Thursday 5 August 2010

With friends like these...

23 comments:

David A said...

Warren Entsch is just coasting along arrogantly expecting to win the seat of Leichhardt. He makes outrageous false promises and doesn't care that he doesn't actually achieve anything. Abbott and Hockey have snubbed Cairns and decided to give millions to Townsville which doesn't need it as much as we do. The local Liberal National Party branch is in disarray with Entsch, Quick and Byrne running a clique that has alienated ordinary branch members.
Jim Turnour, on the other hand is working pretty darn hard to win the funding for the Cairns Cultural Precinct, the Daintree Observatory and big money for small business. He's a persistant bastard and the Labor Ministers run scared when Jim knocks on their doors. But that's the only way you get real action. You just keep going. Jim has a strong work ethic and has a reputation in Canberra for hard work, persistance and loyalty to his electorate. We need a fighter in Cairns, not a blowhard.

Allergic to Spin said...

Mr. Anthony, you have got to be kidding!

Mothers little helper said...

If Jim nods one more time he will be able to claim RSI compensation. Pathethic little 'yes' man.

hooter said...

What a load of shit jim is the joke of canberra he asks a question and the house roars.
What a lying prick you are.
Out of the sydney morning hearal yesterday .
The local member for the far-north Queensland seat of Leichhardt, Jim Turnour, had been asked a question at the fag end of Prime Minister Julia Gillard's Cairns press conference!

Far worse, Turnour, a slight man who has barely caused a ripple in the political firmament of Canberra, was about to attempt an answer.

Advertisement: Story continues belowThere is a rhythm to these prime ministerial press conferences. Gillard faces the assembled media, delivers her latest spending promise, sinks the slipper into Tony Abbott and then sets to responding to questions.

Responding may be too strong a word. Her answers can be broken down to two themes. The government has a marvellous economic plan; Tony Abbott has none at all.

All the while, the local member, whoever he or she may be, stands at the Prime Minister's shoulder nodding enthusiastically at each point about the government's triumphs, looking grave when the Opposition Leader's name is mentioned and flashing a ghastly grin at moments that seem most appropriate.

Finally, when Gillard judges she has wrestled her twin themes to a satisfactory conclusion, she tells the journalists ''thanks very much'', swings on her heel and marches out.

Yesterday, however, things didn't go to script.

As Gillard left the podium, a television journalist chanced his arm with Turnour. If, as seemed likely, Turnour lost his seat to the Liberals' Warren Entsch on August 21, what would have been the main reason, the reporter cried.

Horrors. Turnour hesitated, stopped and moved back to the podium. Gillard had no alternative but to check her determined exit strategy and return to his side. Would the local member make a fearful hash of it and mess up the leader's day?

Turnour, however, had paid close attention to Gillard's routine. He may have been mesmerised, for he broke into a precise replica.

''I'm focused today, every day between now and the election, about what we can do to support jobs in this community,'' he began.

''If you're talking about what's the critical issue here, it's about which government has the best economic plan to support jobs here in Cairns and across the region and that's what we're here today talking about.''

After a minute or two more of this, the television journalist tried again. Turnour retained his hypnotised composure.

''I think I've answered your question today,'' he said. He hadn't of course, but he'd watched Gillard not answering, too, and knew how it was done.

''What people are interested in is which leader is best placed to manage the nation's economy.'' And away he went, getting in a handy jab against Abbott, whom he said had visited Cairns a couple of days ago ''and did nothing to support jobs''.

If by some happenstance Turnour keeps his own job on August 21, Gillard could do worse than giving him a promotion. Parliamentary secretary for ventriloquism, perhaps

HOOTERS said...

Yeah jim is terryfying hhaaaaaaaaaaaa.

THERE appears to be a few rats (that's rattus rattus, the lowly animal that figured in Kevin Rudd's crude description of Chinese officials at the Copenhagen climate conference) in Labor's ranks.
These particular rats probably don't see themselves as rats in the Labor tradition - that is, those who rat on the party - but they could be accused of disloyalty, if not disrespect, to the dear leader. After each caucus meeting a group of federal Labor backbenchers gathers to decide who should be awarded The Maxine, a trophy in name only, for the MP most deserving of recognition for arse-licking the PM. Last week, for example, Strewth was told that Jim Turnour, the member for Leichhardt in Queensland, had won the award for his glowing character reference for Rudd. But following Tuesday's caucus meeting, this anonymous group of judges gave The Maxine to Maxine McKew, the member for Bennelong in NSW, for her glowing speech praising the sunshine that emanates from her leader. The group is in a slight quandary about making the award known (which is where an ever-helpful Strewth steps in). Apparently McKew does not know she has won The Maxine.

Hooters said...

JIM THE TERRIBLE HHAAA

Pension enough, says MP
Thomas Chamberlin

Wednesday, September 24, 2008





LEICHHARDT MP Jim Turnour says he could survive on the aged pension, despite the Prime Minister and Treasurer saying they could not.

Angry Cairns pensioners yesterday challenged Mr Turnour to back up his claim and said he was "talking through his hat".

Mr Turnour earns about eight times the pension each year.

Tell us what you think. Post a comment at the bottom of this page or vote in our online poll.

The average rent for a one bedroom flat in Cairns is $190, according to real estate figures.

Mr Turnour’s comments came as the Federal Government yesterday blocked a Coalition move to raise some pensions by $30 a week.

"In the end, if that is all I had, I would have to live on it," he said.

"That is what single aged pensioners are doing.

"Older Australians have been through some really tough times.

"Pensioners get support from their families, they look to make savings when they go shopping and look at specials and look in their bank accounts.’’

Mr Turnour said his personal situation was different from Treasurer Wayne Swan's and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd's.

He said he could only survive on the pension if he were single and living with other people.

"I know that pensioners out there survive and get by and I take my hat off to them," he said.

"I think if you own your own home it’s easier, but renting a home is tough."

Edge Hill pensioner George Laws said he battled with fuel, food and a rates increase and said Mr Turnour would have "no idea".

"I would say that Mr Turnour is talking through his hat if he reckons he could live comfortably as a single aged person," he said.

"He has no conception of how these poor buggers live."

The Opposition’s Bill to increase the single aged, single service aged and Widow B pensions by $30 a week passed the Senate on Monday night. It was sent to the lower house yesterday afternoon where Labor used its numbers to bury it.

Labor has since said it wants to wait for the outcome of a tax review – due to report next February – before moving to lift pension rates

KB :-) said...

who's Jim again... I heard he was known in Canberra as 'scooter' as he always has to scoot off!. Us locals know him better as noddy.... no where to be found David A ... persistent! strong work ethic!! and a reputation in Canberra for hard work, persistance and loyalty to his electorate!!!... LMAO... u r never going to b able to convince anyone in Cairns of that... have fun trying. Ur time might b more productively spent in helping jim boy pack

Smithfield Sam said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Leuco Gaster said...

Crikey, the Liberal trolls are out in force today! Methinks they protest too much!
Hooter, the only conclusion I get from your whine, is that Jim handled the media rather well.
I bet poor old Warren wouldn't be allowed to speak to the national media - especially after Abbott canned all his favourite projects.

Smithfield Sam (re-posted) said...

Jim Turnour - the "What, Me Worry" member for Mad Magazine.

He's a goner. He'll be back at his previous-to-parliament routine in a couple weeks. What was that, anyway? Maccas? The Shell Servo in Smithfield?

And where's Jim's lovely wife been these last couple weeks. No where to be seen

nocturnal congress said...

Smithfield Sam, well where is Warren's partner for that matter? I've never seen him, well not that I know of.

Bryan Law said...

Did really just read an irrelevant dig at someone's private life based on nothing but gossip, for no purpose other than maligning someone who is getting in the way of electing Jim "waste of space" Turnour?

Disgusting!

Double disgusting!!

An example of how dirty Labor is going to go in this election

p.s. I noticed that Julia KillHard is having truck with Satan, and when she cuddles babies she's assessing them for sacrifice in Satanic rituals. Nocturnal congress is her knife-carrying servant.

Hetro I Think said...

To the poor attempt at a gutter slur by noc whatever.

I rang warren the man that alone did more for gay rights than any other politician and is proud of it.
I asked him are you gay he replied "I AM PROUD TO BE ANYTHING YOU WANT ME TO BE"
.
He then added he would wear that tag proudly if that was said of him.
As he believes everyone is entitled to freedom in todays world.
It is the mark of a man that could not give a rats bum what you are .

It has always been my belief anyone that is elected at anything to represent anyone acts on their behalf not their own .
So I LOVE THE WORDS IA M ANYTHING YOU WANT ME TO BE.
And by the way I am not gay but in a drought who knows.
PS As you are more than likely a labor stooge ask penny wong why the weak woman is to piss weak to ask her own colleages to support her in gay marriage rights that her I AM FOR THE MINORITIES PARTY OPPOSE !

Cairns Resident said...

Where's Warren did absolutely NOTHING for gay rights except talk, talk and more talk. He would have known that Howard and also Abbott at that time would not be listening. Warren, of course, was leaving politics and could say whatever he liked. Incidently, where's Charlie during this campaign and why wasn't she their candidate? Was she "outed "by the big boys like Richardson etc. What a joke. The Labor party has made more changes for the Gay commumnty in the past than any liberal ever would.

nocturnal congress said...

Sheeesh, how 1957 some people still are. I make an innocent comment, and people react using words like "disgusting" and "gutter." Surely if you accepted gay rights, you would have let the comment just pass by without another thought? Or isn't it acceptable, truly acceptable to have a same sex partner? Goes to show that this community is still having problems being truly "open minded." Scratch the social veneer just that little bit and out it all comes. It's "disgusting" and "gutter".

Noj Nedlaw said...

Cairns Resident says “Warren did absolutely NOTHING for gay rights except talk, talk and more talk”. My immediate response is “yes”. Talking about issues is the best way to promote community discussion on said issues. But not only did Warren talk about in the media he also led discussions within the Government of which he was a member. Addressing the issue of the then Cabinet discussions around gay rights, the Sydney Morning Herald said this on 21/08/2007 “The Liberal backbencher Warren Entsch has driven the push from the outset.” Warren’s support for gay rights is no recent fad – it goes back many years and comes from very close personal experiences. Journalist Glenn Milne highlighted these experiences in 2006 in the Queensland Sunday Mail.

Your cynicism, your implied accusation that Warren knew Howard would not listen, belies Warren’s belief and commitment to gay rights and is so, so wrong.

And please, dear Cairns Resident, please do not forget that Warren also introduced a Private Members Bill that sought to legitimise the rights of gay and interdependent long-term couples to each other's entitlements such as superannuation and pensions. To me, that’s actually doing SOMETHING.

I doubt whether many other backbenchers from either side of the political divide would have had the bulldog-like tenacity to keep pushing the issue with their cabinet colleagues.

And pride in that tenacity is one reason why I, as a gay man, will be voting for Warren to again represent Leichhardt exactly three years after the publication of the SMH article.

Evie said...

Spot on, nocturnal congress!!!!
If I may make another analogy...
You know how people like to rave about how "broad minded" they are when it comes to "topless sunbathing." !!
Yes, very broad minded and liberal, blah blah blah.
Yet, a friend of mine decided to test it.
Down she trotted to the beach, whipped off her T-shirt...and waited. Sure enough, she was told to leave the beach by some official because she was "upsetting people". (Gold Coast.) You see, my friend had had a mastectomy.
People have a lot of confusion over "liberal" attitudes. Old prejudices die hard and people are not as "open minded" as they think.

Alison Alloway said...

Our community is not an open, fair and honest one. Yes, entrenched attitudes still linger, affecting even the most "liberal" minded, as both "Evie" and "nocturnal" have well demonstrated.
The issue of the internet filter is yet another example exposing duplicity and prejudice. The aboriginal community have been subjected to internet censorship since 2007, but suddenly it is now an "issue" now that it might apply to ALL Australians.

Syd Walker said...

Alison, you keep making the point about the internet 'filter' not being new, because it was part of the Northern Territory intervention.

While you're not incorrect, I can't really see the relevance of that to the broader debate about nationwide mandatory censorship.

Lots of things were part of the NT intervention. But the merits/demerits of that Howard era policy (continued by Labor in office with some modifications) is a separate, although important discussion.

Incidentally, as an opponent of a mandatory nationwide 'filter', I'm not saying that filters aren't appropriate in specific circumstances for specific users/locations.

I'm reluctant to express a strong opinion about 'filtering' for other communities such as geographically isolated communities in the Territory; they should have considerable freedom, IMO, to make their own decisions.

Bryan Law said...

I couldn't give a holy rolling donut if Warren is "Gay" (funny description for Wazza), and your attempt to make that the issue nocturnal is reprehensible.

You know that homophobia is rife in our society, and that some folk will turn off a candidate for that reason alone.

So when you speculate without evidence that Warren's partner is a man, you are saying he's homosexual and blowing your dog whistle as hard as you can.

Warren's support for gay rights, particularly when it comes to superannuation, pensions, and equitable financial relations in marriage and gay partnership, have always impressed me - particularly when he's pursued that in the LNP.

On the other hand I haven't heard about anything you've done. I don't even know your name. If you caught up with 1957 I'd be impressed - given that you currently seem trapped in the dark ages.

Alison Alloway said...

Syd, internet filtering in aboriginal communities is HIGHLY pertinent to this issue because the aboriginal people were not given any say in the matter. Canberra determined that a "filter" was necessary because of the "protection of children" which was, supposedly the impetus for "Intervention". So what the Government inferred was "an unfettered internet is causing an increase in child peadophilia in aboriginal communities." A precedent has been established. How much longer do you think white Australia can remain "unfilered"???

hetro I think said...

I rest my case and bend over you fool. Now show me anything jim has done you tool.


The World Today - Thursday, 12 July , 2007 12:35:24
Reporter: Simon Lauder
ELIZABETH JACKSON: Liberal Party backbencher Warren Entsch has told The World Today the Federal Government is dragging its heels on removing legal discrimination against gay couples, and is calling for the issue to be dealt with at the most senior level of Government.

Highlighting one area of discrimination, High Court Judge Michael Kirby has written to the Federal Government asking for legislative changes so his partner can benefit from his pension when the Judge dies.

The Federal Attorney General has said he'll consider the need for change on a case-by-case basis, but Mr Entsch describes the Government's actions so far as pathetic.

He told Simon Lauder he's glad Justice Kirby has highlighted the issue again.

WARREN ENTSCH: I welcome him coming forward and raising the issue. I mean, this has been something that has… I have been pushing now for a number of years, and in the last 12-18 months I guess I've been really pushing it hard.

I was expecting, expecting there to be changes in the Budget. I was certainly under the impression, from discussions I've had with the most senior levels of Government, that that would occur. And what has happened is that they have made a minor technical change which allows people in the public sector to transfer their superannuation from public to private, to give them that eligibility to be able to… their partners, of same sex or interdependent partners, to access their super.

And it sends out the wrong message, and the Government says, "Well it's okay, it's okay to be able to have that entitlement if you're working in the private sector, but heaven forbid if you're in the public sector it's unacceptable." You know, that is a ridiculous argument.

SIMON LAUDER: You sound frustrated at the lack of progress. Is the Government dragging its heels?

WARREN ENTSCH: Absolutely.

SIMON LAUDER: Isn't it the case that it's just not a vote-winning issue?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, I don't think it is.

You know, I mean, in Government there are lots of things that are not vote-winning issues, but they're the right thing to do.

This is not about marriage, this is not about adopting children or producing children, this is about financial and legal discrim… blatant financial and legal discrimination. Nobody could stand up there and argue that it's the right thing to do, you know, there is a legitimate reason for doing this.

SIMON LAUDER: So why hasn't it been done?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, I mean there has been a reluctance, there has been an argument on cost.

My view is cost doesn't come into it when you're talking about discrimination. I mean, if we started to discriminate on race, on the basis of race or the basis of gender, or basis of religion or culture, because it was going to cost us too much to make a change, there would be an outrage, an absolute outrage. But it seems that the same level of outrage is not there if it's based on sexuality…

SIMON LAUDER: So there is homophobia at play here, do you think?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, look, no … well, probably a little, but I've got to say that unfortunately there are… I mean, there are people out there that sort of connect gay community, gay couples, with the Mardi Gras. They always seem… that's the sort of good time, that's the sort of lifestyle that every gay couple in the country has.

SIMON LAUDER: Is it a matter of worrying about how the changes might go down in the public arena?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, I think there's a little bit of that probably.

SELIZABETH JACKSON: The Member for Leichhardt, Warren Entsch, speaking to The World Today's Simon Lauder

hetro I think said...

I rest my case and bend over you fool. Now show me anything jim has done you tool.


The World Today - Thursday, 12 July , 2007 12:35:24
Reporter: Simon Lauder
ELIZABETH JACKSON: Liberal Party backbencher Warren Entsch has told The World Today the Federal Government is dragging its heels on removing legal discrimination against gay couples, and is calling for the issue to be dealt with at the most senior level of Government.

Highlighting one area of discrimination, High Court Judge Michael Kirby has written to the Federal Government asking for legislative changes so his partner can benefit from his pension when the Judge dies.

The Federal Attorney General has said he'll consider the need for change on a case-by-case basis, but Mr Entsch describes the Government's actions so far as pathetic.

He told Simon Lauder he's glad Justice Kirby has highlighted the issue again.

WARREN ENTSCH: I welcome him coming forward and raising the issue. I mean, this has been something that has… I have been pushing now for a number of years, and in the last 12-18 months I guess I've been really pushing it hard.

I was expecting, expecting there to be changes in the Budget. I was certainly under the impression, from discussions I've had with the most senior levels of Government, that that would occur. And what has happened is that they have made a minor technical change which allows people in the public sector to transfer their superannuation from public to private, to give them that eligibility to be able to… their partners, of same sex or interdependent partners, to access their super.

And it sends out the wrong message, and the Government says, "Well it's okay, it's okay to be able to have that entitlement if you're working in the private sector, but heaven forbid if you're in the public sector it's unacceptable." You know, that is a ridiculous argument.

SIMON LAUDER: You sound frustrated at the lack of progress. Is the Government dragging its heels?

WARREN ENTSCH: Absolutely.

SIMON LAUDER: Isn't it the case that it's just not a vote-winning issue?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, I don't think it is.

You know, I mean, in Government there are lots of things that are not vote-winning issues, but they're the right thing to do.

This is not about marriage, this is not about adopting children or producing children, this is about financial and legal discrim… blatant financial and legal discrimination. Nobody could stand up there and argue that it's the right thing to do, you know, there is a legitimate reason for doing this.

SIMON LAUDER: So why hasn't it been done?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, I mean there has been a reluctance, there has been an argument on cost.

My view is cost doesn't come into it when you're talking about discrimination. I mean, if we started to discriminate on race, on the basis of race or the basis of gender, or basis of religion or culture, because it was going to cost us too much to make a change, there would be an outrage, an absolute outrage. But it seems that the same level of outrage is not there if it's based on sexuality…

SIMON LAUDER: So there is homophobia at play here, do you think?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, look, no … well, probably a little, but I've got to say that unfortunately there are… I mean, there are people out there that sort of connect gay community, gay couples, with the Mardi Gras. They always seem… that's the sort of good time, that's the sort of lifestyle that every gay couple in the country has.

SIMON LAUDER: Is it a matter of worrying about how the changes might go down in the public arena?

WARREN ENTSCH: Well, I think there's a little bit of that probably.

SELIZABETH JACKSON: The Member for Leichhardt, Warren Entsch, speaking to The World Today's Simon Lauder