Mangled Thoughts

Readers, I shall with Christmas, and a few things to do after, I shall resume writing on 2/208.

Until then, Merry Christmas.

Until then, all the best.

Yes, I was wrong in saying, he hadn’t mentioned it, 4 times mistaken.

I turned to his items that Tim Blair linked in the comments box for the item below,
“Rightie” plays hero from deep inside bolted bunker.

And,Tim? He calls that an attack?

Look, the Two Pastors were being persecuted. They had to engage in a very costly, and gruelling effort to seek justice, by having to fight to remove their case from VCAT and HEROC, to the Supreme Court of Victoria, which should have ended the matter right then. It did not, thanks to a capricious “Judge”. So, they had to resort to the High Court, which slammed that “Judge” in the course of delivering justice.

Jackson, “broke the law”, not simply to get “arrested”, but to hurt Bracks, Hulls and their goons, Sisely, Szoke and Helou. Joe Cambria made sure those were fully briefed on the “crime by directly supplying them the damning evidence, with a letter explaining their duty. They were fully apprised of it, as their lame excuses for not persecuting Jackson show.

Jackson and Cambria had hurt that lot. For, Cambria’s correspondence dismembered them. He had drawn out exactly what that “ law” is really about, and what they are exactly on about, and Sisely and Szoke knew they were trapped like the leftist rats they are.

Here’s the rub: Melbourne’s “rightie” establishment didn’t lift a finger to come to the direct aid of the Two Pastors. Oh, no they did not. Let’s not forget this, we are talking about “ lawyers”, and “free market think tankers” loaded with funds, with access to the media, and so forth. Oh no, they sat in their bunkers, frozen to their chairs. Thus, too, Tim’s pals in the HR Nicholls Society, who didn’t say boo.

Melbourne’s righties are defenders of freedom; that is a lie. I have something else which shows what spineless, unprincipled cowards that lot are. they don’t give a stuff about ordinary Australians, Liberty and principles.

Be absolutely clear about this: that lot also strangled the Victorian Liberal Party, and completely wrecked labour market reform, and Evans, Moore, Morgan, Kroger, and Minchin betrayed the Cabinet in doing so, which is the reason for the call that they be investigated by a Liberal Party disciplinary panel.

I have something in view that should shock to the core anyone concerned for their Liberty. Needless to say, the spineless blobbies palmed off as Liberal MPS run away from their Honor bound duty –yes, that is how serious the business is, and the ‘righties’ are too afraid to act. To foreshadow it, this statement:

The Bracks-Brumby Government, through Hulls and the State Trustees, engages in large-scale confiscation of private property, and their victims have been put through hell. There is an appalling case still running, which I am pushing. There are cases even more shocking than this. What the regime is doing is known all around Melbourne and Victoria. Lawyers know it; accounting firms know it, it is even known by real estate agents, of which one gent told me:

He is thoroughly disgusted with what the State Trustees Office doing, what they do to their victims. He is disgusted having to sell up private property confiscated by the STO., on orders issued by the STO. He is disgusted at seeing the victims reduced to destitution by that lot.

Here’s the rub; barristers, and politicians, and the other “defenders of Liberty” won’t lift a damned finger. I know this, and I will relate what I know.

Melbourne’s Rightie Etablishment did not lift a finger to aid the Two Pastors, with one exception:

Peter Farris QC. Neither did they, in the first instance, come out swinging, go in boots and all, against the Bracks administration when it was only in Bill form. No, we saw the righties sit mum. And, that includes the commentariat in the Media. They didn’t fight, they blew a raspberry only – and that was supposed to hurt the regime over the “blasphemy Bill”. Then, there were those unprincipled nothings called Liberal MPS who backed the “blasphemy Law to the hilt.

This is apart from how many “righties’ in Melbourne, who, absent of a clue about the actual facts of the case, joined in nonetheless in dealing out a back-hander to the Two Pastors:

“ What they said is truly atrocious”. That’s rich, coming from types too lazy to listen to, or read the evidence of what they actually did say.
“ But nonetheless, we defend their right to say it.”

Melbourne’s righties are not Moral Giants, they are cowardly, fat, toe stabbing pygmies, who knife real Liberals in the back.

The sheer hide of those “righties”. They sound exactly like the lefties Hulls has stuffed courts with and who inhabit VCAT.

Defenders of Liberty, And free speech: The b.s. they are.

It puts Tim’s efforts into perspective: Nothing there.

It looks like he felt obliged to put up some mention, inclusive of a link to Jackson’s column in Brookesnews, in which he broke up the “law”, in order to take HEROC on directly - now, that’s a fighting man, as opposed to Tim’s puny efforts.

Tim Blair does have a clue about smearing Jackson, and he should come clean about it:

Be honest Tim, at the HR Nicholls Society, you were putty, you lapped up every smear that lot told against Jackson. They blackened his name and you believed that lot. You didn’t bother to approach Jackson directly and find out for yourself.

I have never met Jackson. One is impressed, from reading his columns, that he is a decent man, who is a fine economist, who does defend Liberty, and accurately at that, and attacks those undermining Liberty, and those hostile to Liberty , accurately.

So, why were they smearing him? Here’s why:

As I have written, that lot are economic illiterates, with extensive demonstration of that solid claim. The point is: Jackson entirely disemboweled the ACTU case, and what did that entail?

He only disemboweled the rubbish put out by that lot, Moore, Evans, and Morgan, as “the economic case” for labour market reform.

You see the point, Tim: the reason they smear Jackson before all and sundry is, they are illiterates, and they do their best to ensure those who count for them, businessmen, a Federal Cabinet, don’t find out how bad they are and are not cut out were their patrons to swtich to someone who knows how to fight.

Their major effort is backside protection. They preach competition for everyone else, but that lot; rather than promote talent, or give way to real talent, who can defend Liberty, they attack them viciously.

Need I have to remind you Timmy, of what HR Nicholls club founder Michael Kroger did to Richmond and Prodos, through his thugs Sheezel, Hanan, and Barry? Or, didn’t you read those columns I wrote which, I can assure you Tim, really hurt them. I know I did. I have more to write on this, later.

Yet, that is the sort of moral giants the likes of Moore, Evans and Hugh Morgan are really like.
“Blue bloods”, oh Lord, I’m in no mood for sidesplitting laughter.

The Crunch is: Tim Blair did call for Jackson’s black banning; for his Brookesnews to be shutdown, and did call him illiterate.He did so in response to what he lapped up.

Tim, if you are about to say something you do not wish the whole world to find out about, don’t send it over the Internet. To reinforce this, that is how I discovered Kroger, who, only an ordinary member of the Liberal Party with no executive authority at all, had written Sheezel’s the “Shitzeel” $5,000 a week paycheck.

Sheezel stored a copy in his email and the laugh is, he accidentally hit the send button – blimey is that guy a right dumbkopf.

Next, I know from very senior Liberal sources what transpired.

However, readers can look at these interesting items, and notice that Tim figures in what is related:

“Our right’s incestuous behaviour is only helping the left”, Joe Cambria

Tim Blair and the Rightwing controversy, Joe Cambria

The Tim Blair dinner reveals what’s wrong with our pathetic rightwing,Joe Cambria

Professor John Quiggin slimes Windschuttle, Gerard Jackson

And this, by Bunny Champers:

It was about four hours later and Batty and me were still holding up the bar in his local when I thought of that rotter Tim Blair. Now it’s true I don’t like that Irish guttersnipe Jackson, but at least he’s a genuine lefty-hater, not a limp-wristed feather duster like Blair. He’s also up front. When he’s got something to say, he won’t send out backstabbing emails behind your back, he’ll tell you to your face.

So when Blairy sent out a cowardly email accusing Jackson of being an incompetent illiterate who deserved to be blacklisted by the club and that Brookesnews should shut down, even I saw red. Jackson’s got his faults but he would never stoop that low. (It’s still a rum thing when a professed conservative media Johnnie thinks blacklisting an anti-lefty is a jolly good thing).

So, at the meeting you called for his blackbanning; you then called for his magazine to be shut down; and you said he is illiterate.

So, Blair, don’t tread on my toes on this, it doesn’t hurt anyway.

I have left you an out. You be the man and make a clean breast of it to your readers; say you were taken in by the cretins at the HR Nicholls Society; that you regret it, and publish a fulsome, public, apology to Jackson

Next, you can get serious about defending Liberty. That takes an effort and tack entirely different from what you have shown. Your Steyn piece is and instance of; no defence and attack. It hits entirely the wrong targets, calling for the lynching of an Islamo-fascist cleric misses the point, and only damagesa good cause.

To appreciate this, readers must realise that, for example, Bolt, and Albrechtson have done considerable damage to liberal causes, from labour market reform, to the fight against the cult of man causes global warming. With it, they have also completely damaged the Liberal Party and the general, great cause of Liberalism.

It is not, for example, the Muslims in Australia, Canada, UK, Europe, US; it is the leftists who are at the bottom of the censorship stife – ‘blasphemy laws. You don’t hurt the real culprits taking your approach at all, and that means, the situation remains bad.

Next:

How are you defending Liberty and Free Speech, when you joined those moral cowards and intellectual buffoons attacking those real Liberals who can defend Liberty. Clowns who make sure real talent is buried, is never recommended to those who fund their fat backsides. Oh, this applies to the likes of the IPA too.

How are you managing it, when you called for censorship of Jackson, called for his accurate, hard-hitting, economics news magazine be shut-down. How do you defend Liberty, when, as Janet Jackson, you utter things, you state things, which hard leftists push for. After all, that is what the “blasphmey law” is about, in case you didn’t notice Tim.

Oh, Tim, you don’t realise how bad such types are. But the ACTU does, and the hard left also know, and they know the damage the likes of Janet wreak.

Melbourne’s “rightie” establishment, while they don’t see it, that closed gene pool swamp, are now proverbial dead men walking. What one is doing is to help finish off those treacherous slobs. That means also the commentariat, the likes of Bolt, - oh yes, he also did great damage to labour market reform and Liberal Party and liberal causes; yes, he did, Tim.

Lastly, we are talking about types who hold Australians in contempt. Bolt calls them ingrates. The HR Nicholls clubmen hold ordinary Australians should be grateful if someone offers them a job at $2 day. They hold many Australians in contempt, as nothing but serfs that should be content with living miserable lives. But, Tim, you never have reported on what that lot are really like, have you?

It’s up to you Tim. Stop fooling around, or confine yourself to the trite.

You see, it’s not only me. It’s not only Jackson. It’s also real Liberals, and enough of them are silvertails, who have had a gutful of the righties, their stupidity, cowardice, and treachery. They too are no longer mucking around, sitting back quietly hoping things will change. They too, including the silvertails, are all into a bit of blood spilling; spilling the blood of those scoundrels who style themselves “defenders of Liberty” and great, heroic, tough guy Liberals.

That is why a civil war has erupted in the Liberal Party. Real Liberals launched it, and it won’t end until the rigjhties are properly finished off, crumpled up in screaming heaps.

That is why I went for you Tim, you swallowed that lot’s bilge, and you went for a real Liberal, who is a very fine economist, who demolished the ACTU and ALP over labour market reform, and who could have run the case for the Government out in the open. I know this, not only because of Jackson’s work, because Tim, ACTU heavies told me so, directly.They said, if the Cabinet had not been so stupid as to accept Moore, Evans and Morgan as their advisers, and had hired Jackson, Jackson wouldmhave slaughtered them in public.

Here’s another thing to note:

The ACTU never smear Jackosn, because, unlike the Quiggins in the media, they respect Jackson. They told me, they read Jackson because he is very good. More-over, the ILO in Geneva read him too. They are very releived, Tim, Cabinet didn’t use Jackson. They could not believe their luch Cabinet would take advice from those they call “clowns” and “buffoons”. That is how much they feared your pals, Tim, in the HR Nicholls Society; they laugh about them, crack ripe jokes about your pals.

Cabinet didn’t take on Jackson, because your pals in the HR Nicholls Society, buried Jackson. And, the rest is history:

That lot totally wrecked the campaign, and with it, are also directly culpable for the election defeat. The election was lost in 2005; we know this, because Mr. Joe Cambia published an article only documenting the fact:

Yes, Tim Blair, you do have a clue what you said against Jackson. And so do others. So, don’t play tiddly winks over it. In claiming to defend free speech, you called for Jackson to be silenced. That makes you a hypocrite. You did read the rubbish Albrechtson wrote in the Australian, that destroyer of Liberal causes?

Oh, and here’s David Kemp, calling for the silencing of Liberals, you see, he is a Kroger-Costello crony, and as unprincipled and spineless as they are, but that is why they made him President of the Party. (I know why he demanded Liberal Party members be silenced; you don’t Tim. He’s another rightie who holds manyAustralians and hier inalienable rights in contempt).

Get real, or clam up. In the meantime:

Those treacherous wreckers have strangled the liberal Party, set back labour market reform and with the appalling consequence: many Australians will be thrown into unemployment, enjoying a 100% paycut. Oh, yes, that is what that lot have done to the cause of Liberty, and to the Liberal Party, and what they have done to many ordinary Australians - signed them a 100% pay cut by ensuring many will be made unmeployed during the coming year.

As I say Tim, it’s up to you, for there are now many Liberals in Victoria, who are in no mood to tolerate rubbish anymore. We are now in the business of disemboweling Melbourne’s righties. And, Tim, I’m enjoying it; they thoroughly deserve it.

No, that is not, sadly, a newspaper headline, because that is what the inquiry will be, a whitewash. Of course, that means a scapegoat will have to be found. It’s a bit ridiculous, though, when so many could be given the bullet, apparatchiks and politicians of the Liberal Party.

What, however, is needed, is not a string of inquiries, i.e., whitewashes . Before anything more is done, investigations into key figures responsible for Liberal Party disasters (the wrecking of the campaign for labour market reform, and what that entailed, the election defeat) are absolutely necessary.

Keep in view that the election was lost not in 2007 but in 2005, due to the incompetence of ministers, their immediate advisers, and those they relied on to supply the economic advice, Kroger’s pals of the HR Nicholls Society, Hugh Morgan, Ray Evans, and Des Moore.

The investigations must be conducted under a panel with full disciplinary authority to act against those who betrayed the Liberal Party, because, as will now be outlined, that is what those in the sights did.

Nick Minchin.

Having commented on Nick Minchin’s article for The Australian, I nearly wrote the following, but it was out of place for that item:

The initial impression is that Minchin took out an insurance policy to protect himself and his lucrative position as a Senator. He made sure to assert that for a long time that he fully supported a reform of the Party which would have avoided its collapse. Yet, as also remarked, irrespective of the past, Minchin had ample opportunity to lead by example, on labour market reform. He didn’t, and here is the reason why:

A senior Liberal Party source told me:

Minchin was given a case study on labour markets that completely demolished any objections — including the ACTU’s assertions — to labour market reforms.

Minchin read the case study. He was, therefore, fully apprised of its import, even if he might not have fully understood it.

He then foolishly rejected it in favour of the rubbish his pals in the HR Nicholl’s Society had put up as a “watertight economic case”.

Here is the rub:

As a Minister of the Crown, Minchin was honour bound to do his duty to the Cabinet. He betrayed that duty when he deliberately buried the case study. He reneged on his duties as a Minister of the Crown and to the Cabinet. In short, he betrayed Cabinet and he betrayed other ministers charged with running the case for the Government of Australia.

In doing that, he betrayed the Liberal Party of Australia. He is therefore as culpable for the election defeat as are Hugh Morgan, Ray Evans, Des Moore and Michael Kroger.

Minchin’s treachery and incompetence begs the question of a conflict of interest over a serious matter: his relationship with the HR Nicholls Society. This, too, must be a matter for investigation. His disgusting apology to the HR Nicholls Society for the impending disaster when Morgan, Evans, Moore and Kroger are the real guilty parties, has been commented upon in Liberal Party circles.

[Minchin’s apology to the HR Nicholls Society was commented upon by the media.]

The HR Nicholls Society

The lines, which must be taken in an investigation against the HR Nichols Society, are:

1.Why did Kroger, Evans, and Moore bury economic material that was prepared not for them but for Cabinet. Much is clear enough from my sources; the material was not only crucial for the Cabinet to read, it also demolished the rubbish put up by Evans, Moore and Morgan. Next, they had a duty to supply the Cabinet with accurate advice. Rather than do that they used the opportunity to promote themselves to the detriment of the Liberal Government.

2. How is it that a “think tank” that is not a sub-unit of the Federal Liberal Party, and not even of the Victorian Liberal Party, was treated as the only source of informed economic advice to the Cabinet on labour market reform?

How was it managed that Kroger, Moore, Evans, and Morgan could occupy that position and make sure no alternative advice reached cabinet? This question brings back into the torchlight, again, Nick Minchin. How is it that that a Society of incompetents and ignoramuses came to control what advice the Cabinet received?

Again, they are very serious offences.

Disciplinary action:

The above matters are not speculative. The evidence is damning, and it is extensive. An investigation panel must have the authority to take disciplinary action against each of those named above.

Disciplinary action against Nick Minchin must include his recall as a Senator and replaced with a truly principled Liberal. Minchin must be sent down in disgrace. That is not all the actions that should be taken against him, they are only two that must be taken.

Kroger’s stacking of the Administrative Committee of the Victorian division should be fully investigated, along with the activities of those he personally anointed as his ‘people’. A clear-cut example, which exemplifies why action must be taken on those counts against Michael Kroger, is the disgraceful Richmond-Prodos branch affair.

Taken together, the above points constitute serious grounds for a major investigation, and as an immediate imperative. It is urgently required to ensure that no whitewash occur and that the real culprits behind the disasters are brought to book. They have more than merely disgraced the Liberal Party, they have deliberately betrayed it. Once again, I draw your attention to Mr Minchin’s destructive actions.

Federal and States’ officers charged with conducting the “inquiries” will damage the Party further if they do not act properly on these matters. They will not rectify what is wrong with the Party. Moreover, they too will be responsible for perpetuating that which has severely crippled the Party. They have no choice in the matter.

Let it be known a whitewash will itself be a scandal, with those conducting it themselves having breached their duty. Dare they compound the above grave, deliberate actions of the above named with more deliberate reneging on what is now clearly their duty?

Let it be known such articles as these are read widely; there are no escape hatches this time for the Party’s Federal and States’ officers.

Let it be known, it is a grave matter of integrity, for the Australian Liberal Party, and its Divisions.

Caught between Minchin and the ALP Cabinet, things don’t look good at all. Not that Minchin’s colleagues are any better.

I have in view matters which are grave, but some details need further attention first.

What one will say now is this:

“The defence force is politicised”, is a euphemism for what politicians, bureaucrats and “advisers” have done, and continue to do to the armed services.

If that young gentleman is still uncertain that the Hawke cabinet initiated it, let us try two examples:

The Steyr rifle. It is a dud. One if its faults is, it cannot be wielded in bayonet work. Many trample over the armed forces that, for some strange reason, dislike the bayonet. That’s all very good for them, but it is not for the men who have to wield the Steyr. We had an instance of why:

A Section of a Scots platoon, in Iraq, “Ladies from Hell”, nearly out of ammo, had no choice but, fix bayonets, get up, and walk over the enemy. It was either that or die.The stronger in numbers Islamic enemy were terrified, reflected in their wild firing that missed those fine soldiers.

[German infantry, WWI, called the Scots “Ladies from Hell” because they were terrifying with bayonet. The Scots, it is clear, can still wear the sobriquet with pride].

A treacherous leftist “reporter” deliberately went into propaganda mode, shooting footage of the bodies of the enemy, and then wailed: those men of the Scots Regt. mutilated their bodies. No, they did not, but that liar of a journalist isn’t interested in a few hard truths.

Collins Class Submarine, the concrete submersible I call it. The ALP Cabinet bought that from their socialist mates in Sweden, when two superior, vastly superior subs were available from Britain. OI know about the British conventionally powered submarine. The other was a US nuclear powered submarine.

Of the two, the second, the nuclear sub, is the best. It does require some additional expenses as in what is required to house it.

So, what is the problem?
It’s not simply supplying servicemen with weapons and equipment to succeed in battle.
It is a life and death matter for fighting men. Their lives depend on the equipment they sue, and the weapons they wield.

That is something entirely lost on politicians, bureaucrats, advisers, “journalists” and other self-styled experts.

Those two weapons alone show the abuse dealt out to the men who have hard work to do, and in doing it, their lives are at stake.

It must be pointed out: The men in combat units, as opposed to careerists stuffed into uniforms, are professionals, and adhere to the traditions which make the armed services what they are, great fighting forces. As professionals, needless to say, they endure whatever abuse is handed out to them, and get on with what they have to do.

Politicians, and bureaucrats and “advisers”, get away with abusing them, because they know the men of fighting units are professionals.

A young, retired officer, now a “University professor”, during a discussion on radio this year, said angrily: the Howard Government had “politicised the armed forces”. He is wrong; the Hawke Cabinet did that. What would be correct to add is, “… and the Howard Cabinet failed to stamp it out, making them just as bad.”

Here’s the rub:

One reform would help undermine the “politics”:

Only help, for a knife has to be wielded ruthlessly against the shallow, conceited, wealthy taxpayer kept rotters, who are playing “merry hell” games with the armed forces, to completely eliminate it.

Those who should be responsible for purchasing weaponry and equipment, are those who wield them. They are the men who know not only about warfare, but they know what it means to take to the battlefield.

Secondly, since they would make the decisions, they will cut to the chase, they will choose weapons and equipment which they know are effective, and which they can trust their lives with.

If rifle costs ten dollars more than what some ” adviser” cares for, too bad, infantrymen should be able to go out and get that rifle.

If A new submarine means building deep-water facilities to house the sub, too bad, they should be built.

Well, I have foreshadowed something very juicy, indeed. Fort what I have just sketched out is only the tip of a cruel abuse of the armed forces.

To highlight it further, consider the shabby treatment of the British armed forces by the same sorts playing games with Australian men at arms. The British ” government” has gone further than the politicians, bureaucrats and “advisers have in Australia. Things are so bad; it is not simply an odd journalist commenting on it. Now, despite their professionalism, servicemen have gone public. It is a great scandal. There are now no illusions entertained by many in Britain about how atrociously the British Govt. is treating men who have to take to battlefields, and risk their lives each time.

To note, compouding the evils of “politics’, the Socialist Blair and Brown Cabinets have also rammed down politically correct demands on the Brisish Armed Forces that have caused serious problems.

Next to disclosing what the self- styled defenders of Liberty are doing to Liberalism and the Liberal Party, causing great damage, trying to encapsulate what the “righties” are like in a single, telling incident is like wrestling with an octopus.

The analogy is not too bad. The Octopus is a bottom dweller; they are bottom dwellers. The octopus is soft and blubbery, and so are they. The octopus is not, however, charming; neither are they. It kills prey, to grow fat on; so do they. Its suckers enables it to cling to things as if it were adhered by ultra strong tarzan glue; so do they. There is, though, a disanalogy, because an octopus has eight tentacles only; an octopus that met that lot would suddenly acquire an inferiority complex.

During a google search, to find out how how many anecdotes and incidents demonstrating what that lot are like, the item linked below is one more telling insight into how peculiar those conceited wreckers are:

The ‘persecution’ of Ray Evans: the TNA’s (now Brookes News) editor replies

Amusingly enough, the item also contains an account of Warby declaring that Jackson is “No friend to liberty”.

One quote is staggering, both for the stupidity demonstrated by Warby, and as in itself just one of the many insights into the man - and it’s not the only one contained in the article:

Warby makes the risible assertion that I am making the “costs of sticking up for liberal and conservative ideas even greater than they already are.”

The point is, it is not simply Warby, because he is not atypical of the “righties” who have stuffed the Liberal Party and the Liberal cause. Mind you, it doesn’t distil all, such as, Kroger and his pals, and henchmen are also thugs. Helen Kroger is even stupider than Warby and also a thug; when she rises to speak in the Senate for the first time, it will be hilarious.

Helen alone will have listeners to the Parlaimentary radio broadcasts of the new Parliament crumpled up in pain from groaning and laughing. She will single-handedly ensure the Liberal Party loses more seats at the next Federal election, that is how stupid that woman is. Don’t take my word for it:

Heavyweights around town, when they have met the woman, have walked away stunned, and shocked. Stunned because she makes the proverbial bimbo seem a Pulitzer prize winning genius. Shocked, because they are horrified that she could have been considered a Parliamentary talent.

Readers, yes, too often in columns, one blows the gasket. The difficulty is, it is not blowing the gasket, it’s the risk of blowing the engine, because that lot are so bad. As sources have supplied inside information, each time one has pondered how bad are they, and that surely things can’t be worse than they are. No, the penny drops, they are octopus, bottom dwellers, many leagues below the suface, clinging hard to a rock, which is crumbling and breaking apart under their grip.

That must be because he is so dangerous to the left, it wouldn’t be fair to the foe for him to leave it.

Blair is defending free speech, in Canada.

Mark Steyn is a big man, who likes to play tough, and surely there must be Canadian Liberals willing to back him in his fight against Canada’s own blasphemy laws. Or, are Canadian Liberals ground under too, as the Victorian Liberal Party is, by flakes pretending to be Liberals? If so, well, Steyn is in deep, deep trouble.

‘Them’s are real fightin’ words.’

“Forget Steyn - let’s put the Mullah himself on trial!” Cries Tim Blair.

Tim Blair has gathered an army of stirred, battle ready men. You can tell, they are all in the comments section of the call to arms.

Yes, Sir; way to go; biffing Canadian dictators and their bloodthirsty henchmen from inside the frontline, Australia.

Ol’ Ironsides Timmy and rugged men, battle plans drawn, watching all through the night, as Steyn sleeps. Hard men, waiting for the order to advance, bayonets fixed, grim faces under steel helmets, ammo pouches full, rifles mirror clean, tense, eager for battle, the enemy before them in their sights.

Strangely enough, shaken and not stirred.

Not one bit of it. As for shaking, that’s from laughter.

For, Timmy, as so many of the ‘defenders’ of Liberty in Australia, didn’t “risk their necks” fighting for liberty not simply inside Australia, but also in Victoria.

They were not around when Bracks and his thugs persecuted the Two Pastors.

Come to it, long before it got to that, all those lawyers stuffing the Liberal Party, as “advisers’, didn’t utter a peep against the blasphemy law when it was only being raised as a bill. Gee, they didn’t wish to risk their fat paychecks over a fight for inalienable rights did they now.

As for the Parliamentary Party, well, they stood shoulder to shoulder, inclusive of that ignorant, incompetent twit, Robert “ Paper Doyley” Doyle, and backed it the hilt. [I will expand on the hypocrisy of that blobby, since at the time he was the Opposition leader. He has only supplied the juice himself, this year, on what a disgrace to the Liberal Party he is.]

Blair didn’t stick his neck out for the two Pastors.

Neither did he report on their persecution, not even the smarmiest, trite crack on his blog site. Ol’ Ironsides had better things to do, such as smearing Jackson. Jackson must be well used to it by now, being smeared, by cowards who can’t tell who the real foes are, and are bereft of any clue as to how to hurt them.

Oh, this is all out in the open. One doesn’t need sources for this item, though they could, beyond question, mutter some interesting details. For, it’s only all on the internet. Yes, sir, anyone can google the internet and check it all out for themselves.

Here’s an instance that encapsulates what the self-styled defenders of Liberty are really about, and are like:

Michael Warby declared, “Jackson is not a friend to Liberty”

Well, Warby fried his brain long ago, or else, all along it’s just a bird that calls, “cuckoo, cuckoo, cuckoo”, and inhabits his skull, nibbling the few nuts he’s loaded with.

The master of Liberalism in Australia himself.

Well, that’s what Steyn says Tim is. Then, Steyn, when he visited “Downunder” last year, only saw what is inside the IPA – so that means they must have got him sloshed to the eyeballs first, for no sober man, thus absent of milk of human kindness, could say Timmy is the good oil on all things Liberal.

That’s not a reflection, that’s the truth. Here’s the proof:

Tim Blair didn’t only, as related in a previous item, call for Jackson’s blacklisting from the HR Nicholls Society (not that that is any great tragedy). Freedom loving Timmy has also demanded that Jackson’s Brookesnews be shut down.

Along with Warby, Kroger and his pals, Janet Albrechtson, Timmy’s notion bears some close resemblance to the dictator’s definition of liberty:

“You are free to do what I tell you to do. You are free to say what I tell you to say. If you disagree, if you disobey me, I will bludgeon you into the ground.”

Who can tell, perhaps he even owns a pair of leather jackboots.

Oh, what great defenders of Liberty that lot are. They cowered in their bunkers when the two Pastors were being persecuted, attack a real Liberal and very fine economist, and howl for the blood of Canadians.

Do the likes of Tim believe anyone would not notice?

Rhetorical only.

Hmm… Tim comes out fighting, in a haven far from Canadian shores, when, apparently, all should have long forgotten what the Bracks administration did to the Two Pastors under that shocking “law”, and the miserable failure of the likes of Timmy to come out fighting hard in the open. This is typical of the “righties” who have wrecked the Liberal Party, as also:

Treating members with contempt, and most Australians, and regarding them as mere dumb oafs. Their policy is:

Wait long enough and the oafs will forget their little acts of spite, their acts of cowardice, and their major acts of demolishing the Liberal party. Thus they continue to keep up the pretence of being Liberty’s heroes and tough guys.

Meanwhile, during the shocking persecution of the Two Pastors, Gerard Jackson did something what all those cowards couldn’t find the time to for – because they were all trembling behind bolted doors of reinforced steel bunkers.

He came out and fought, and deliberately broke the “law”, and for the very good reason: to reinforce what that “law” is really about, and to further expose the frauds responsible for it, and those who enforce it.

He didn’t simply break the law by publishing it on his Brookesnews website. I did that on M.T. too but, there is a flaw in just doing that:

HEROC could safely ignore sites, particularly since the pressure being applied to the thugs was hurting them. Due to this, Jackson made sure Sisely and Szoke received the hard evidence of his hideous crimes.

We know he did, because he only linked the correspondence sent directly to those two totalitarian thugs, and, their replies – yes, they had read the evidence.

Moreover, they were not let off the hook. Mr. Joe Cambria wrote them, explaining to them their duty, they must prosecute Jackson.

Their reply, as Cambria commented on, was a very lame excuse to extract themselves. The reason why is because, if they had gone for Jackson, the ensuing case would have exposed the truth of what that“law” is and what it is really about.

[One will return to all things Brackistan: HEROC, and the State Trustees Offices are two excellent targets to open up on them again, showing what the regime of Brackistan is really on about.]

Just a few more reasons why tough ACTU bosses and leftist heavies roll about laughing.

As long as that lot dominates the Liberal side, the left have nothing to worry about, except being tickled to death by feather duster wielding “righties”.

The day those self-styled freedom fighters, including those morons in the HR Nicholls club, IPA etc, get serious about defending Liberty, in Australia, and with it, apologize to real Liberals, and it would have to a very good apology indeed, is the day one might (only might, a very doubtful might) take that lot seriously.

Right now? No. Not that lot of “defenders of Liberty”, who run away from real fights, cowering behind locked doors. Ridiculous to contemplate taking them seriously, as they smear and attempt to silence real Liberals -and exert their own version of the “blasphemy law” against real Liberals, who do defend Liberty.

In the meantime, those conceited, puffed up cowards have stood by, while politicians and bureaucrats get away with ramming down things that are shredding Australians of their inalienable rights.

They are contemptible, because what they are really doing is spitting on Australians; as Bolt called many Australians, they “ are ingrates”.

Bravo, Ol’ Ironsides “Timmy” – or is that “Timbo”. No, it’s “Hypocrisyman”.

Meanwhile, deep within the bowels of another bunker, a cunning plan is being hatched:

Two jackbooted goons deep in conversation:

No.1: “I’ll silence your serfs, if you silence ours.”
No.2: “Why?”
No.1: “Don’t be silly, mine won’t rise up against me because they’ll believe you did it; and vice versa.”
No.2: “You reckon they will swallow that?”
No.1: “Now, now, they are only dumb oafs.”
No.2: “What about Kroger? He won’t like that. It’s his feudal right to bash up all his vassals, and to grant serf bashing rights to those who are his loyal liege men.”
No.1: “Right, let’s scrap that idea; I’ve just wet my pants.”

Having mused yesterday on:

Of course, Robb is not the only Liberal MP renouncing a highly moral measure [labour market reform]. Turnbull denounced it, Nelson is prevaricating over it, and then there are driveling backbenchers such as Chris Pyne, who should take up knitting instead.

Nelson has stopped prevaricating. Mind, he had been prevaricating since the moment he was appointed leader of the Opposition. Now he has stopped prevaricating. That is a good sign, after a couple of weeks, he made his first momentous decision as leader of the Liberal Opposition, and cheify weify of the shadow cabinet. The man has nuts.

Tut tut, for leaping to the salacious conclusion, because they are not those sort of nuts. He doesn’t have nuts nuts. He has the nuts, which fill the cavity located above the neck and between the ears. Mind, Kevin Rudd doesn’t have any nuts, he nibbles others’ nuts so he can feel brainy too – it shows, hiring, to taxpayers expense, a P&O cruise ship, mounting it with heavy machine guns, to pursue Japanese whalers is brainy on a number of counts:

Machine guns have no function other than, use against someone else; servicemen have a good clue as to against whom they should be used against, the Islamic enemy in the East. Not Rudd, he’s prepared to use them against civilians, of a friendly country, with whom Australians do business with, enjoy friendships to boot, to “save” mass murderers of krill.

Ah, just consider that, readers, and what it means, Rudd playing Cap’n Bloody Mental of the High Seas. Consider it: the Prime Minister is only threatening to commit very serious crimes on the high seas. So, while he crawls to Peking, that man is prepared to cause more than a very serious diplomatic incident against the Japanese! He’s not deranged, he is far worse than that, he is criminally insane.

Where were we…nuts. That’s right, Brendan Nelson has nuts, and not nuts nuts. We can tell he doesn’t have nuts nuts but only nuts, because of his first, serious decision he has made as leader of the opposition.

Around 5.03 –6.00 p.m. yesterday, he announced it:

“We have listened to the people,” there’s that note of contempt for ordinary Australians creeping in again, that characterizes so many “Liberals” riding roughshod over the Party and stuffing parliaments, “and we renounce labour market reform. We will hold the Cabinet to what it has proposed.”

No, the real reason is, Nelson has never been able to defend labour market reform because he, like so many of his colleagues, inclusive of Nick Minchin, of whom we have more to relate, is ignorant and has been too lazy to apply himself to the case.

If the Liberal MPs had any spine, they wouldn’t renounce it. They would let the ALP hang itself.

The recession, set in train by the RBA some years ago, will soon be fully visible. How severe it will be is, presently, only speculative, but the full impact is soon to hit Australians. By reversing the reform, the Cabinet will ensure not only many Australians will receive a 100% pay cut because they have been thrown onto the heap of the unemployed. Cabinet, therefore, will compound the fallout from the recession, ensuring the misery of crippling unemployment, the last time being the late 1980s to the 1990’s

How severe could the recession be? Regulation is strangling enterprise in Australia, noting firms have shut down because of regulation. So, add on top another recession Australians do not need to have, if it were not for the RBA and brain dead politicians, and it might turn out another horror run, like the last time. My betting is, it will certainly be very severe in Victoria, because of the sheer amount of carnage the Bracks-Brumby regime has wreaked against enterprise in Victoria.

The point is clear enough: when the recession hits, compounding the rising unemployment rate due to the reversal of the reform, a gutsy Liberal leader would be able to stand up in Parliament, and outside of Parliament and pulverize Rudd and his fellow cabinet cretins. Then, voters, suddenly concentrated on why the reform is “kind”, would come out swinging too and not only hit the ALP but demand a very early election.

No, that’s not for that spineless, socialist, statist, Brendan Nelson, with nuts instead of brains, and jelly instead of nuts nuts. It’s not for all the other spineless, ignorant nincompoops occupying precious Federal Liberal seats either. No, not that lot.

The inference is crystal clear. When the Cabinet crumples form the shock of reality, all that Nelson and his fellow pseudo-Liberals will do is whine:

“Unemployment was lower under us. See, we told the Parliament, and the people that we are the only Party that can create jobs and keep unemployment low.”

Ah, yes, enough Liberal ministers, as employment rose due to the reforms, stood up in Parliament and boasted: “ We have created thousands of jobs”. No they didn’t, they got out of the way, well, to an extent they did, and markets and entrepreneurs did the real work of shrinking the heap of the unemployed.

However, it’s the line of savage attack itself which is the point, as in, it’s as damaging as shouting boo and hoping Rudd will run away out of fright.

In the meantime, the ACTU is now calling in its chips, and demanding a complete reversal of labour market reform to the good old days of thuggery, and high unemployment rates. They will collect; they own the backsides of Rudd and his cabinet, for they won the election. No, that’s not altogether right, the HR Nicholls Society defeated reform and the Liberal Party.

After all, that lot of clowns put up as the “case” for reforms the very false arguments the ACTU relied on to defeat reform. Adding for good measure; ‘ Australians are paid too much, and that they really should be content living the life of medieval peasants and serfs.’

That lot, Hugh Morgan, Des Moore, Ray Evans, Michael Kroger with his fellow HR Nicholls clubman and sole pal Peter Costello, and Nick Minchin, only blew the campaign out of the water and helped the ALP to an election victory.

Their pals are not Liberals. Their pals are the ACTU bosses, who will tidy up what that lot of blundering, “useful idiots” completed through their connections, as in boots applied to the soft heads and backsides of Rudd and Gillard.

Brendan Nelson’s collapse is only the final reverbration from what has happened, the total collapse of the Liberal Party. Not that that disturbs Liberal MPs; they still feed at the taxpayer kept hogs’ trough, and that is the real reason why they entered parliament.

In the wake of the election defeat, Liberal Party members are scrabbling around seeking an explanation. Too many won’t admit, they are one of the many reasons why the Liberals were defeated, even if some of them are honest on some noteworthy points:

Robb Andrews declared, “We’re in appalling shape.” No kidding, all these years the Party has been in appalling shape, and now he notices. It’s impossible to agree with his reasons for why it’s in appalling shape, for example:

Mr Robb has also hit out at John Howard and the previous federal cabinet, of which he was a member, for misusing their Senate majority with “hard-edged” policies such as Work Choices.

Hard edged? What, they didn’t allow mps to appear cute and cudly? So, policies which the ACTU demands be restored, giving many Australians a 100% pay cut by throwing them onto the scrap heap of the unemployed, is being nice?

What wasn’t hard edged was the clarity required to mount and press the campaign for the entirely sound and thus highly moral labour market reform. It doesn’t gel, it seems, with Robb, freeing labour market reforms is, since he stresses the pr stunt of appearing cute and cuddly, is one of the kindest things any Cabinet can do for many Australians.

The real problem was, Ministers, the economic guru Peter Costello, their ‘advisers’, and the HR Nicholls Society, didn’t have a grip on what the reasons for that reform are. Nor did it occur to them, they had to be properly armed because they had to convince voters that it is a ‘kind’ reform.

It is obvious that it occurred to none in the Cabinet to seek sound advice outside of the HR Nicholls Society. It is obvious not one of them spotted the advice from the HR Nicholls Society was badly flawed, and neither did their advisers. Well, that is what you get when lawyers and pr men are hired as ‘advisers’, nothing but blanks.

Of, course, Robb is not the only Liberal MP renouncing a highly moral measure. Turnbull denounced it, Nelson is prevaricating over it, and then there are driveling backbenchers such as Chris Pyne, who should take up knitting instead.

“We developed a hard edge across a raft of policies and I think that left an impression on the minds of the public.” ?!

What, with “watermelon red policies”, spending spree election promises; and that’s not counting the massive increases in (de-) education, ‘health’, and so many other boons when in office, and Robb Howard a hard man? There are those who are convinced the Liberal Party was reduced to a wing of the socialist parties.

‘”We didn’t reinvent ourselves over the last four or five years,” Mr Robb said.

Now, unless he means acquiring anew real Liberal principles, is Robb suggesting the Party didn’t travel far enough to the left? In that case, they did motor a rather long way down the socialist road.

He said factions were part of “human nature” (?!) but in the Liberal Party they had become less about ideology and more about personality.

Well, he’s partially right in that. Moreover, what is required now is open faction fighting, with members, inclusive of MPs, having to stand up before Liberal members and defend what they stand for, before all comers. There has to be vigorous engagement, because what is at stake now is the thrashing out of what principles the Liberal Party supposedly stands for.

In case Robb hasn’t noticed, Liberal membership has dropped by large annual numbers, for several years, precisely, because Liberal principles have been expunged from the Party.

The Liberal Party stands for nothing

Thus screamed “The Age” the other day.

Well, that is what the Party has been reduced to. The difference between the Victorian Division and the Divisions of the other states is, in addition to their own conceited Brahmin and Toorak Doctors’ wives types, lawyers, ‘dog kennel architects’, economic illiterates, statists and so forth is; they don’t have on top a Michael Kroger and pals making sure those Divisions also die rapidly from asphyxiation.

That lot, together, have ensured a Parliamentary Party in Victoria of blobbies led by Ted “the Toorak village idiot” Baillieau, and the likes of Helen Kroger who have been jobbed into Federal seats by Kroger and Costello. Bye the bye, it’s not only Liberals who muse, that lot could be mistaken for a left wing of the Victorian ALP led by “Red Ted”; it’s chaps on the other side of the fence who fancy so too.

“The Age” playing it up doesn’t add salt into the wound. It’s a bit of a ‘Johnny come lately’ reduced to stating the bleeding obvious.

What is going on?

One thing is clear; rather many are shirking from facing up to a few hard home truths. If they weren’t, then Liberal MPs would, first, be sacking their advisers and replacing them with those who can supply them the hard-edged advice they need. That would be a start only.

Nick Minchin did state two good measures that are needed, against others that are not impressive:

The report set out clearly what a successful political party must do to achieve its ultimate goals: attract people to join and work within it; harness the human talents and resources of its members providing them purpose and motivation; constantly develop, refine and promote its ideals, ideas, policies and platforms; select people to undertake leadership tasks in the lay party, the parliamentary sphere and in its professional structure; reach out into the community both for ideas and information; communicate its ideals and policies to the community, arguing its points of view and persuading people to support them; be successful in winning elections so that its policies may be translated into action by governments; and be able to keep a close scrutiny over its actions in government to ensure that those actions are in accord with its philosophy and policies…

…regular reappraisal of preselection procedures, with the committee attracted to plebiscites in which every party member residing in the relevant electorate has a vote in the preselection.

Well, those two reforms are needed; they’ve been needed for several decades, as Minchin admits. The obstacle is those, for their own narrow reasons, who are hostile to any measure which internally opens the Party. In Victoria, Kroger, Costello and their pals have made sure it cannot be done. Kroger only owns the Party.

I can’t see Minchin belting up Kroger, not on his record and on a very difficult matter, market reform. Minchin, grovelling on his knees, apologised to those who smashed labour market reform, the HR Nicholls Society. It begs another question, talking about principles and ideas when having failed to make thorough discovery on such a serious matter involves a lacunae, it exists in the brain.

There was a grave matter which Minchin could have lead by example, and he failed miserably, as did his fellow Cabinet Ministers. Moreover, they allowed Kroger and his brainless trust pals to get away with their stranglehold over the sources of advice. An instance:

Kroger, a senior Liberal Party figure told me, was handed crucial material. Kroger said he would pass it on. He did, to his brains trust, which promptly buried it; readers can draw the inference as to why his chums buried it.

Now, that is another problem, and it is not peculiar to Kroger and his chums at all, supply of advice. Pr types and lawyers engaged as advisers have strangled sources Ministers in the Howard Cabinet needed. I have in view telling examples.

Then, for the “lay membership”, it’s not a matter of turning the Party and branches into a hens’ chatter club. If the measure is to be fruitful, members have to be supplied with material, and with a range of speakers, who can guide them through matters fundamental to Liberalism. This has to be matched with open debate between those who can do that work, but might disagree on some fundamental points.

Debate should include guest speakers and their supporters who are hostile to Liberalism. The reason why should need no explanation. It can be noted, too many have shirked facing opponents out in the open.

Members need to be able to question and challenge. Moreover, MPs must be open to such challenges, and must be required to respond; they cannot be allowed fast escapes. For, members must have confidence in the capacity of MPS and candidates, and in the principles for which they stand. Unlike the present lot; rather too many stand for nothing at all, and have simply been flung into Electorates.

Next, there is another reason why members need to be fully engaged, which Minchin only partially touched on when he stated:”constantly develop, refine and promote its ideals, ideas, policies and platforms…” Labour market reform again serves as a telling illustration:

Voters, not just Liberal Party members, had to be convinced of why freeing labour market reform is sound. That means the case had to be thoroughly understood, and from that, confidently put to voters and defended. That is not as straightforward as it seems. Try it readers. Go to Jackson’s Labour Market Wars, read it thoroughly, concentrate on the economic reasons, and on false counter arguments. Make the effort to thoroughly understand the case, follow it with further in depth reading, and then do this:

If you have acquaintances who like a bit of cut and thrust, and who, say, are opposed to reform, engage them on it. For to do that is to realise how difficult it is. It requires careful statement. It requires facility to put it to the man in the street. It requires application and extesnive preparation to do it. It is something which distinguished Professors, in various fields, once did, some still do; they don’t confine themselves to poring over things with their fellows, a closed chat club.

They, as effectively as they could, put serious matter to the layman for their consideration. I still remember from childhood the sermons by a Lutheran Pastor; everyone was a first rate theological dissertation, and it was delightful to listen, and to wrestle with them.

Now, that is what Jackson does in his columns on economics:

His columns, it is unmistakable, stand on a welter of learning, and thorough penetration of economic theory. He is not taking readers through all the extensive intricacies of economics - capital theory, for example, is a massive subject. He his finding adequate expression for the comprehension of the lay reader of the crucial, fundamental, economic theorems and arguments, and demonstration.

That is in stark contrast to what Hugh Morgan, Ray Evans, and Des Moore produced; unreadable, inchoate rambles – but why? The answer is: their grip on the economics of labour markets is non-existent. A difficult, intricate subject cannot be successfully put in the absence of a solid, thorough understanding of the subject.

The ACTU knew the HR Nicholls clubmen were groping in the dark, and they didn’t guess it, they saw it in what that lot stated.

Those who cannot handle demanding subjects under neutral conditions have a snowflake’s chance of doing so in the heat of political contest. It showed, the Ministry ran away from reform. They backtracked; trying to extricate themselves from the deep hole their advisers had dug for them.

They seemed as stunned as Morgan and co. did. They couldn’t work out why voters were not gobsmacked by the brilliance of the measure. Morgan and co did expect voters would be gobsmacked and would say, “Yay, what a wondrous thing it is.” Hit in the face by the reaction, Moore and Evans turned nasty, while Morgan retreated quickly from the public’s scorching gaze. Ministers panicked.

So, those are the only two measure suggested by Minchin which warrant adoption, but a lot of work is required to make them work properly, and that “w” word is something, it is clear, too many in the Party are adverse too.

It means too, changing a few telling and nasty attitudes: contempt for members, treating them as vassals. It means, for once trusting them. It means charging them with political engagement of the Party against opponents. Those are the very things that were eliminated too long ago, which is why the ALP has a head start.

There should be no shirking from even ferocious debates within the party. Pretending to be happy clappy and that load of rubbish, “broad Church” doesn’t establish principles and win elections. Politics entails a fight for principles. If principles are not hammered out in robust fashion, the upshot is what we witness today, a Party that stands for nothing but propping up navel gazing hacks.

Ah, well, bang goes the good suggestions; it requires spine to proceed in that fashion, and many of those who dominate the Liberal Party lack it.

Australian Liberal Party in turmoil? It is about time there was “turmoil” in the Liberal Party. If there had been turmoil in the past, it wouldn’t be the gasping, sclerotic carcass it is today.

In the item, “The odd couple”, I wrote:

One has witnessed it, and many senior figures have witnessed it - inclusive of Greg Lindsay of the CIS telling lies about Mr. Gerard Jackson. The reasons why Lindsay smeared Jackson is clear to all who know about it – after all, some only got it straight from the horse’s mouth.

The background is a conversation, some time ago, with sources on various serious matters, which involved comment on the CIS. One of the sources, who raised the CIS , contacted me yesterday evening, having read the article, to clarify something, which entails an unqualified apology to Greg Lindsay and retraction of the statements.

I apologise sincerely to Mr. Lindsay, and retract the offending statements.

I do not retract all else in the item, inlcuding reflection on the contradiction between the CIS claim to be a “leading” free market ‘think tank’, and its output. Their claim is:

The Centre for Independent Studies is the leading independent public policy ‘think tank’ within Australasia. The CIS is actively engaged in support of a free enterprise economy and a free society under limited government where individuals can prosper and fully develop their talents. By critical recommendations to public policy and encouraging debate amongst leading academics, politicians and journalists, the CIS aims to build a better society.

Analysis of economic questions and matters, ,and supplying advice to Cabinets and other parties, is not a child. We are also talking about politicians, their advisers, and bureacrats and what they do, and what they act on. For a decade the Coalition cabinet has acted on bad advice with ruinoius consequences. The problem, therefore, is so-called adults are playing loose and fast with Australians. It is nothing less than immoral, but the culprits are not simply ignorant, unprincipled, spineless politicians and bureaucrats.

The problem are those, including the CIS, who claim to be defenders of “free markets” , and supply advice based on, accordinlgy sound economic theory. The CIS, the IPA and the HR Nicholls Society, far from having done that, have severely damaged the Liberal case, because their output is appallingly bad.

Humphreys on “carbon emissions” economic controls is just another instance of what is wrong with the “think tankers”. His paper involves two lines, science and economics, and he gets both badly wrong. No Austrian school economist would have written what he did on “Carbon -trading-taxes”.

No Austrian erconomist would have mentioned the “man causes global warming” grand lie unless they had read and understood the arguments, or had brought in somone who understood claim and the science behind it, or rather the dung heap of pseudo-science on which the “AGW” claim sits.

No Austrian school economist would have written a paper dedicated to helping politicians impose more heavy burdens on Australians, which also entails capital destruction. Every Austrian school economist knows “carbon trading” is both a tax, entails further regulatory burdens to force compliance, and it is a scam that makes a lucky few wealthy, while many Australians are impoverished.

So, what is the CIS banging on about when it publishes rubbish like that, by someone who pretends to be of the Austrian school. They are not defending free markets at all by such not a-typical rumblings palmed off as serious economic analysis and advice. They are on the same level as the IPA, damaging Liberalism, not advancing it, and with it supplying bad advice to those who can ruin the lives of many Australians. That is an appalling state of affairs and it shows.

The decade of the Liberal Cabinet has been wasted, ending in a disaster - the defeat of labour market reform, triggering the election defeat. A decade of nothing much to disturb socialists and statists at all but instead, much that entrenched the objectives of socialists and statists.

During the weekend, I caught up with an acquaintance. He will be closing down his firm in the near future. The reason why: he has had it up to the gills with the burdens each tier of government has imposed. The final straw for him has been the disgusting OH&S regime of the Bracks-Brumby regime. Well, at least he won’t have to worry about the impact of “carbon emissions” punishment. His is not the only case of an entrepeneur shutting down because of the hideous burdens polticians, and their advisers, have imposed. I know of many such cases.

Ah, Liberal Senator Helen Coonan, another ignoramus, had the hide to stand up in public and declare regulation is not a burden and doesn’t damage enterprises. That, it supplies, according to her, a predictable framework for entrepeneurs to engage in markets. She could be mistaken for the illiterates that stuff the ALP, the Greens and the Democrats. Who was her ‘adviser’, as Minister of ” Communications”, another damned lawyer? A clueless “think tanker”? Des Moore, Hugh Morgan, Ray Evans, Andrew Bolt?

It is shocking. And, what are the “free market think tankers” doing. They, in damaging Liberalism, have only entrenched politicians and their advisers, and the bureaucrats on their demolition derby run. It is not that lot, the whole lot of them, who bear the consequences, it is every Australian, who, having no choice, unless they wish to indulge prison time, have to wear the grand schemes and burdens and endure the ensuing carnage.

That, readers, is also why one is happy to savage not only the HR Nicholls Society, but also the likes of Bolt and Albrechtson. Juvenile delinquents, playing games with matters they do not have much of a clue about at all, and sneering at the man in the street to boot, and wreaking havoc with it.

It is not funny, readers, a joke, writing about the types who have damaged Liberalism. It’s not a game, hitting lefties and “Liberal” twerps.

At times, readers, it makes me wretch, no,truly. It’s not a laughing matter; which is why sarcasm is a safety valve. There are very serious figures around Melbourne who take the same dim view of the types who have done nothing but wreak havoc - the commentariat, politicians, bureaucrats, and “think tankers”.

They enjoy sarcasm too, but they also don’t find the matter funny, a game, a joke. But, then, they are serious men and women, as opposed to the dilletantes, ignoramuses, and buffoons who have wrecked the Liberal Party and Liberal causes.

How odd: these days, Andrew Bolt and Janet Albrechtson are writing the same content(-less) columns. One called for Howard to job in Costello as Prime Minister and so did the other. Bolt waxes lyrically about a Kroger dictatorship of the liberal Party (why doesn’t Kroger just buy out the Liberal Party) and the other wonders at how marvellous it would be. She confuses an ad- hominem attack with destroying a false argument, crying it’s a foul lefty plot, and, lo, he echoes her. They are at it again; they must be joined to the same neuron.

The two latest examples read as if written by demented, paranoid, conspiracy theorists. Who, readers, is spoon-feeding them, escapes me; a Kroger perhaps?

No.1: The latest instance.

(The second instance will be related in a separate item, because of what it involves.)

Albrechtson screams hysterically about a Stalinist plot to purge the media of “righties”, silencing them forever. We can be sure of it because the ALP is warming the Treasury side benches, and the Left is resurgent.

Bolt trumps the Brechty baby. He fears he is already in the sights of the Red Guard’s firing squad - but, he continues, he will gamely fight on. That’s reassuring, Bolt still in there clobbering leftists and the Rudd Cabinet, right up to his last gasp , to the tune of a Roger Whittaker ditty; bravo. Now, I have to wipe the keyboard, having splurted the morning cup-o’-scotch all over it.

First suspicions prove reliable: whatever twisted their thumbs had to be as savage as a sugar ant feasting on the old thigh. To line them up, read:

Bolt, “Beware those whackers”, 14/12/07

Albbrechtson, “Orwellian Left quick to unveil totalitarian heart”,12/12/07

Here is what triggered their fury mixed with fear, an innocuous, light item by a Mr. Guy Rundle:

“Rundle v. Albrechtson round 3“

Rundle summarises what he actually proposed in the original article that infuriated Janet and Bolt. Then, he has a thoroughly good time sending Janet up - it was too easy.

There are good reasons to laugh at Crikey.com, the trite ‘content’ of their “insider” “reports’. There are good reasons to loathe that pack of drivelling lefties, such as smearing certain individuals. To recollect an instance of the latter:

…The KKR, believing Prodos to be an easy target to attack, blundered.

Confident, they ventured more than their usual thuggish, stong-arm tactics against non-KKR candidates and their Branches. Kroger’s stick puppets: Sheezel, Hannan, and Barry defamed him, and ran to Crikey dot com with their lies. Crikey published on it, believing it a great wheeze but only to wake up with a note saying: You have committed defamation. Crikey has pulled down its slimey libels from its site.

Sheezel grovelled to those scumbags of Crikey.com., apologising for “the mistake”. Imagine it defaming a solid Liberal to the delight of those lefty slimes and then apologising to them for it. There were more than a few senior liberal figures who itched to take a horsewhip to the hides of Kroger’s thugs.

Not for Rundle’s reasons, but his basic proposition is right. Treacherous leftists, whom Brookesnews has carefully covered, should be sacked from Murdoch’s papers, and so should the likes of Janet, Woods, and Bolt. A vast improvement could be thus effected. The objection is: who would replace the likes of Janet, bolt, Woods, McCrann?

The editor of the “Herald Sun”, for example, fancies himself as a real lefty eating “conservative”; he’s only boasted of it on radio. Then, you turn to the “Herald Sun”, read the editorials, and the opinion pages. What is striking is the complete disjuncture between the claim and the reality.

What would happen is, needless to say, the likes of Janet and Bolt would be replaced with more preening ignoramuses, who continue on the good work of wrecking Liberal positions and convincing readers the Liberal Party is a party of unprincipled cretins.

Looked at properly, Bolt, Janet, and et al are, along with the gene swamp pool the CIS, IPA and HR Nicholls Society, protectionists - of themselves. They work at preventing talent rising on the Liberal side of the fence. They do not prescribe for themselves what they prescribe for most Australians. This is what has frightened Janet and Bolt, the notion that they can be sacked, and replaced with real talent.

Don’t overlook the hubris of Janet, McCrann, Bolt, et al. According to them, they are the only “righties” fighting the left. Bolt’s columns and speech is littered with the perpendicular I: “I told you”; “what did I say”; “you’ll see that I’m right”; “I’m right on this”.

Those navel gazers are gurus on all things. Just as Hugh Morgan, Des Moore, Ray Evans are. ‘Lo! They speak. All are gob-smacked’. “Let all mortal Aussies keep silence/ And in loving reverence stand…”

Though they have completely misread Rundle, Janet and Bolt have a record of calling for the heads of leftists. Yet, they whine when the left dares a poke at them. They have never noticed, the left have been poking them all along, and having a good laugh doing it. Not, of course, that was what Rundle proposed. Matters are, though, worse than the terror of lefties jabbing those two in the ribs.

Glasshouses and rocks.

It doesn’t do for types like that to complain about a “ Stalinist purge” when they are either party to such thuggery themselves, or advocate it, and not just against leftists, but against real Liberals. Forget stones, the “righties” throw rocks.

Brechty babes advocated it in her call for liberals to imitate the good old days that saw the rise of the German National Socialist Party and, uncle Adolf.

Bolt might enlighten all as to which pack of “liberals” black-list those who have a solid grip on matters crucial to the Liberal Party, and with it, on how to fight the left. No, that would be too embarrassing for him, for he is one of them. It happens to be the HR Nicholls Society. Here’s an example from his fellow “clubber”:

“So when Blairy sent out a cowardly email accusing Jackson of being an incompetent illiterate who deserved to be blacklisted by the club, even I saw red.”

It’s alright Bolt, readers can google search Brookesnews and read up on the thuggery of his fellow “clubmen” themselves.

Here’s another anecdote, just for the benefit of Bolt’s fan club:

Timmy Blair, a senior source told me, at a meeting of the HR Nicholls Society, barracking as Des Moore smeared Jackson, cried out: he should be “black-listed”. The silver-tail continued;Timmy has also felt free to smear Jackson. Let’s put it this way: calling Jackson “illiterate” while hanging out with real economic illiterates is an indication of something unhinged – it’s called a brain.

Can Bolt explain why the HR Nicholls Society and their inbred cousins, the Adam Smith Club, CIS and IPA strangle talent, smear talent, make sure no talent capable of advising the Liberal Party soundly and fighting the left is brought to attention and promoted. The policy of that lot is something the left would find very strange indeed: best to tell lies against talent and bury them, lest they fade from view. (Contrast: the left are always on the hunt for talent to advance their causes.)

Bolt can scream it’s not true, but it is true. Senior figures have witnessed it.

Hubris, jealousy, and avarice drive the cowards who boast of being “ leading free market thinkers” and “defenders of Liberty”. Yes, Mr. Bolt, please explain how and why belonging to a pack of backstabbing cowards is morally superior to belonging to a leftist pack of cowardly, backstabbing leftists.

Why, Bolt, Brechty baby, whine about imaginary Stalinist purges of the “right”, when you lot are busy doing it to liberals? Why moan about a non-existent threat to your heftily paid journo jobs, when types like you two,your bosom pals, are busily silencing real Liberals, and kicking them out of Liberal Party offices, and making sure all forums are closed meetings for the gene swamp?

The left are Liberals’ opponents. Whereas, Liberals’ enemies are in the Liberal Party ( Kroger and his chums) and in the media.

It’s why, the Nicholls Society, Adam Smith Club etc, will soon be extinct, the memberships are dying out from old age. No, truly, they drive out keen young Liberals, and all that remain are the same narrow circle who are now near geriatric age. I’ve checked this:

Not having attended an Adam Smith Club or HR Nicholls Society “meeting” for well over a decade, they were never impressive, one relies on reports these days. Some of my sources, who occassionally manage to bring themselves to endure the unendurable, attend just to check if the dying still breathe. Nothing has changed they told me:

“You mean, it’ still a….x?” ” Yes,” each replies, “the same clutch of dotards speaking down to each other.”

Each acquaintance has remarked on the complete absence of young, keen, bright men and women.

Hand in hand with Janet, Bolt whines about a figment of his imagination, a leftist putsch against “ righties” in the media. Bolt is entirely silent on: his club, and his new pal, Michael Kroger, indulge in “ Stalinist purges”, against Liberals, frequently. What cowardly, lying hypocrites they are.

Bolt’s and Janet’s real whine is: while the man in the street must compete for jobs, those two, and their cretinous pals believe they are exempt, and they work hard to make sure they stay exempt.

The silvertail, having seen the HR Nicholls swamp first hand, is also appalled at how bad that lot is. He mused, “A full frontal lobotomy seems to be a perquisite for membership”. He’s worried his company might have wasted good money on that lot.

No, honestly, readers, there are Liberal heavyweights who have not been able to accept how bad that lot are until they attended a “closed circuit” session; then they undergo a rapid change, their ‘good will to all men” sensibility is suddenly abridged.

Bolt and Janet can sleep tight at night. Apart from Rundle, leftists don’t wish to see Janet and Bolt sacked. No, they wish them long life in the Murdoch stable.

Bolt’s and Janet’s’ ‘Chrissy’ to the left, and they deliver them 365 days a year.

While such types are paraded as the best and, brightest “righties” in the media, the Unions and the ALP party machine are saved a fortune in campaigning against the Liberal party and Liberal positions. The disastrous labour market reform campaign is a hideous example: Bolt, Janet, with the HR Nicholls Society, blew it right out of the water, to the ACTU’s merriment.

The objection to what Bolt and Janet wrote is not the display of juvenile temper. It is, those two have played a major part in wrecking labour market reform, and in bringing about the defeat of the Liberal Party.

The left don’t wish to see the likes of those two sacked from newspapers because; the man in the street now associates the Liberal Party with raving mad, right wing zealots, who are off the planet: that is how much damage those two alone have done to Liberalism and the Liberal Party.

The left is enjoying their latest puerile, sterile, hysterical efforts because, they see what Bolt and Janet, busily admiring their navels, don’t. Those two are destroying the credibility of liberalism for the public. They are purveying a completely false impression that is becoming firmly fixed in the perspective of the man in the street. There is evidence for this:

It is, anecdotal but it is increasingly a commonplace to hear the man in the street refer to the Liberals as the Party of unprincipled, ‘rightwing’ would be dictators.

Not that, sadly enough, it is altogether off beam, because Kroger is attempting to impose a dictatorship on the Liberal Party, exercised through spineless, conceited, ignoramuses, contemptuous of ordinary Australians and Liberal Party members. The likes of Kroger, Sheezel the “Shitzeel”, Helen Kroger, Russell Hanan, and rather too many Party “ hacks”, are what many see reflected in the tripe poured out by the likes of Janet and Bolt. That is how bad the “righties” in the media are.

That is how much damage their recent efforts have done. Oh, it’s not a crack, nor a joke. The left are overjoyed with the sheer stupidity of Bolt and Janet. There is sufficient reason to give those two the “D – notice”. How do they manage it, to be at once both buffoons, and wreckers of “ good causes”? “Stalinist purges”, bah!

Someone stick dummies in their mouths, for waiting forever to hear their next fiction stories is a doddle.
——————————————————————————————–
Having, besides Brookesnews’ exhaustive coverage, examined the pulp ‘the HR Nicholls Society palms off as economic analyis it is worth noting, the CIS’ pulp economics.

The following tripe is typical of the CIS:

“Exploring a Carbon Tax for Australia”, John Humphreys, in pdf format, here.

It is tripe.

Just one correction, out of very many reqired: Humphreys, the “carbon trading” scheme is both a tax and a criminal scam.

Do you really have a clue what such measures really entails, because your paper shows you don’t, nor do the seniors at the CIS.

One more brief point:

CIS - Humprheys ,it reads, accept the lies spun by the Greens and charlatans pretending to be scientists:

One of the most prominent policy issues being debated in Australia at the moment is how the government should respond to the potential threat from climate change. Mainstream scientific opinion suggests that increased emissions of greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide) are leading to global warming, and that this could cause significant costs if not adequately addressed. In contrast, there is no mainstream opinion as to how policy-makers can best respond.

And, that lot, together with the HR Nicholls Society, IPA, Mcrann and Alan Woods claim to be leading ‘free market thinkers’.

The Carbon Coalition also needs to fire a broadside into the rotted hull of the CIS, and not just against the Greens and the Government.