? To take the ability to fuck with the voting system out of the hands of local partisans?

It isn't impossible. You guys lack the vision and the will. Sometimes I think you all are incapable of thinking outside your box and that's half the problem.

You would be better prepared for this discussion if you read the sources with which you were provided above. 

You seem blissfully unaware that the vast majority of electoral reform in the US comes from legislation, such as the landmark Voting Right Act. 

HB One is also solid legislation - about which you apparently did not read. 

There are also thousands of USAeans working on constitutional amendments, such as overturning Citizens United. 

If you read up more, you would be able to grasp that we progressives are working hard at BOTH the constitutional level and legislative level (local, state and national). 

I am really quite ignorant about OZ and how it works - so I try to not spout off about it. 

You tone above, and as usual, is disrespectful, so I just giving you back a little of your own bile. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Sometimes I wonder about you guys.

Taking the first point first, if what you say is correct, that you lack the ability to phrase an amendment that is clear, concise and descriptive so that the Supreme Court cannot ignore it, you're already fucked.

To the second point, you describe how voting is done NOW. Isn't that the point of CHANGING it to make it fairer and more universal? In fact, isn't that the entire reason for a Constitutional Amendment? To take the ability to fuck with the voting system out of the hands of local partisans?

It isn't impossible. You guys lack the vision and the will. Sometimes I think you all are incapable of thinking outside your box and that's half the problem.

FKT

An amendment isn't particularly "thinking outside the box." How many times has it been done?

But I think it's impractical for the reasons I gave and more... very unlikely to achieve a majority big enough of any of the several types possible. Last, it would be very difficult to implement in the presence of so many voters who will gladly support partisan fuckery. That's the real root of the problem. The USA is getting the government it deserves.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

An amendment isn't particularly "thinking outside the box." How many times has it been done?

But I think it's impractical for the reasons I gave and more... very unlikely to achieve a majority big enough of any of the several types possible. Last, it would be very difficult to implement in the presence of so many voters who will gladly support partisan fuckery. That's the real root of the problem. The USA is getting the government it deserves.

- DSK

I was reading that Amendments must be approved by 2/3 of the states, which in practical terms means 10% of the population can block one. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/23/2021 at 2:28 AM, LB 15 said:

One in every 70 US citizens have died of covid

Are you drunk?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Venom said:

Are you drunk?

I am and your are a Trump worshiping, stolen election believing fuckwit.

But tomorrow, I will be sober.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope wrong again half-wit. Next time get your wife to do the calculation as numbers are obviously not your strong point.:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets try to explain this another way to our friends in OZ . . 

If Murdoch is allowed to do to your country what he did to the US, 

at least a third of you will turn into mini-Venom's. 

I rest my case. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

Lets try to explain this another way to our friends in OZ . . 

If Murdoch is allowed to do to your country what he did to the US, 

at least a third of you will turn into mini-Venom's. 

I rest my case. 

I actually doubt it, if only because I don't think Australia does quite as many lobotomies as the USA.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember the good old days when journalists simply reported the facts and left you the consumer to engage in some critical thinking and reach a conclusion?

Rupert and his ilk now go -here are the facts supported by this photo of the mouse in question but wait there’s more and after the commercial break we’ll have Hannity tell you just how scared the Elephant was, and you should be scared too.

I miss the good old days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear Australians:

Do NOT go around thinking you are immune to Foxification. I first visited the UK in the mid 70s and was aghast at what seemed to be newspapers written by insane people. This crap would NEVER work in the USA I thought to myself, we are way too smart for that. Turns out I was wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, AJ Oliver said:

Lets try to explain this another way to our friends in OZ . . 

If Murdoch is allowed to do to your country what he did to the US, 

at least a third of you will turn into mini-Venom's. 

I rest my case. 

You really don't get it.

Rupert *started* his shit here in Oz. We know all about him and despise him. We're inoculated. Besides we don't have the First Amendment protecting him and people like him from getting sued for lying.

And as I have said before, there's little mileage in trying to motivate the stupid and racists to get out and vote and the flip side - trying to prevent people from voting. EVERYONE votes. The nutcase fringe on both extremes gets diluted to irrelevance.

We get people like Clive Palmer and - currently - Craig Kelly in politics, but they garner little support and barely hang in there. Usually get tossed out in relatively short order.

Different country, different rules. Murdoch moved to more fertile grounds for his bullshit. That's you guys - you soak it up and ask for more.

FKT

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Different country, different rules. Murdoch moved to more fertile grounds for his bullshit. That's you guys - you soak it up and ask for more.

@AJ Oliver needs to get up to speed.

Murdoch has tried (still is trying) to control Australian politics, long before he got involved in US politics, tried to control British politics, until the Brits caught him illegally phone tapping. He lives in USA because he can get away with all his Elliot Carver style bullshit there. Successfully too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_International_phone_hacking_scandal

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Sidecar said:

@AJ Oliver needs to get up to speed.

Murdoch has tried (still is trying) to control Australian politics, long before he got involved in US politics, tried to control British politics, until the Brits caught him illegally phone tapping. He lives in USA because he can get away with all his Elliot Carver style bullshit there. Successfully too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_International_phone_hacking_scandal

^^^^^This, Murdoch ran afoul of pesky laws about liability, slander and privacy in Oz and the UK long before going to the US.

He was pleased  to discover those very laws can be easily circumvented by claiming your God given constitutional rights and anything that gets past that goalpost can be tied up legally ad infinitum.

Surprisingly none of the Capitol rioters nor the Federal authorities have looked at the role Fox played in setting the scene.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Navig8tor said:

^^^^^This, Murdoch ran afoul of pesky laws about liability, slander and privacy in Oz and the UK long before going to the US.

He was pleased  to discover those very laws can be easily circumvented by claiming your God given constitutional rights and anything that gets past that goalpost can be tied up legally ad infinitum.

Surprisingly none of the Capitol rioters nor the Federal authorities have looked at the role Fox played in setting the scene.

 

The power of a Free Press, despite it being a vehicle to transport lies and sedition.

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Ease the sheet. said:

And Australia has the ABC, funded by public money.

Though Rupert has encouraged governments to cut its funding drastically..... And succeeded.pretty well,  because it also suits their agenda.

Fixed.....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

Besides we don't have the First Amendment protecting him and people like him from getting sued for lying.

You don't think news organizations (or anyone else) can be sued (or even prosecuted) for lying here? That's laughably ignorant.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Pedagogical Tom said:

You don't think news organizations (or anyone else) can be sued (or even prosecuted) for lying here? That's laughably ignorant.

Maybe they can be. How often are they? And what proportion of cases are successful?

FKT

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
14 hours ago, Pedagogical Tom said:

You don't think news organizations (or anyone else) can be sued (or even prosecuted) for lying here? That's laughably ignorant.

Maybe they can be. How often are they? And what proportion of cases are successful?

Beat me to it........

Prima facile, so many conventions, constitutional obligations and laws broken during the Trump years and Americans are still talking about it...Not to mention the constant barrage of lies and fake news.

Link to post
Share on other sites

and it's odd, countries allow these individuals and agencies of disinformation to run fkg wild with impunity right beneath their noses. follow the money.

if it was my watch, that shit would be fkg history, I'd go after those fuckers like it's war, if only out of spite.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2021 at 7:05 PM, Fah Kiew Tu said:

And, funniest of all, Meli is actually supporting Murdoch, Stokes and Packer!

FKT

 

On 2/21/2021 at 8:08 PM, Ease the sheet. said:

She's no fan of that triumvirate.

She's making her case in support of Facebook bogans.

 

 

not to mention, the Saturday Paper and other assorted small independent news services. I just want to see Jouro's paid.

I thought we had laws about media monopolys or have they been gutted ?

One solution. Don't watch Tellybijon.:P

I don't own one .

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/24/2021 at 11:52 AM, Ishmael said:

And he will still be ugly.

And you'll still be a big fat pussy! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:
23 hours ago, Pedagogical Tom said:

You don't think news organizations (or anyone else) can be sued (or even prosecuted) for lying here? That's laughably ignorant.

Maybe they can be. How often are they? And what proportion of cases are successful?

FKT

You're getting warmer. "Definitely they can be" would be truthful, to the extent truth is important to you.

I don't know the answers to your questions, just know ignorance when I see it. You can research them yourself if you're really interested.

If your position is that we should "open up" libel laws in the US, you have a notable ally in Donald Trump.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.