Tonight, riled reader Shaun O’Brien debuts on Webdiary with a rip roaring critique of Webdiary, me and politics in general. Welcome aboard Shaun!

 

The sky is falling

by Shaun O’Brien

Often I have poised over the keyboard ready to unleash a tirade of abuse towards the thoughts expressed in WebDiary over the last few years but have always restrained by saying “Whats the point?” Not being “political savvy” enough to know what is really going on behind the scenes has always been at the top of my mind, especially when I can’t say for sure that what I read/see/hear from the media from ALL sources can be relied upon as being factually correct and not so biased that it incorrectly gives the wrong impression of what’s really happening. Doesn’t say much for your profession does it? I think lawyers are thought of better.

Some History of my leanings

I began my political awareness at uni (surprise, surprise) seeing for the first time grass roots level action and reading current affairs in a new light as I ventured out into the big world on my own. My staple diet of information was The Australian and it is still is my favourite media outlet, however I counterbalance this right wing media by reading smh.com.au, which by the way leaves the news.com.au site for dead (daylight second).

I have never joined a political party and never will. My parents are small business owners with no tertiary education, catholic backgrounds and conservative in voting. I am also a conservative voter, although less enthusiastic about the Queensland conservatives (I have nil desire for any Queensland party right now!). I am a Liberal supporter but don’t believe that Howard is the only reason to vote for the Libs. In fact I dislike the carping nature of his leadership – I put it down to “small man syndrome”. However the general beliefs of the Libs are close to my heart and that’s why I vote for them. I will shed no tears when Howard resigns.

Knowing that the SMH is generally left leaning, I recognise that Webdiary is a place for non-Liberal/Howard writings, but there seems to be a failure in actually promoting pragmatic solutions (not ideological theories that would make Lenin proud) and actually assessing what the alternative parties offer instead of current federal government policies.

1. War on Terror

I agree that the Federal Government went to war lying to the public as to the real reason and that the WMD claims were garbage. They should have just said that we had to do it to keep the USA on side for the ANZUS alliance (as per Kim Beazley comments on the recent intelligence report). And that is reason enough, since we are not big enough to be alone in this region without a sympathetic friend and we are not Asians regardless of what the ALP says and never will be in the eyes of our neighbours. That alone is enough to ensure we have a powerful friend to call upon. It happened once before and only a fool would think it couldn’t happen again!

Should the invasion have happened? I really don’t know since it seems that the form of a future Iraqi Government that may take hold when they finally have elections may produce a form of country not too dissimilar to Iran, and that won’t be good for the region.

As far as increasing the risk of terrorist activity all I can say is that what happened in Madrid would have happened anyway even if Saddam were still there, just like Bali, and will continue to happen whilst nation states allow their lands and resources to be used by terrorists.

There are probably dozens of these countries and Iraq was NOT one of the main offenders. But allowing him to thumb his nose at the UN in particular and the US allows these other states to feel emboldened and allow terrorists in their countries and to do what they do is bad for the world.

Now it looks like a terrorist act can bring down a government, and many seem to be cheering the end result. Would they be happy if another terror act in Britain brought down Blair? Or have another plane plough into the Empire State Building to end GWB? What about Australia?

These people have nothing better to say than “I told you so”, even though what happened in Iraq has nothing to do with what these terrorists are trying to achieve.

Al-Qaeda had nothing to do with pre-war Iraq so why does the media say that the terrorists bombed Spain for their contribution to the Iraq war? When the media say this what they are really referring to is “support for the US” in general.

This is a war between those who hate the US and those who support/have similar cultures as the US and nothing more.

GWB could have remained out of Iraq or we could have had a Democrat in the White House and Latham in the Lodge and the bodycount from terrorist bombs would have been the same. Those who say it wouldn’t are lying as much as Howard did.

Local politics are clouding the whole problem in dealing with these terrorists, and will continue until there is bipartisan support and agreement as to the real reason why there are Al Qaeda/Islamic extremism/Middle East problems, including oil production and consumption issues.

Those who that France is a beacon for world harmony forget Rainbow Warrior and Pacific Island testing. How quickly we forget – they are no better than the US.

2. Pauline Hanson and Abbott

Another issue I have dwelt on for a while is your negative stance to the attempts by Abbott (and whoever else) to bring down Hanson covertly. As a fellow conservative seeing Pauline Hanson’s rise was very worrying as it tried to move the country to the far right.

However the left leaning media people went after Howard for not putting Pauline and her supporters in their place immediately. So what was he supposed to do? Most if not all of her ideas were stupid, but it did hit a cord with those ultra conservative voters who would have naturally voted Libs/Nats anyway.

Margo, not once have I seen you or your fellow colleagues advocate that the ALP dismiss and repudiate the Greens in the same way for their stupid unworkable ideas, that would never work or would cost so much in employment, jobs and growth etc.

Green voters would generally vote ALP if that were all they could vote for, just as One Nation supporters vote for the Coalition.

Why has the media let this hypocrisy happen? Why does the ALP get away with getting close to the Greens (re Latham and Tassie trip for Green preferences) when if the Coalition did the same with One Nation supporters/party (overtly anyway) they would be crucified? Many journalists should be dismissed from their industry on this point alone!

Anyway Abbot should be congratulated for taking a stand not supported by this country’s media in dealing with One Nation because they were disaffected Coalition supporters at the end of the day.

The media wanted the Coalition to take them Pauline Hanson apart with a sledgehammer instead of dealing with them as the ALP treats its Green friends. SHAME ON THE MEDIA.

And why were the Greens so quiet when the debate raged in 2000/1 on the increases in fuel excises from CPI adjustments/GST. I never heard a word from them (or the ALP) about how it’s better for the environment if the country got used to not using their cars and only the “stick” (higher fuel prices) will achieve this – no “carrots” large enough as an alternative. I would love to debate Bob Brown on this point alone!

3. Ladder of Opportunity?

Seeing Latham rise in the polls and use his “ladder of opportunity” raises some interesting points as to where he (and you Margo) would like to see the country head if he won office.

The ALP stands for nothing more than mediocrity. Sure the ALP will want people to climb that ladder, but once they get to the 4th rung its greased up so no-one can climb any further.

Just in case you manage to get a few rungs more with lots of hard work, the lackeys of the ALP will be at the bottom of the ladder shaking it so you fall off. Since when does it mean that even when you pay taxes, if you choose to go outside the system (ie health/education) then you are not entitled to any return on the tax dollars you have put into the system. Socialism at its finest!

Why does a child get discriminated against as to how much tax dollars go to his/her education depending if they go public/private. If I choose private education why should my child be denied the same tax dollars I put into the system as the person who sends his child to a public school? If I want to put more of my hard earned money into my child’s education why should I be penalised?

I haven’t won Gold Lotto but that’s how the ALP treats anyone who wants to spend more to get something extra.

The same goes to health as well. I see little of my Medicare Levy each year but I do get the 30 percent private health insurance rebate which allows that if I do need medical treatment I won’t need a public bed but again the ALP sees that I must forgo my tax dollars if I go outside the public domain. The ALP’s slogan should be to climb the “stepladder of opportunity” cause that’s as high as they want you to get in life.

Well that’s about as far as I can go for today. As to the title “The sky is falling…” it’s because my small children listen to a ABC playschool tape when in the car about these animals who think that the sky is falling and nearly get eaten by the wolf who knows better. Perhaps you should be careful about exclaiming how bad things are supposedly in Australia and how democracy is crumbling – neither are happening and you are taking your eye off reality.

Kerry Packer is always waiting around the corner, Margo, if you are not careful.