Nelson defends position on 7:30 report

O'Brien gave Nelson hell last night on the 7:30 report but that's his job and fair enough. I wish he's do the same to Rudd but If you want to read about Red Kerry check out comments on Bolt today .

There are alot of disparaging comments about Nelson's performance on there aswell.

I just want to say I disagree. I think Nelson stonewalled brilliantly. Kerry had all the information he needed from Liberal statement, he was trying to make Nelson sound like that there was no commitment to a 2012 start date for the ETS, when there was a conditional commitment.

I would have loved it if Nelson had comeback with "You seem to be intent on reading between the lines, Kerry. Why don't you read between these lines", holding up three middle fingers. Instead he did the verbal equivalent.

He stuck to his line and didn't change it. In doing so he was giving the bird to all the people in the press who have accused him of vacillating on the ETS issue, when he hasn't.

In the dying seconds Nelson threw O'Brien a bone and admitted of a small possibility that the ETS might not start in 2012 and made no apologies for the delay. I repeat, this is an assertion of his position as it has always stood. Not another shift. (In the sentence "An ETS will start probably by 2012"", the word "probably" admits of a possibility to the contrary. Duh)

But you could tell he did not really want to say that because Turnbull and his mates in the press would beat him up. I dont think shadow cabinet meetings are much fun for anyone right now, and i for one don't blame the victim but the bully. When Trendy Turnbull's got the whole press in his side, what choice has Nelson got but to keep his head down a little?

Nelson is no wimp. He won the fight, he's just trying not to gloat in Turnbull's face because he'd hit the roof. Turnbull is a bad sport as we saw when he berated Nelson within hours of winning the leader, for getting emotional about it!

It's time for Turnbull to behave like an adult, and put up or shut up. He should end hostile and contrary leaks to Nelson, or be honest about his hostility and challenge for the leadership.

Nelson's in charge of the Libs. He won fair and square. He's maintainted, even increased his partyroom support, as evident from the ETS press release.

Respect his Authoritah!!


BTW I congratulate the ABC on giving the interview a headline that actually reflects what Nelson said and did ("Nelson maintains stance on emissions trading scheme"), unlike everyone else (see prior blogs)

ETS: News Ltd journos cant read press releases

Well I'll be. It seems that Nelson did not agree to a 2012 start to the ETS after all. It seems I was mislead by News Ltd. And I thought left-wing con-jobs came from the Fairfax press.

The written party room statement gives in-principle support - that means support for an ETS or something like it, but not necessarily and ETS - to start "slow", "probably by 2012" and not "too far ahead of the rest of the world."

www.news.com.au is running the story that this is not what Nelson's policy was prior to the meeting.

But it is.

Before there was doubt on whether there should be an ETS or something else less damaging to the economy. Still doubt, looks like.

Before there was doubt about the timing: probably 2012, maybe not depending on other countries. Yep thats the same too.

Yesterday arvo the OZ ran a story that spun the whole thing as a victory for Nelson. This is what confused Andrew Bolt who wrote a really happy assesment of the exchange, then retracted it when he read the OZ next headline "Start climate scheme in 2012: Nelson".

This is not Nelson's position at all as can be seen from today's written statement. But Nelson's opponents in the libs and at News wanted to steal the this mornings headlines, so they got in last night. Somebody (not naming names Turnbull and Hunt) briefed the OZ (Samantha Maiden i guess) that Nelson gave full support to a 2012 start, and the only variable was the carbon cost.

The OZ's on-line articles today but still insists that Nelson changed position again, when the "in principle" stuff has always been there. And www.news.com.au is running the story that Lib policy is not Nelson's. This is all bullshit. It is his policy.

Turnbull and Hunt got nothing more than in principle conditional support for a probable ETS start date of 2012. If they think otherwise and breif the OZ, that's their problem. The Liberal party's position is in the document and it is what Nelson said it would be.

Immigration Conflagration

The timing of this announcement by the government of a serious downgrade to the use of detention facilities for asylum seekers, sorry, illegal immigrants , is telling.

The let this one slip out just when the Libs climate change war was at it's peak, so their response would be drowned out.

This is New Labor spin management of Blairesque finesse, following the pattern set by the British Labor staffer who suggested releasing bad new on 9/11 a couple of hours after disaster struck. Abominable. Expect more of it.

The ALP knows this is unpopular. The libs are right to oppose it in the senate. There are still opportunities to diverge from the ALP, even if ETS went begging somewhat.

Detention has been a very effective deterrent. Immigration increased under Howard for people who came through official channels. That's fair. That's in the countries best interest.

Allowing people to break our laws and then vanish into the community so they can't be found and deported isn't.

And BTW if people are not in detention, where are they? That's right. They are in government housing normally reserved for the less well off Aussie citizens. I've seen it all in England. It's called benefit tourism.

This country is headed down the new labor path ... to oblivion. Sorry, now i'm thinking like a defeatest Pom. We will take a couple of steps down that path and then some Aussie battler will wrestle the media to the ground and save us from the commies and hippies. Oi Oi Oi!!!!

Help: I dont get low-carbon-cost ETS

I dont get the Libs compromise posn at all. A 2012 ETS startup with a low carbon price. Isn't that just the initial carbon price for the permits, then industry trade them as they see fit? If they expect the price will go up in future the market price will follow that trend. The futures market is already trading carbon at 20$ per tonne. Either the market is going to set the price of carbon, or it isn't. If it is we can't control it.

If factories decide to exceed the carbon the have permits for, what happens. Surely the just get a fine. The cost of non-compliace has to be worked in to the cost of the permit. If the fines are big, as the will have to be for ETS to work, the permit cost will rise.

How are permits allocated? Some govt official gives each factory x-amount? Or do they just realise 50 billion tonnes worth of permits onto the stock exchange and let the factories and spectators batttle it out? If so i think we'll find that the price of the permits has SFA to do with the issue price even withing minutes of release.

Does someone out there have a clue on this?

Nelson the new battler

I'm a little dissapointed that the shadow cabinet rolled Nelson on climate change. I wish he had overruled them, I reckon he would have loved to himself, but when you're popularity is lacking you dont have the clout. If he had done, he would have been out.

I'm still proud of the fact that he broke ranks with all the other pollies and basically brought GW scepticism/realism back. This train is only going to pick up speed.

It's now clear that Bishop's requests for certainly on a position on behalf of WA's businesses was the main shop stopper. It seems she is spouting the line from before the election, before Kyoto got signed, that something has to be done on emmissions and soon ... because she has put nuclear back on the table. This is a famously unpopular position in Aus, and now the ALP has fresh ammo, as if they needed any. I'm beginning to think Bishop is a liability.

The WA miners are fighting last years fight. And it appears might have vested interests in the nuclear starting up. They are happy with the bullshit of and ETS beccause they might benefit mining uranium. Well, everyone else loses. So 10/10 for capitalist killer instinct guys, but good politicians balance your self interests against everyone else's.

This nuclear option is a big mistake. I'm not against it personally but we dont need it. If carbon cost stays low it's not economic. And the political spin of trying to appeal to greenies by saying nuclear reduces emmissoins will never fly. It's is just trying to appeal to hippies with an even more world-threatening capitalist evil (as far as they are concerned).

This argument is bullshit based on more bullshit - the need for an ETS. Good politicians clear bullshit out, they keep piling it on.

Nelson has been hounded down for changing his positions. I dont think he did change his position. He spoke his mind. He was speaking about his own personal views. They diverged from the norm. He was entering into a debate with his collegues.

And he started debate in the country as a whole.

The journos who hound him down would rather all the discussion went on in secret. Shhhhh dont talk about how this is all crap. Everybody believes it.

I think Nelson did everything he could. I wish it could have been different. At least he sent a message that the forces of bandwagonism in the party had some opposition. The party heard this message, as did the media and the public. Bolt is on a roll. We'll see the results of the next two bi-elections before Turnbull throws his hat in the ring.

Nelson is still the leader. There's alot of time between now and then for Nelson to be proved right.

Mild irritation from a lover of this nation

My comment on Bolt's blog item Americans doubt what Aussies swallow whole, reproduced here. No disrespect to aforesaid uberblogger...

It's a miscalculation dis Australia, mate. It's bad for your career, almost as bad as Costello attacking the liberals after the election loss.

We are your loyal readers but we are loyal to this country first and foremost.

Aussies have a strong sense of morality. That means it can be perverted by the media, BUT AT LEAST WE HAVE ONE.

In some other countries where i've lived many people can be so cynical, evasive, weak and sycophantic.

When writers attack Australia and Aussie culture they buy into the cringe, right-thinking people lose confidence that keeps the pseudo-intellectuals in charge of the culture. It's they, not the people that are to blame for Australian's delusion on this topic. They have stifled debate with their control of the media.

We need a channel like Fox to balance the TV coverage. That would change the atmos in the mainstream media be more in line with the blogosphere, where dissent is the meat and drink of the audience/readership.

Love of country is the main moral force opposed to the advancement of the Lefties. You would be wise not to arouse the ire of the patriots.

BTW you did a great job on Insiders on Sunday, Andrew. You really ticked off Crabb,Annabel

Milne's facts entertaining, but his spin irrelevant

Glen Milne has a great piece in the OZ about devastating polling for the ALP in Gippsland.

His problem is that he breaks this story as having anything to do with Costello or Turnbull.

If Turnbull was leader the Petrol issue would not have gained prominence, and the ETS would be screaming ahead in 4th gear, if not overdrive. Both of those things would have pissed off the ute driving coal-miners of gippsland.

Costello is always so silent no-one knows where he stands so, why imply that Costello would have done better than Nelson.

That lead in the polls is totally down to Nelson, splitting from the ALP's agenda. Milne does not even mention him in the piece!!!

Australia leads in the fight against Manbearpig--o-phobia

Global Warming experts scepitical article in todays oz,

... and ...

quoted on line at my fav blog Ace Of Spades HQ in the states. As Rush Limbough did with Bolt a couple of weeks ago.

The cringe is over. Thanks Johny. We owe ya, mate.

OK, i still derive childish pleasure when Aussies get pats on the back from O/S. Maybe it's not quite over.

When we are leading the world, and other people hate us for it ... and we don't care ... THEN it will be over.

Libs will set ETS policy

I told you Nelson was running the country! He's already poured petrol on the agenda. But I didn't realise he held the match in his hand too.

Whoof!

If Labor splits with the greens, the Libs (and independents) control the Senate. That means the half-arsed ETS policy that Rudd is putting forward requires coalition support. I dont think Rudd has the nuts to call a double-dissolution over the issue that caused such a big swing against him in Gippsland. If he does, great!

Sometimes i forget the politics is simply grade 8 arithmetic:
Conservatives votes - Lefty votes = Result (either positive or negative) for the country

But Nelson would have had done his sums, and this must have influenced his decision to split with the Turnbull, Hunt camp and really slap Rudd around on climate.

Nelson has everything to gain here. He can secure not only time but major concessions in the ETS scheme that benefit all Aussies, not just industries where the staff are unionized. For Turnbull and Hunt to waste this opportunity and only ask for a 2 year delay is crazy.

I'm beginning to think fines for over-polluting might be a better idea than cap and trade. I dont think business as usual should be penalized. And i dont think that the government can be trusted with the money that carbon licenses will bring in. They will redistribute it to safe seats, entrench their power and increase welfare dependency, whilst crippling industry.

At that rate we'll be like Argentina in 20 years : the economy in tatters, endemic poverty, and daughers being kidnapped left-right and centre. And we wont have Maradona to make up for it.

Iemma backs carbon-based growth

A 2nd Airport for Sydney in Newcastle! Think of the growth, think of the benefits to industry, and to tourism in the Hunter valley. Think of the "carbon pollution"!

Howard started the snowball rolling on nation-building. Now it's an avalanche and all the latte sippers in the country combined cant hold us back now.

The (right-wing) Labor states are choosing to announce huge carbonified industry expansion like coal-fired power plants and airports at the same time as Rudd is trying to put a lid on these kind of things with the ETS.

Thank goodness for the division of powers , eh?

Hmm. When is WA ALP right gonna wade in and demand IR reform for the mines. Nah. That's a longshot. As we saw with electricity in NSW it's alot harder to stand up to the unions that stand up to Rudd.

Labor and the Unions: A Conspiracy Exposed

The union movement have made a big mistake. They are gloating over their election victory, and in the process they are openly flaunting the fact that they control the Labor Party. This used to be a secret. The ALP's success relies on it being a secret.

It's not a secret any more. The new book Inside Kevin 07 reveals the machinations of power behind the rise of The Rudd.

The unions have played right into Howard's hands.

I have a theory. Workchoices was never about winning the election. Howard knew it was a huge gamble he was quite likely to lose. Workchoices was really about taking on the unions and bringing them out in the open.

Played for and got. Well done Johnny!

Howard knew that the original draft of Workchoices without the no-disadvantage test was pushing the envelope of what the electorate would accept. He kept it in, not in spite of this but because of it. It tempted the unions to take him on.

The article linked talks about how Combet tried to get Howard to drop AWAs and the no-disadvantage test. Other people in ALP did not want to negotiate with Howard because they knew if Howard compromised Howard would still be in power. They wanted to mount the legal to WorkChoices and to topple Howard. Their blood was up and they smelled power.

First came the unions legal challenge against AWAs. AWAs were always big issue for the unions. They cut the unions out of the negotiations between employers and employees. The no-disadv test is about members wage's. That's a secondary concern, if not an irrelevance, for the ACTU. It's useful to them politically to be seen to negotiate for this. But the real issue is that they maintain there powerful role.

By sticking to his reformist principles Howard proved that he was prepared to risk power in order to do what was right for Australia. He did it instinctively. By his own admission, he never ran from a fight. By fighting he forced the unions to fight back.

First came the unions legal challange. It was a failure. High Court upheld the IR laws providing Howard with the legal vindication of his IR stance.

Then came the political challenge. People marching in the streets. Union were openly displaying their power for the first time in my lifetime!!

Howard eventually compromised to the more politically palatable position of the fairness test. This shift of position was not miscalculation. It was cunning. Howard had what he wanted and now he could compromise back. If he had compromised his principles in the beginning the fight would have all been done behind closed doors away from Aussie eyes - Rudd style. Howard don't play dat.

So now I get it. This was all for me. For you. For the next generation of Aussies.

Now we all know the truth about the unions and the ALP. They are one and the same.

Howard knew WorkChoices was a huge gamble. He lost, but in the long term we are all the wiser. That was his ultimate aim. He could not run the country forever. He had to prepare us for the future by showing us the way politics really runs in this country.

For Australia to realize it's ambition the left-wing stranglehold of the unions on the nation's politics, and the nation's psyche, and must be exposed and broken. Howard might not have broken it, but he exposed it so that we could break it.

And we are. The culture has shifted, forever.

Bloggers like Andrew Landeryou yourself use the words "union thugs" all the time. I have myself. I honestly can't remember anyone doing this before Workchoices exposed the unions. We see them as they are now. And we see how powerful they are. And it pisses us off!!

The next act, but by no means the last, in the play is now unfolding. The arrogance and incompetance of Labor in office has sealed their fate. They are boasting of the victory, as well they might. When the poms won the Ashes they knew they had beaten the invincible. They also knew that was going to be the one and only change to celebrate for a generation. But the Unions and ALP's arrogance has lead them to the fatal mistake of admitting the way they work IN PRINT! On top of this Rudd's inablity to rein in the unions wage demands and protests against an all- encompasing ETS show the ALP frauds, mere puppets on the union's strings.

But Howard is manipulating the puppeteer!! Like Eddy on the cover of the classic Iron Maiden album Number of the Beast


Get it? The Unions are Satan, and Howard is Heavy Metal made flesh!

Workchoices was short-term bad politics. But long-term political genius worthy of Abraham Lincoln.

Combet was wise to leave the ACTU and go into parliament. The Unions power is on the wane. Once they have been deceved, Democracies are not inclined to forgive.

Brendan Nelson is running the country

I told you Rudd would me-too the Liberals even in government.

Rudd has caved in to pressure to make sure there is no net tax increase on petrol with the introduction of the ETS.

Where did that pressure on petrol prices come from?

Come on.

Let's hear it.

Fess up.

I know you know.


That's right! Brendan Nelson! One guy. The opposition leader. All on his lonesome. Nobody else said squat untill (well) after he said it and set Gippsland swinging his way. Noone from the Liberals, no body from labor nobody from the press.

The country has just adopted Nelson's policy are we are all better off for it. Let's hope for more of the same.

Paul Kelly's plebian attempts at philosophy

Pah-lease!

Pascal's wager? Galileo's dissent? The prisoner's dilema? Adam's Smith's insight?

How many philosophical name drops, quotes and popular little philosophical su-doku puzzles can you put in one piece.

Sign of a definite lightweight.

He's so trying to spin it (for Rudd) that the smart kids are debating GW. They aren't. They are taking the piss out of it.

ETS - it's got the world talking

Did I say talking. I mean shitting themselves.

McCain is in the same spot as Nelson. He has to decide whether to send the economy into freefall on a whim for no appreciable provalble gain, or not. Be unlike Nelson he is choosing wrong.

Nelson is not only right. He's on a winner. Be grateful that at this moment this country can produce a leader that has nuts, when the US can't. I expect a wave if immigration from the US come November.

The entire media is spinning it that Turnbull and Hunt rapped Nelson's knuckles last week for suggesting the ETS could wait, or the cap and trade idea was not the best and the Nelson fell back into line. I don't buy it. Where was the public retraction? The guy is silent. He's taking annual leave! This saga is only just beginning and it is the duty of the conservative commentariat to get behind the guy. No exceptions.

Nelson has time to assert himself and should not be afraid to subtly adjust his position. if the Mayo bi-election gets a swing to the Libs on his watch Turnbull's position will be weaker again. Turnbull cannot challenge before then - like bull at a gate. There's is a reason why he didn't make it up the first time. The parliamentary party dont trust him to consult them. That hasn't changed. His presumption to lead the leader on last Thur's 7:30 report can't have helped.

From Nelson's form to date you know he can suck up as much pressure as Howard for as long as he wants and still get his message to the electorate.

Pollies face-off on climate

UPDATE: Whatditellya? Hunt and Turnbull are the ones who's green images are on the line, and they are trying to manipulate Nelson's position through the media. Or are they clarifying it? I don't know. The green paper comes out on Wednesday. I think they will find common ground.

Whether Liberal's 2012 ETS deadline has a flexible or fixed, the main thing is that Nelson has got everyone to agree that if China and India dont make significant sacrifices neither should we. This position is a significant shift from the "act first and lead" position - the implausible position implicitly supported by anyone courting the green vote.

Nelson's position was Howard's defense in not signing Kyoto, which Turbull opposed. It was Rudd's position after Garrett screwed up during the campaign. But Rudd forged ahead and signed Kyoto without requiring the Chinese to sign up to even non-binding targets as they had promised to consider at APEC (thanks to Howard and Bush). Now Rudd is saying the G8 climate talks was a failure because the developing countries have not fallen into line. He's making wiggle room.

No one is admitting it, but everyone's position is moving slightly to the right, and Nelson is leading (the politicians). They are all cooling slightly on the issue of warming and (sorry to keep going with the metaphor but) this issue is one that needs to stay hot if it is going to maintain a head of steam. It's panic driven. If we all start acting rationally it will lose all politicial momentum. The world is actually cooling. I'm sitting here freezing and I want cheap power so I can leave the heater on dammit!

UPDATE: Bolt has dug up the quotes I alluded to here. Bolt is pushing the idea that Turnbull disagrees with Nelson (as did the Aus) whereas Turnbull is denying this and Nelson is not talking. Bolt sides with Nelson. I honestly think this was Nelson's whole ploy. His statement came straight after the ABC publically admitted that GW believers were embarrassing in their religious zeal. And after the Hollowmen (the latest ABC spoof about Rudd) was announced. The media momentum has shifted. Nelson has played for the conservative media's support and got it. They had always plumped for Turnbull in the past. That's what had to end.

Nelson has nuts

OMFG!! Nelson is refusing to ask Aussies to lead on climate change in direct and open opposition to Rudd on the issue. Not even the mighty Howard had the guts to do this as the election approached.

Nelson has picked a huge fight. The main opponents to this move are Malcolm Turnbull and Greg Hunt. He is facing down the Libs who want to drag the party to the mushy consequence-free Left. It's a huge gamble. I hope to lord he wins.

He has alot of the voters behind him as we saw in Gippsland, plus the (Labor) States, critically the unions, and now finally the media are getting behind him. Even the conservative media! Whooda thunk it?

Thing is I always knew Nelson had nuts because he refused to betray Howard. He sucked it up during the first few months (Kyoto, apology) like a true battler. Bolt is only realising it now. Bolt and Albrechsten's refusal to support Nelson and fantasizing that Costello has a future are my only complaints about my respected rival commentators.

The ABC finally realises warming isn't cool

Everybody is going on about the ABC political editor's rant (it's not a riff, Bolt. Back in Black is a riff). It seems that GW-scepticism is the new atheism. Sure, I'm happy about it. One less commie at the ABC. But I'm not that impressed. The ABC are following not leading on this issue. The cool kids have known for ages that GW attracts nutters, like all of the Left's anti-capitalist rants.

Might I remind you of an inconvenient truth that goes by the name of ... MANBEARBIG!



Genius

Thank goodness for the States

Just as Federal defense minister Joel Fitzgibbon calls for the abolition of the states, we get a lesson in just how important the states are. NSW and Victoria are railing against the energy-destroying measures proposed by Garnaut in his interim report.

It's all about division of powers. Australia is like the US in that it is a federation of smaller states that have their own representative governments. The British and French governments are much more centralised. The government in Britain or France can change every persons life in the country in almost any detail, from tax on petrol to beds in hospitals to education standards, with the stroke of a pen. The Australian government can't.

That means that Rudd can't fuck the country up that much. What a relief.

The division of powers is demonstrated by COAG holding him to ransom over the "environmental threat" to the Murray. But the states dont just have legal powers, they have a legit elected voice and thus alot of political power aswell, which they can use to persuade/pester the federal government.

If Garnuat is just one of Rudd's inputs on climate change policy, hopefully the states are the other ones. They are having the good sense to protect jobs, power supplies and investment security in this country. I hate to say good things about the ALP, but I am impressed by the right-wing of said party finding common ground between the welfare of employees of the coal-fired power industry, and the business leaders in that sector.

This is exactly the sort of alliance between the blue-collar and the big-end-of-town that Howard would have approved off. What's the aim? Nation building, as it always is when people rise above "class" interests. We need to secure our future by making sure people who give enough of a shit to build power stations dont go under, taking their employees and the nation's energy supplies with them.

This has a flow on affect to national confidence. When rock bands plug in their amps, thereby keeping us entertained and boosting morale, they need to be damn well sure there's gonna be power. Electricity and rock are inseperable. Why do you think our greatest band is called AC/DC? And nobody, but nobody, has done more for this country's cultural confidence than AC/DC.

Now that the left of the ALP is in charge federally, the states are moving right to balance them. Without the states pencil-pushing power-trippers like Penny Wong could enforce a life of ascetic denial on us in the name of Al Gore, and destroy all the progress in national confidence-building made under Howard. Balance of power is a good thing for this country. Of course that balance would be better served by conservatives at state level. But better the right-wing of the ALP than than wall-to-wall tree-huggers.

Joel Fitzgibbon's call for the abolition of the states would not have gone unnoticed or unapproved by Rudd. For Rudd to let this statement be made demonstrates (1) he wants more power and (2) his judgment is so flawed he must never be allowed to have it. Rudd is Mini-Mao. (Picture A Commie version of Dr.Evil saying to Rudd, "You complete me") Rudd wants bureaucratic control over every aspect of our lives. He hates disorder and disagreement with a pathological passion. He is blinded by his own sense of self-righteousness. He wants to extend his micro-management to your home and your wallet and your head, because he thinks he knows what's good for you better than you do! Because of our beautiful constitution we can say "up yours, Rudd" with immunity. I say thanks to the States for doing just that.

UPDATE: SMH acknowledges that the states are holding back Rudds enviro agenda. That say it pisses them off, but cracks are appearing in their religious adherence to the apocalyptic doctrine of GW.

Under the bit which forecasts what will happen if we do nothing to reduce greenhouse gases, it predicts 1276 Queenslanders will die each year from temperature-related causes by 2030. That figure will increase to 5878 a year by 2100. In the most extreme "hot, dry" case, there would be 11,322 Queenslanders dying by the end of the century.

...

How anybody can model with any precision the exact numbers of deaths that will result in another 82 years based on an estimated small rise in temperature is known only to a few and baffling to the rest.

If the SMH are saying this. Rudd is pushing poo up a steep incline.

New scientific discovery: druggies enjoy drugs

This report in the OZ of how the "spiritual experience" of magic mushrooms can make people feel good is bad science and distorts for possiblity of bad physicatric ill effects. The find is based on a series of experiements on human volunteers where they were given the drugs.

Who do you think is going to volunteer for this kind of experiment?

Right. Druggies.

Who do you think conducts experiments like this, and edits the results

Right. Druggies.

Are these results any surprize?

Most [subjects] reported having a "mystical" or "spiritual" experience and rated it positively.

More than a year later, most still said the experience increased their sense of well-being or life satisfaction, Mr Griffiths and colleagues report in the Journal of Psychopharmacology.

"This is a truly remarkable finding," he said.

"Rarely in psychological research do we see such persistently positive reports from a single event in the laboratory."

Is that a fact? Perhaps the positive results have got something to do with the fact that it's based not on objective measures of the benefits but no heresay: what druggies said about their drug experience.

When data that is more reliable than an opinion came in it was prompty swept aside

While some of our subjects reported strong fear or anxiety for a portion of their day-long psilocybin sessions, none reported any lingering harmful effects, and we didn't observe any clinical evidence of harm," Mr Griffiths said.

Of course they said that you idiot. They want the research to support their drug use.

At least the researchers admitted one thing sensible:

Hallucinogens should not be given to people at risk for psychosis or certain other serious mental disorders, the researchers said.

Guys, that's everybody. Until you take the drugs there is no way of knowing how you will react. People flip out and there is no going back. I wonder how these experimenters could have been so sure that the people they were giving the drugs to would not freak. Could it be because these people had taken the drugs before? on multiple occasions?

None of the results of this test can be taken seriously unless the prior drug use of the participants is (honestly) published as well. Those conducting the experiment must be subjected to as much scrutiny as those who were used as subjects.

This is bad science. I fear bad data, bad interpretation and misreprsentation are being used to peddle an agenda, a dangerous one.

Just how dangerous is revealed by the most compelling piece of information in this survey, a quote from a subject on their drug experience:

Surrender is intensely powerful. To 'let go' and become enveloped in the beauty of - in this case music - was enormously spiritual," one volunteer said.

The evidence is clear. Drugs make you a dickhead.

Phillip Adams hates Australia

Gippsland's emphatic rejection of Rudd and his perversion of the Aussie lifestyle doesn't it well with pinko Phillip Adams. His peice in the OZ today speaks volumes of his love for the common man ... NOT!

I learned several things from the article:

Phillip Adams Hates Australia

WHY do we have such a rotten national anthem? It’s because the only words that rhyme with Australia are dahlia and failure.

I love the national Anthem. Australia is advancing, and is fair in every sense of the word. And at least we've got the country's name in our anthem. Unlike Britain.

Adams is indulging himself in the almost-intellectuals' favourite passtime: denouncing the cultural cringe whist unconsciously participating in it and reinforcing it. He describes us as a failure in his title "Add Warming to the Failure List" and then disparages us for seeing ourselves as failures. That a man who writes such contradictions considers himself intellectual is, well, contradictory. Yet he ploughs on, undeterred by his lack of intelligence or wit.

Because were [sic] into failure in a big way. Think of all the films weve [sic] made about our failures. Even before Gallipoli and Burke & Wills ....

Adams lists a bunch of films without a happy ending. Some might claim that Australian's did not need the sacharine bullshit of a happy ending. We appreciate Tragedy, just like the ancient Athenians, the most intellectual and strong-willed people that ever lived, and of course Shakespeare the world's foremost literary giant ever. The best example of Aussie tragedy is Mad Max II. The best and most original film ever made. Oh yeah, and how about The Lighthorsemen. It's got one of those happy endings that Aussies don't need but on the plus side it celebrates a victory that actually happened. Pity commies like Adams bagged it in the 80s for precisely this reason, saying the happy ending celebrated war. The reason why Aussie films can be negative is because of the almost-intellectuals' hatred of Australia and desire to represent it as a failure. These films do not represent Australia or the mindset of the broad Aussie public. The man in the street does not make films, and he doesn't watch many Aussie films (apart from Mad Max II "I am The Humungus!").

I also learned that Phillip Adams has little faith in the institutions of democracy, and supports Dictatorship:

Oh, they might be able to slow down the disaster in an authoritarian country, but it is the nature of democracies to dispute and dither.

I see. What does Adams suggest?

In war we switch to a command economy and form war cabinets

Ah. The commie reveals himself. It's those nasty market forces that are the problem. And those naughty political oppositions. Can't the opposition just join with the government in a bi-partisan war cabinet? If only we could force them to agree with the leader.

Still learning: Phillip Adams has no sense of perspective, and as such is a Global Warming alarmist.

we were tackling a problem that makes the Cold War look penny ante, let alone that trivial war on terror

Yeah, Adams. We were wrong to fight the commies in the cold war. If we'd had just given in we could have enjoyed the pleasure of always agreeing with the authorities an the joy of humble poverty. And that war on terror. Adams says that it's trivial that Aussie citizens were killed in cold blood. Say no more.

All that fear mongering over such a "trivial" thing. How can politicians and pundits stoop so low? Then Adams finishes with (speaking of Australia as a swagman)

And his ghost may be heard as you pass by that billabong.

Translation "We're all gonna die!". Even if the world did warm up this would not happen. It would be really annoying and cost alot of money. But we are not all going to die. This is much more about humbling business and the populace so that they sacrifice themselves at the almost-intellectuals' new alter of submission - climate change.

Lastly I learned, Phillip Adams is an old man.

You are an old man, Adams. An old man. Old, man. Man, you are so old. Sooooooo old.

You don't know what the world is coming to do you, Adams? You aren't "cool" anymore so nobody gives a toss what you say, except other old farts. The world does what it wants and all you can do is frown. You miserable old git.

Your cuddly-but-cruel Baby-boomer values are old and out out date. Just like Victorian moral stuffiness and stifling deference.

Soon the hippies of the 60s will all be dead, and you'll be with them. You can have all the peace you want in the grave.

Young Australia has this little thing called life to live. That takes pride, determination and self-belief. We will not humble ourselves with your perverse puritanical post-modern religion. We are too busy building a great nation.

Australia fair advances. Get out of out way, Adams, you geriatric unpatriotic hippie scum.