Posts filed under 'General News'
Another month (and a week) gone, so it must be time, once again, to check in on US President Barack Obama’s approval ratings, and it has to be said that June was not a great month for him, with the “strongly approve vs strongly disapprove” figures favouring the “strongly disapprove” for the first time ever, and for a number of days in the month.
As always, the figures presented herein are taken from the Rasmussen Daily Tracking Poll.
June saw, as the overall trend, a slow closing of the gap between the raw “approve” and “disapprove” numbers.
Data courtesy Rasmussen Reports, LLC
Looking solely at the “strongly approve” vs “strongly disapprove” figure, known as the “Rasmussen Approval Index”, we see that it crossed the zero line many times.
Data courtesy Rasmussen Reports, LLC
As usual, to put this in context, here are the graphs for all of 2009.
Data courtesy Rasmussen Reports, LLC
Data courtesy Rasmussen Reports, LLC
It’s quite clear, looking at those graphs, that June continued what May paused: the gradual increase in disapproval with Barack Obama. It’s just a pity that the US system of government does not have an opposition leader, as I would love to be able to compare the figures with an opposition leader if they had one.
Samuel
July 7th, 2009 at 07:57am
I don’t see how this story has turned in to such a massive source of media excitement because, quite frankly, I fail to see how this is any different to the not-uncommon similar activities of civilian males in public places.
It is believed male sailors on HMAS Success devised a competition based around how many female colleagues they could sleep with.
Allegedly, men in the service put dollar amounts on the heads of different women and accrued points based on how many female colleagues they slept with.
Larger amounts were offered if the sailors could sleep with a female officer or a lesbian and sailors challenged each other to have sex in various locations, including on top of a pool table.
It is believed the sailors in question detailed their bets in a book known as “the ledger”.
Following complaints from female personnel, the damning book was discovered while the navy vessel was visiting Singapore in May.
The captain ordered the sailors to immediately return home to Australia after they were formally interviewed.
The Defence Department has now launched an internal inquiry into the matter.
“The matter concerning sailors who were returned to Australia from HMAS Success in May 2009 remains under investigation, so the veracity of any allegations has yet to be confirmed,” Defence said in a statement yesterday.
Cue the predictable shrieking from the usual corners…spokeswoman for the usual corners, Melinda Tankard-Reist from Women’s Forum Australia:
When you consider that women constitute 40 per cent of the Navy, they have a right to feel safe in their place of work and not to be treated as potential notches on a sailor’s belt. Obviously things have gone backwards, I thought the defence forces had moved on from this sort of pack-animal behaviour.
This is a serious sexual incident. It requires the strongest level of disciplinary action and censure possible. I don’t believe these men should be able to serve at sea anymore because they’re not reliable, they can’t be trusted, they don’t respect women and these are not the kind of men that we need defending us.
Oh come off it Melinda. There’s this amazing word called “no”. I’m not seeing any allegation that the male sailors forced female sailors to take part in their little competition, which means that if they said “no”, and the male sailors backed off, then there is nothing wrong with what has happened here. And realistically, if the allegations were about rape, that would be the headline, not “Navy Sex Scandal”.
Some people (and this includes you Melinda) seem to forget that military personnel are not “on duty” simply because they happen to be on-board a military asset. They, just like other humans, have rest breaks and downtime. As long as the alleged behaviour occurred during their downtime, in their “de-facto civilian” time, there is no real issue here.
I will cover all bases though by saying that, if it is found that the males who are alleged to have been involved were forcing females to take part, then they should be dealt with swiftly and severely, however I am seeing absolutely no reporting of any such allegations at this time, and therefore, as far as I’m concerned, this is no different to the behaviour exhibited by many (but not all) civilian males at the many and varied nightspots around the country.
As long as the word “no” is respected, what we end up with here is two consenting adults. It is not the role of the state to interfere under such circumstances.
Samuel
July 5th, 2009 at 04:56pm
We have a new benchmark ladies and gentlemen. No longer do you have to wait for my football or horse racing tips in order to work out who will not win, you can now safely assume that if I go offline on purpose, somebody of some importance will resign.
Last time it was Peter Costello, this time it’s Channel Nine newsreader Mark Ferguson, and Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin.
Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin shocked the political word Friday afternoon by announcing that she will step down at the end of the month and transfer power to Lt. Gov. Sean Parnell — a move that throws into doubt her political future and a potential run for president in 2012.
Palin, last year’s Republican vice presidential nominee, made the surprise announcement from her home in Wasilla, flanked by her husband, Todd, and family and state commissioners.
“I never believed that I nor anyone else needs a title to do this, to make a difference,” she said. “I’m determined to take the right path for Alaska, even though it is unconventional and it’s not so comfortable.”
One factor she cited was the media and political attacks on her, and she suggested that her reason for quitting abruptly was to allow the state to move forward under Parnell without distraction, calling this the “right path for Alaska.”
“For my state and for my family to progress … I will not seek re-election as governor,” she said, voicing confidence that her successor would “continue without interruption and with great administrative and legislative success.”
Parnell will be inaugurated at the governor’s picnic in Fairbanks at the end of the month, Palin said.
I think the person to sum up Mrs. Palin’s resignation in the best manner is Eddie Burke, political commentator and broadcaster with radio KBYR in Alaska, who was interviewed yesterday by the excellent Mark Simone, filling in for Sean Hannity on Sean’s national radio show (convoluted, I know, but stick with me):
The Governor is sick and tired of the peppering of ethics complaints that has cost the citizens of the Alaska upwards of a million dollars. These liberals up here have just peppered her constantly. She can’t go to a snow machine race with her husband’s jacket on without getting an ethics complaint.
That said, I have been amused by the interestingly partisan reporting of the story. CBS News’ 1am EDT radio newscast, for example, was very amusing, declaring that Palin “couldn’t hit the nail on the head” in her press conference, implying that she didn’t make any sense.
I, for one, hope that this isn’t the end of Sarah’s political career. She has a lot to offer her country and I dare say that, if she does run on the Presidential ticket in 2012, it will be nice to have her doing so whilst not drawing a paycheck for a job (such as Governor) which she would struggle to do satisfactorily whilst in campaign mode. I think she may have learnt that lesson during the 2008 campaign where she was run off her feet doing both jobs. Perhaps Obama had it right in that regard…just ignore the job of Senator while campaigning.
Stepping away from the serious for a moment, when I first heard the story without the full details, and I heard Sarah saying that she would continue to “make a difference” for her country and that she “doesn’t need a title to do that” (paraphrased), my first thought was that she may be about to start a promising media career. Rush Limbaugh is on leave next week, and it would be great fun having Sarah Palin fill in for him. Alas, the details of the date of her resignation, July 26, dispel that fun theory.
Back to the serious, and I highly doubt that this is the last that we will see of Sarah Palin. In fact, I think that she has just placed herself in a better position to prepare for a run for President in 2012, and with Obama’s approval rating currently sitting on 53% according to the daily Rasmussen Tracking Poll, and the grassroots conservative movement gaining an awful lot of traction, 2012 could very well be the best time in many years for a strong conservative candidate to lead the Republican party to victory, and that would really need to start with next year’s mid-term elections.
I get the distinct impression that this is just the beginning for Sarah Palin, and that KXNT’s Casey Hendrickson was thoroughly correct when he mentioned that he was:
[..] watching the libs spring into disorganized action trying to figure out what Palin’s next move is. They are so transparently scared
.
Whatever Sarah’s next move is, I’m sure she will do very well, as will her country as a result.
Samuel
July 4th, 2009 at 04:39pm
Today we wish the Good and Services Tax a happy birthday, for it was on this day in the year 2000 that the Howard government replaced a whole bunch of archaic taxes with it. Unfortunately the GST hasn’t replaced income tax yet, but I look forward to the day that it does.
Samuel
July 1st, 2009 at 09:55am
Not the best day in the history of American politics. Their version of the emission trading scheme has been passed by the US House Of Representatives, but still needs to make it through the Senate.
The Democratic-controlled House, dealing a legislative victory to President Obama, narrowly passed sweeping legislation Friday that calls for the nation’s first limits on pollution linked to global warming and aims to usher in a new era of cleaner, yet more costly energy.
The vote was 219-212, capping months of negotiations and days of intense bargaining among Democrats. Republicans were overwhelmingly against the measure, arguing it would destroy jobs in the midst of a recession while burdening consumers with a new tax in the form of higher energy costs.
The House’s action fulfilled Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s vow to clear major energy legislation before July 4, and sent the measure to a highly uncertain fate in the Senate.
[..]
The legislation would require the U.S. to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by about 80 percent by mid-century. That was slightly more aggressive than Obama originally wanted, 14 percent by 2020 and the same 80 percent by mid-century.
U.S. carbon dioxide emissions from the burning of fossil fuels are rising at about 1 percent a year and are predicted to continue increasing without mandatory limits.
Under the bill, the government would limit heat-trapping pollution from factories, refineries and power plants and issue allowances for polluters. Most of the allowances would be given away, but about 15 percent would be auctioned by bid and the proceeds used to defray higher energy costs for lower-income individuals and families.
[..]
On the House floor, Democrats hailed the legislation as historic, while Republicans said it would damage the economy without solving the nation’s energy woes.
With any luck this thing will die in the Senate, much likes it seems to be doing here in Australia.
Samuel
June 27th, 2009 at 01:51pm
Technically speaking, the barcode itself is older than 35, but today (June 26) does mark the day that it was first used commercially, all the way back in 1974.
(FORTUNE Magazine) – As revolutions go, this one ignited with something less than a boom. But that doesn’t mean the events of June 26, 1974, didn’t usher in a transformation. On that day a checkout clerk slid a ten-pack of Juicy Fruit gum over a bar-code scanner at a Marsh supermarket in Troy, Ohio. The cash register automatically displayed the price, and an era was born.
The IBM UPC barcode is everywhere in our lives. As somebody who was not alive before barcodes became ubiquitous, I can’t imagine life without them. The mere thought of a weekly grocery shopping trip without barcodes is the material of nightmares.
My favourite use of the barcode though is in making self-serve checkouts possible. I gravitate toward self-serve checkouts when I’m in a store which has them. I just find the process of dealing with a competent (if slightly naggy) computer to be much more enjoyable than the process of dealing with a checkout operator who wants to argue with me about how many packets of biscuits I’m buying.
Happy birthday to the commercial use of the barcode!
Samuel
June 26th, 2009 at 11:02pm
As I noted yesterday on Facebook (and thanks to Padders for pointing it out to me), I am very pleased to see that Senator Steve Fielding has sided with the truth, and declared that global warming/climate change is not caused by human activity.
After talks with the government and top scientists, Senator Fielding, whose vote could be crucial in passing the Federal Government’s plan to put a price on carbon emissions, has released a document setting out his position.
“Global temperature isn’t rising,” it says.
[..]
Senator Fielding’s document was prepared with the help of some of the country’s most prominent climate-sceptic scientists.
It says it is a “fact” that the evidence does not support the notion that greenhouse gas emissions are causing dangerous global warming.
The even better news is that this could be the end of Kevin Rudd ridiculous Emission Trading Scheme.
The Government is struggling to muster enough votes to pass the legislation ahead of a vote scheduled for tomorrow [Thursday/yesterday].
Senator Fielding’s stance appears to torpedo the chance of the scheme passing as the Government would need his support, as well as that of the Greens and independent Nick Xenophon.
The support of the Greens is not assured. The party is concerned that the Government’s model for emissions trading lets big polluters off too lightly and has an emissions reduction target which is too weak to do any good.
[..]
If all cross-bench senators reject the ETS, the Government would need the support of the Opposition to pass the scheme.
Since that article appeared on Wednesday, the vote on the ETS has been delayed until August.
Samuel
June 26th, 2009 at 03:35pm
I’m playing catch-up here with stories from the last few days, so I apologise that some of these stories are a few days old, but this one made me fall off my chair when I heard about it.
One of the federal government’s infamous “taskforces” are proposing that obese people be given subsidies on gym memberships.
OVERWEIGHT people could be paid to lose weight under a radical plan to combat the nation’s obesity crisis.
The Rudd Government’s National Preventative Health Taskforce is next week expected to call for tax breaks or subsidies for gym memberships and fitness equipment. Parents could also get tax breaks to help pay for children’s sports club membership.
Junk food ads could be banned in children’s TV time and there could be new voluntary restrictions cutting salt and fat in packaged food. Fast-food restaurants could also be asked to give a calorie count on menus.
So let me get this straight…if I go and put on 500kg in the next two days, I could get a subsidised gym membership? Great! Somebody ring McDonalds and get them to bring a truck to my place.
A Sydney resident has been quoted in the article, stealing my thunder. Why should fat people be paid to join gyms, when people who aren’t fat (like me) have to fork out excessive amounts of our hard earned dollars to join gyms if we want to improve our physical fitness?
Darlinghurst resident Fleur Carter said yesterday it was unfair to offset the cost of overweight people to use the gym when the same scheme wasn’t extended to other people.
The 26-year-old pays $90 a month to use City Gym, where she is exercising to try to put back on weight she lost after a recent illness.
“You have got other people as well who have got health things like asthma where it is medically better for them to be fit,” she said.
“The Government doesn’t pay for them to go to the gym.”
And in signs that Australia is headed for a soft tyranny under Kevin Rudd after all, we’re all being told to change our lifestyles to fit the government’s agenda.
Employers will also be asked to do their bit by encouraging employees to stand while using the phone, instituting meetings as participants walk and organising regular work breaks.
Meanwhile the long-suffering smokers and drinkers are once again set to be forced to pay more to do something which is perfectly legal.
The cost of a pack of cigarettes could also rise by as much as $3 a pack to encourage 130,000 people to quit smoking and the taskforce will call for new restrictions on pubs and other venues selling alcohol.
And the justification for a soft tyranny? Further down in the article, this hoary old chestnut is trotted out as a reason.
The task force has warned, unless we change our lifestyles, the next generation may be the first to live for a shorter period than their parents.
How many times have we heard that one?
Meanwhile, over at Smart Company, recent ABS statistics have been interpreted in this headline:
The more we spend on weight loss, the fatter we get
Yes, it seems that despite our increase in spending on our personal fitness, we continue to expand.
62% of the country’s population was overweight during 2007-08, up from 54% the previous year
Gym membership…I think I’ll pass thanks Kevin.
Samuel
June 26th, 2009 at 01:09pm
The stuff which clogs up out courts…some days I just have to foam at the mouth and fail to produce sentences.
the classic children’s ditty Kookaburra and the Men At Work hit Down Under are set to go head-to-head in court amid accusations part of the rock anthem is a rip-off, The Daily Telegraph reports.
Music publishing company Larrikin owns the Kookaburra song and claims the melody that accompanies the line “Kookaburra sits in the old gum tree” is reproduced in Down Under. The case is due to start in full within days.
A fresh battle erupted yesterday, with lawyers for Down Under songwriters Colin Hay and Ron Strykert, and music giants Sony BMG Music Entertainment, Sony DADC Australia, EMI Songs Australia and EMI Music Publishing, claiming Larrikin doesn’t actually have copyright to Kookaburra – the Girl Guides do.
[..]
The entertainment giants, along with [Colin] Hay and [Ron] Strykert, have lodged a counter-claim against Larrikin alleging misleading or deceptive conduct.
The part of the Down Under song that is alleged to have breached copyright is the distinctive flute riff.
According to court documents, lawyers for the songwriters and the record companies will argue “the Down Under work does not incorporate the whole or any substantial part of the Kookaburra work”.
As this is before the courts, I should refrain from comment…I’ll just foam at the mouth in disbelief instead.
Samuel
June 26th, 2009 at 09:36am
Apologising to the “stolen generation” of Aboriginals was a bad idea which would set a dangerous precedent. Well, it looks like it did just that, and has created an open invitation for people to blame the government for everything which happened their childhood, and demand compensation for it.
The federal government should apologise to children who were abused and assaulted in institutional care, a parliamentary report recommends.
[..]
The new report recommends the government apologise to the victims, as previously recommended in Forgotten Australians.
The government should request apologies and redress from relevant church and religious agencies, which it said showed “a lack of proper acknowledgment of the issues raised” in the original reports.
The government should also provide further financial support for former child migrants to re-establish family connections, the report said.
Whilst there wasn’t a large crowd of weeping people outside parliament house today, as there was for Kevin Rudd’s apology to aboriginal children, there was a large enough weeping crowd in the public gallery.
Around 100 people who were in the public galleries clapped and cried as the report was handed down.
I suppose we can wait and see how many turn up if Kevin decides to apologise to this group as well.
One thing’s for sure though, based on the television footage, this lot are much angrier than the aboriginals were, although why they have decided to blame the government is beyond me…perhaps it’s because the government has a lot more money to spare than charitable organisations.
ABC Radio’s AM program pre-empted the release of the report the other day, and Jim Luthy, one of the apparently hard-done-by, seems to sum up the misguided anger of the group:
“It was identified as one of the most brutal homes in New South Wales. So that’s how I ended up there. My mother died, my father shot through, for no other reason than that you could just be virtually kidnapped and taken off the streets and placed into a home.”
Your parents disappeared from your life, you were a kid on the streets, and you don’t think this is a good enough reason for you to be placed in care? The only difference these days is that you would be placed in foster care which, whilst having the benefit of a closer relationship with your carer, is much harder to regulate.
I can understand your frustration and anger Jim, but rather than jumping on the “stolen generation’s” bandwagon and blaming the government for the way you were treated, take your group, get some lawyers, and launch class actions against the people and/or organisations responsible. If various governments happen to be one of your targets then so be it.
Do this properly, and if you have a case, the courts will make sure that you are properly compensated. Trying to push the entire blame on to the government, and trying to make them cough up for your compensation, rather than making the people who are truly guilty pay, will only punish innocent taxpayers (of which I assume you are one).
Let the courts do their job of being impartial, apportioning blame and setting out a compensation schedule. That is the role of the courts, not of the government. If it is then found that the government has something to apologise for, then let them apologise.
In a case where blame, if there is any, is even more widely spread than was the case with the “stolen generation”, the government apologising before a court has made a decision would be plain stupid. One can only hope that Kevin Rudd understands this…although based on the federal government’s statement that it:
is committed to acknowledging the past hurt caused by Government actions
on the AM program, I doubt that he has learned his lesson from the Stolen Generation fiasco.
Samuel
June 25th, 2009 at 11:21pm
A story with a happy ending from Reuters.
A pilot on a Continental Airlines flight died in mid-flight and the plane landed safely near New York City under the control of two co-pilots, authorities said on Thursday.
Continental flight 61 from Brussels landed at Newark Liberty International Airport, according to Continental’s website.
“The captain of Continental flight 61, which was en route from Brussels to Newark, died in flight, apparently of natural causes,” Continental said in a statement.
“The crew on this flight included an additional relief pilot who took the place of the deceased pilot. The flight continued safely with two pilots at the controls,” it said.
The plane was a Boeing 777 with 247 passengers on board.
The pilot, 60, was based in Newark and had worked for Continental for 32 years, the airline said. Continental has one flight daily between Brussels and Newark.
It’s nice to see an aeroplane story where an airline has taken precautions to ensure that a bad situation doesn’t turn in to a disaster.
Samuel
June 19th, 2009 at 07:35am
When I glimpsed the front page of the Herald Sun this morning, the first thing I thought was “gee, Dame Edna isn’t wearing as much make-up as ‘she’ used to”.
Now I can just sit back and wait for the Moran family to work out where I am, and set fire to my stuff.
Samuel
June 18th, 2009 at 05:39pm
And there’s no prize for guessing that it’s the gas industry which is infuriated by the debacle:
The gas industry has slammed the government’s Renewable Energy Target (RET) legislation saying it is flawed and was misleading consumers.
Under the RET legislation to be introduced in parliament this week, households which install an electric water heater can apply for a rebate.
The Gas Industry Alliance says under the proposed RET, electric heat pump water heaters qualify as solar products and will be eligible for rebates.
Group spokesman Peter Harcus said the legislation makes no sense and should be amended if the RET is to be effective.
“Would you call your fridge a solar product? These electrical hot water products run the same way, driven by grid electricity and generate more greenhouse gas than genuine solar products,” Mr Harcus said.
“Under this policy, if you put your fridge outside, it would therefore be considered solar. It is a complete farce.”
Mr Harcus said consumers were being misled by “bogus” solar products which run on electricity and produce more carbon emissions than a solar energy system.
The gas industry group is calling for electric heat pump systems to be removed from the scheme.
It says due to the inclusion of electric hot water systems for rebates, the RET will fail to deliver the 20 per cent electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020.
Hmmm, a solar fridge…that’s one thing I haven’t seen Malcolm Douglas pull out of the back of his four-wheel drive yet. Maybe he will do so the next time Channel Seven decide to show one of his dubious outback cooking shows.
Samuel
June 16th, 2009 at 05:15pm
Another Sean Hannity interview for your enjoyment, this time with the author of Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto, US talk radio host Mark Levin.
I finally got my hands on the book a couple weeks ago when I last returned from Deniliquin and am most of the way through it (it’s not particularly dense…it’s just that I haven’t had a lot of time to read of late) and intend on finishing it this week.
The book spent seven consecutive weeks at the top of the New York Times bestseller list, and, at the time of the interview last week, had spent nine of the last ten weeks at the top of said list.
Sean and Mark discuss the book, the mainstream media’s apparent lack of interest in the book, and how it relates to the Obama administration (despite it being written almost entirely before Obama was elected).
Samuel
June 16th, 2009 at 09:54am
I probably should have done this research before I drove to Deniliquin yesterday, but I ended up doing it afterwards and was slightly surprised by what I found.
I do not, at this time, have a working car stereo, so have been relying on my iPod for audible entertainment during long and longish trips, and have been slightly concerned that such action may provoke a negative reaction from the police and incur a fine, however as I do not believe that it hinders my ability to drive, and instead makes it possible to concentrate for longer periods of time (I would have been very bored without it), it was worth running the risk.
Last night, as the topic was starting to annoy me, I decided to do some research and found that it is perfectly legal in Australia to use an iPod (or other device) with earphones while driving, despite the fact that it can potentially block out external noises.
When I thought about this, it made perfect sense as deaf people are able to drive (although I don’t understand how anyone can teach a deaf person to drive) and they can’t hear a thing, either inside or outside their vehicle, and to the same extent, it is legal to block out external noises with a car stereo (within prescribed environmental noise limits).
Apparently the same can’t be said about using an iPod in this manner in the US, where most states have outlawed it for reasons which don’t make much sense to me.
A word of warning though, much like the use of any device, if an iPod is distracting you from your driving, and you cause an accident, you can be charged with negligent driving.
This is general information only and does not consider your needs and circumstances, nor is it a substitute for professional legal advice. You should seek professional legal advice before acting on any advice given herein.
Samuel
June 16th, 2009 at 07:54am
Next Posts
Previous Posts
