by Mary W Maxwell
In a stunning flash of poultry insight, Gumshoe editor Dee McLachlan concocted the above photo. I think we should take the day off from writing articles and let that picture sink in.
Please comment along the lines of what can be done about the fact that our MPs don’t work for us. A friend of mine showed me a list of 24 MPs to whom she recently sent notice of an urgent national matter, yet got no replies. (Compare Mal “Return-to-Sender” Hughes. He received at least an occasional reply in past years.)
It is an untenable situation. Please be as creative as you wish. Show that Gumshoers aren’t about to “chicken” out.
Thanks!
Been there, done that, but you have chosen to ignore my proposals without comment.
Oldavid, you forwarded material to me some time ago. We were in email discussion. Then you pulled them.
No, I didn’t. You vaguely implied that my style didn’t suit your style or editorial policy.
I said that you could edit it all to your heart’s content and publish it in your own name but if my name was to go on it I want to see it and approve it first. The only thing being discussed at the time was an open letter to Christian Porter and you wanted to redact significant parts of it.
The last word was do not publish without my approval.
Something as particular as an “open letter” does not bear significant editing for obvious reasons.
One of the most obvious clues that most politicians do not work for the public and the nation is their continual absence from the House and the Senate during the sitting season.
I have just downloaded a fixture of sitting days for the House of Representatives and appears that the House only sits 22 days of this year. That’s if I have read the page correctly. Seems incredible!
If this is the case why isn’t EVERY Member of the House representing us, the people, present every sitting day? 22 days out of 365!
When the APRA Bill was voted on in the Senate, in February, it was passed by 7 of the 67 Senators.
When Mr Bob Katter presented the Bill on (The Australian version of the Glass- Steagall Act) the chamber was virtually empty.
This is nonsense and should be illegal.
Aussiemal,
The blame for this situation lies directly at the feet of the Australian electorate, who despite this knowledge, continually vote for the same traitors over and over again. Standing inline at shopping centers waiting in line to shake the hand of these people. THERE is the ISSUE here. I.M.H.O.
One thing we need to do is change our Constitution and include a requirement that no legislation can be passed in the either house of any parliament in Australia unless there is a sufficient number of members present that the number of members voting for a proposed law represents an absolute majority of members of that house.
For sure, we first need elector initiated referendums but by focusing out attention on elector referendums first and achieving that, we can then turn our attention to all the other matters that need to be fixed.
By writing ‘my will’ letters to politicians and forming groups and going to see their representatives in their offices, small numbers of us electors can make the corporate owned representatives feel the heat and match the pressure that the corporates are able to exert on House members.
Apparently it only takes 06% of the population to create a critical mass that will lead to a change of government. (from a recorded radio show from NZ I listened to last year.)
Sorry folks. I stuffed up. The House actually intends to sit 70 days in this current year. Even so, that is not over working our well paid politicians to be representing us every sitting day. They have I believe a massive number of staff to help with “out of House” work.
L.O.L. Come on, we all know, to access our Politicians it requires DONATIONS to their party.
I’m pretty sure this was recently made very clear by public announcements made.
Try donating a couple of hundred bucks in you letter of requesting a meeting, hinting that there may be more to come, should meeting be set up.
Betcha you’ll be successful.
In all my dealings with politicians the bottom line was, “What is in it for me?” The number of politicians that are principled individuals is low, and even for them they have to consider the bottom line in order to continue to have a seat.
If you send them a letter, you might get a return ‘form’ letter that acknowledges your concerns, yadda, yadda. If the issue is too controversial (eg: Port Arthur) you won’t even get the form letter. The same if you have a meeting with them. You get a handshake, a concerned look and smile, a thanks for coming, a photo opportunity – and then out the door you go and the next mug comes in.
They aren’t about to compromise their pre-selection opportunities for your small problem. If your issue is contrary to the party line, good luck.
They are looking for voting blocks and financial support. If they are choosing attending between two meetings they look at the size of crowd, the media coverage, who’s got the campaign finances, etc. – it’s a BUSINESS and they treat it like that. Just like you may have plans for your career and superannuation, so do they.
The control of the media allows control of public opinion and the politicians. The media can ‘spin’ anything any way they want it. If a politician starts ‘rocking the boat’, then the MSM can slaughter them.
I’ve been involved with or interacted with a number of small alternative parties. In every case they were compromised as ‘controlled opposition’.
On the other hand, the alternative media is a big thorn in the side of the control system. When I refer to the ‘alternative media’ I don’t mean the ‘shock jock’ clowns, they are just another form of ‘controlled opposition’. I’m referring to the various websites and blogs that the masses are slowly turning to in an effort to find out what is really going on.
Everything is monitored. If you start to organize, ‘they’ know it and will quickly determine who’s who and how to divert or control the group. If you are going to do something, you don’t use electronic media to coordinate the plan. To be effective, you may have to go it alone. It is not that there are spooks everywhere, but there are a Hell of a lot of stupid people that will compromise you. The ‘X Files’ had a popular line “Trust no one” – it’s good advice.
Knowing the above reality, you have to work within it. Consider it a form of ‘guerilla warfare’. The terrain and opposition constantly changes, change with it, be like water and move under and around the obstacles.
Eventually, the ‘100th monkey’ phenomena (collective consciousness) prevails.
Good one, Terry. A practical evaluation similar to my own long time observations.
However, I am not as pessimistic as you about the abject subservience of the plebiscite. The main problem is that they/we don’t realise that there is a viable alternative.
It’s their ‘system’. If you work within it, you are bound by their rules. If you start to win within that system, they will change the rules.
‘Moving the goalposts’ is not just a cliche’, I’ve had them rip the goalposts out of the ground and take them home – they will make sure you ain’t never gonna get close to the goalposts.
If you have a ‘viable alternative’, I’d love to hear it. I expect that so would they – so they can head it off before it goes anywhere.
A NEW game that doesn’t need goalposts — maybe?
The old game that has the immutable (unshift able) goalposts!
If everything is in a “process of becoming” then there are no goal posts. There is no perversity; there is no evil; there is only the convenience of the rich and powerful. Goodness, gracious me! they’ve always had a train of sycophants willing to lick the “boots” of “political correctness” for their political and monetary gain.
Everything is not (in some aspects) in the process of becoming. We are existing on a very sophisticated and constructed template that controls banking, media, and government. But systems usually erode and collapse… by things unexpected.
If the people are ever going to change anything, they have to realize how fake it all is first, get that Leon ?
Fascinating! Do yous really suppose that the Natural Order can be subverted or inverted by your fleeting infatuations.
Nah! The more that you knows that yous is wrong the more yous perverts will bring more grief on ordinary people trying to do their ordinary duty.
Terry,
very true , good analogy .
Chook city, North Dakota
email form the leonard peltier tea
Greetings Friends, Family and supporters,
We were hoping to share some good news about our visit with Leonard this week but that was short lived. Even though the Elder’s Unit where Leonard is housed is no longer locked down, Coleman 1 is in a lock down status thus preventing visits. However, the prison stated there may be visits next week-end, we’ll see! We are still actively pushing to get a special legal visit! In fact, we had to speak to the Bureau of Prison’s Regional office in order to have the legal department in Coleman respond to our attorney. If this denial of a Legal Visit continues, we will pursue the matter in court! Leonard’s freedom depends on his ability to work closely with his legal team. While we have been building up a legal fund, filing a brief can be very, very costly, so we need your continued support. You can help by purchasing merchandise from the website shop or check out the new paintings on Peltier Art.
It seems to me that by voting (or donkey voting) we are giving our consent to be governed by these degenerates. I am looking for a basis to fight the fine that comes along with refusal to vote, eg failure to make full disclosure as to whose interests are being served.
That ‘Voting is Compulsory” is yet another LIE.
It is compulsory to attend and get your name crossed off.
That is quite so as I have been doing for many years adding a swipe at the crooks presented as candidates by writing across the ballot paper “NO SUITABLE CANDIDATES”.
I have more recently discovered that there is an effective, and perfectly legal, way to register a valid vote of “no confidence” in the candidates presented. If there is a candidate(s) you approve of you can use an indelible pen to indicate your preferences in the boxes in the usual way and you can exclude all other (or all) candidates from consideration by drawing an indelible line through the preference box and the candidate’s name which precludes a “normal” distribution of preferences that you don’t approve of. This is not an “informal” or invalid vote.
Presently, the “preferential voting system” is cunningly skewed to benefit the major Parties.
If a sufficient number of voters (I don’t know how many) deliberately exclude enough candidates the election must be declared “null” and a new election held with NEW CANDIDATES.
This applies to State and Federal “Lower Houses” of Parliament. I don’t know how it might apply for the Senate… they keep changing the rules for that.