New leader's game

In light of the leadership performance that occurred this week, I just had to share this funny image.  From here:

I want this as a real game!!

Our honourable leader....

Because it wouldn't be Australian politics if we couldn't have a laugh at the politicians, I had to share this piece by a British comedian in America.



The weird thing is it made me laugh and cry. Cry because I cannot believe we elected this person as PM.

And yes, confession: I had a good chuckle at the last line.

foreign aid #2

So the last 24 hours has seen an abundance of criticism to the Liberals budget cuts, especially foreign aid. It has called into question the public's ability to "trust" a government, that holds out details of its budget until it is too late. It also calls into question "trust" when they promised, not so long ago for large spending in foreign aid.

Lethargy

Apologizes for the absence of posts in the last week or so. It is hard to believe that in less than 7 days a new Prime Minister will be elected. Will it actually change anything? 

One thing I have noticed, in both myself and others, is the lethargy of election talk in the air. People are tired of K.Rudd, economists are tired of Australians whining (or the Liberal party telling us) we are poor & the economy is the top election issue, people are tired of no humane action on asylum seekers. Everyone is tired of the election! 

I know the busyness of life has stop me from tuning in. However, there is also another, more subtle reason for my disconnect - that belief that nothing has or will change. Both major parties are offering, what appears like similar offers. Both PM hopefuls are as distrusted as the other. Their policies have not changed in the last week. Both have hard-to-believe promises.

With only 5 days to the polls, I am trying to rouse myself back from political sleep. Like falling asleep in a uni lecture, I know I need to pay attention to what is going on. But like uni, there are so many other things to check out (AFL finals footy anyone?) As I wake myself I hope that the rest of the country stays awake and that Saturday's winner will be the best for the country. 

(27.8.13 - PPL experience #2, asleep on the couch.)

Debate #1

So, in the midst of feeding and putting kids to bed, I missed the first debate last night between the PM and the Opposition leader.

By the sounds of it, it wasn't worth watching. From the videos and replays and articles I have read it appears that they K.Rudd and Abbott battled it out on known territory, appealing to the hip-pocket of middle class voters (yes like me).

Here are some of my thoughts:
* Wasn't a game changer. I don't think the debate would of changed or helped you with your vote
* K.Rudd appealing to his good management of the GFC (fair enough)
* Abbott attacked for the potential to increase taxes
* K.Rudd playing the gay marriage card (remember the Apology to Indigenous Australians anyone?)
* K.Rudd seemed more nervous than Abbott (a little bit of a surprise)
* Liberals adamant that the carbon tax will be scrapped. Sorry, but I do not believe that the "direct action" Abbott is talking about will do ANYTHING. (BIG thumbs down)
* Both men, but particularly Abbott appealing to voters with really broad, abstract vision and (frankly false) promises. The best is Abbott's "We can make your life better." Seriously? (Promise the world...)

(for some articles I found helpful - link 1, link 2 & particularly link 3 - love Natalie Mast's opinions!)

Speaking of debates, there was one on Wednesday night between Bob Car and Julie Bishop about Foreign policy, but (for some reason) I cannot find much information on it or what is was like. Anyone out there in the wide world web have good info??

The verdict of the debate: same same but different kettle of fish (or prawns)??

Watsons Bay, October 2012

Helpful article/page #2

For those of Christian faith (or at least sympathetic to Christian ideas) this website by the Bible Society is quite insightful.  It has great articles about each parties different policies which will help anyone, even if they do not have faith in Jesus.

I found the leader profiles particularly interesting - K.Rudd & Abbott. I have not particular opinion about if I think their faith is a good thing for a PM as I do not think it will sway my vote as much as their policies. 

Hoping this will help others. Let me know what you think.

Wanna a man?

Firstly, apologies for such a big gap in posts. I will strive to blog weekly but please forgive me when this doesn't happen. Life (work, kids, family, cleaning etc etc) gets in between me and the computer often! :)

(stolen from SMH March 10, 2010)

I am going to blog today about something that deviates a little from my previous discussions on the policies. I want to raise the issue of the actual PERSON we are voting for as Prime Minister. Even though our democratic system doesn't allow us to actually vote for the prime minister (unless you live in the seats of Manly or Griffith), our culture is so celebrity/character driven that the MAN who is PM counts a lot. So - which MAN should I (we) vote for?

I am not aligned to any political party. I have no like/dislike for K.Rudd other than I am impressed he can speak Mandarin. He receives no sympathy points from me in regards to the Julia Gillard backstab/betrayal.  I do confess however that I have a personal dislike for T.Abbott. Why? I don't think it's his appearance or his party. I think it is his language. It is the way that he uses a lot of negative language in the public sphere that he walks in and which I feel isn't helpful for us voters as we try to look for policies instead of slogans. His speech are sometimes just a string of slogans. I listened to him talk about the recent boat-people crisis and actually found his use of the word "mugs" offensive.

But I want to and am willing to put aside that personal opinion of T.Abbott, if the man and his price/policy is right.  I really want to look beyond my own preferences to see what sort of character he is and also K.Rudd.

So I read this article about T.Abbott:

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/abbott-the-thinking-persons-prime-minister-20130619-2oj68.html

I also recall this article about Mike Baird who says some equally glowing accounts of T.Abbott:

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/the-son-rises-20121023-282ga.html

And then read this one about K.Rudd to provide some balance:

http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/the-son-rises-20121023-282ga.html


All articles are bias. Some are just more obvious than others. All of the above are extremely bias. But I would like to hear what other people think. I confess, after reading the first article (and being slightly scared by the image that is in the article) I nearly fell off my seat laughing at the concluding line that T.Abbott was a "thinking woman's Prime Minister". (Down, prejudice, down!). It wasn't a convincing article for me.

Open to more though! So, please send me through articles to help me get a clearer picture of what MAN I want (to vote for).

Day 2 - 2 comments (woohoo!) - 2 articles - 2 thoughts

Day 2 of blog and though it is less than 24 hours old, I am thinking this might be a good thing.

Thanks for the comments on my first post. Keep them coming!! I confess I feel a nerdy-love when people comment. Yes, a strange sense of affirmation.

I have two articles for you today. One can be considered more serious than the other.

First is this, http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/tastes-the-same-defrosted--not-to-liking-of-all-20130627-2p04t.html sent to me by The Man. It is an interesting take on KRudd.  I can already feel Abbott getting more and more frustrated with every minute he has to look at Kevin's ever smiley face.

The second article is more informative and related to what this blog is really about. A friend sent me this article through my FB and clearly sets out the various policies of each party about paid parental leave and childcare. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-10/federal-election-parental-leave-childcare-policy/4671954

My two thoughts:
1) I am unsure which of the parental leave schemes I think is the best. They are quite complicated. I have two different experiences with paid parental leave. The first, when Peppa was born, was when there was no government paid leave. But my employer provided 14 weeks paid leave. I thought that was pretty generous and a great way of showing that they wanted to retain me. My second experience, when George was born, was with the government's paid parental leave. My employer actually provided 18 weeks paid leave on top of the government's paid leave which was simply amazing and generous. (And no, there is no requirement for me to return the money if I did not return). I see the way that my employer has taken the initiative as their point of difference from the competition. If they had to do this (as under Liberal policies) maybe it would not be as great? (Still thinking that through)
2) The main reason I think government paid parental leave is excellent is for people who do not work for large corporate organisations (like me) who provide paid leave. It just provides that help at a great time of change. A lot of women I know can get quite worried about going back to work and how their "career" or "work skills" may become devalued when they have a child. I think the paid parental leave takes the financial pressure off having a child and therefore the mother to return to work.

I also have some thoughts on childcare and glad that the major parties are thinking of reforming this. But I will leave that for another post.

Your thoughts?

(Paid parental leave experience #1 & #2)