Cream rinse and tobacco smoke, that sickly scent is always there… when is insufficient choice undemocratic?

I set out with the best of intentions.  I was going to be a responsible voter and check out the policies of all the parties and try to work out which best represented my views.  The process was good: it established that my feelings towards the Greens were legitimate (it was interesting to note that — despite somebody‘s assertions that the Greens don’t really believe all of their policies — Bob Brown was there on Insiders claiming that ‘we have worked very hard on many of these policies in the Senate‘).

It was also interesting that, as a conservative, I was more comfortable with the policies of the Australian Sex Party than I was any of the other parties (that I’d examined so far: and, let’s face it, I was already into fringe crazy land).  Despite wanting to send an e-mail about their stranger policies, I was so impressed that I was going to volunteer handing out ‘How to Vote’ cards.  Of all the parties, they seemed the most sane even though they were essentially a political party for the sex industry (and I still have concerns about the commodification of sex).

I live in the ACT.  Today, I had a look at the list of candidates on offer…

Shit all.

Absolutely shit all.

In the senate, for example, we have Libslabs Greedems and an ungrouped person who has nothing to offer.  All of the candidates (except the last because next to nothing is known about the last) are essentially the same person.

Oh, I forgot to add that there’s more disdain for the Greens this week.  In an attempt to show that they’re just as willing to lower themselves into the political shit flinging match like the bigger parties, the Greens boohooed about Abbott’s use of ‘No means no’ when referring to Julia Gillard.

Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said it was an inappropriate phrase to use.  — ABC news Online.

((My own 20c: Abbott ought to have been aware that it would cause offence.  The correct — that is, the PC — way out of the problem was to say: ‘I can understand why some people might have found it offensive.  I certainly didn’t mean for it to be offensive, but I sincerely apologise for any offence caused.’  The current approach appears to be along the lines of: ‘But I am a white male and Tony is a white male.  Therefore, when we use words, they mean exactly what we say they do.  Shut up an make me a pie.’))

Unfortunately, this gave a free kick to probably my most hated news ‘personality’, Andrew ‘I won’t accept a tearful apology from you barbarians’ Bolt.  He correctly noted that a Greens senator had used the phrase and hadn’t been hounded by Sarah Hanson-Young.  The only possible way to spin the event is to say that the Greens senator was quoting somebody else.  Even then, it’s a flimsy reply.

So I’m in an election campaign where all of the major candidates are indistinguishable in their deplorable behaviours and where I can’t vote for my party of choice.  At least GetUp won their constitutional challenge, meaning more people can vote for parties which won’t represent them.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s