In anticipation of this month's ridiculous Australian of the Year awards, freelance writer and political commentator, Paul Collits, has come up with the 'Anti-Australian of the Year ‘Boring Award’. His nominees are:

The Warners (Cricketer David and wife)
Brittany Higgins (Just awarded around $3 million of our money without explanation)
Lisa Wilkinson
The Teals
Chris Bowen
Voice Activists
COVID State Enablers

Make your own choice. The standout for me is Chris Bowen, closely followed by Voice Activists

I nominate Paul Collits. I admit I don't know much about him, but the inclusion of the Teals in his shortlist indicates he's willing to put party before country.

I nominate Keith Windschuttle because he tried to
re-write history for his own gains.

The nominations are already in, but it's no surprise that a couple of morons don't understand the difference between voting and nominating. It's a good thing that they don't have to pass an intelligence test to get a vote in elections.

ttbn,

You did tell us in your opening post to -
"Make your own choice," and then gave us
yours as well. So it was misleading.

So rude to call people "morons," when they
are gracious enough to respond to your thread.

Foxy

It was not misleading. You were given a list of nominees with a request to pick one of them if you wished. You chose to nominate another person after the nominations were closed. If you want to give your opinions on other people not mentioned in my thread, start your own thread

Dear Foxy,

Good choice.

I however would have to pick Scott Morrison.

Secretly appointing himself Minister on a range of portfolios is pretty un-Australian in my book.

It was not only disturbing to a lot of Aussies it was a bad look overseas as well. It was frightening to learn our system allowed him to get away with it and I am grateful to the current government for measures to stop it happening in the future.

There's another one who probably writes Xi Jinping on his ballot paper if he doesn't like the names already on it.

ttbn,

Sorry but I beg to disagree. Go back and read your opening
post. You said that the nominees where - HIS choices and for
us to choose our own. You neglected to add - to choose from
HIS choices. Your at fault here! Take responsibility and stop
doing your houdini act.

Dear Steele,

I thought about Scott Morrison, as well as a few others.
But decided on Windschuttle. I'm glad you approve.

Ah, get a life, Foxy. Whatever. I don't really care if you felt mislead. I didn't mislead you. As an aside, I agree that Scott Morrison could well be have been a nominee but, it wasn't my list. I could list lots of people from across the political spectrum; I have no love for anyone these days.

But, I will side with Keith Windschuttle who is honest and a very scrupulous historian, one of the few who can trace his information back to original documents. And he is not connected to any of the scumbags on the original list of nominees, who should be the only ones considered in this instance.

ttbn,

This is a discussion forum over which you have no control.
And if you don't approve of the directions in which
people will respond - that is your problem. I am merely
doing you the courtesy of offering you an explanation.
Your non-acceptance of it - is once again your problem not mine.

As for Keith Windschuttle? He's been discredited by his peers
for not using primary sources in his research. However your
support of the man comes as no surprise - doing research is not
something you believe in - you've told us many times that you
believe more in opinions. than research. But it appears that
you're even selective in your choice of those.

What a stupid thread for discussion, who cares who some far right crack pot nutter "nominates" as those he don't like or agree with.

Hi Foxy,

Don't feed the forum chook, Nursy has been on hols, down at the R.I.P Retirement Home for old farts, so the chooks haven't been getting their daily dose of 'Doz-Easy' tabs, they're been a bit cock-a-hoop with themselves lately.

I would like to nominate a bloke for the annual 'Turd Award' but I don't know his real name.

Hi Paul,

I'm trying to ofer an explanation to ttbn.
He's rejecting it.

I can't do any more.

I think that I will give up casting pearls before swine. This thread has attracted only OLO's leading oinkers.

ttbn,
Supposing, a few years back, Julia Gillard had come up with "the 'Anti-Australian of the Year ‘Boring Award’" and someone had posted her list of nominations on this board and asked you to make your choice, can you honestly say you wouldn't have rejected them all and nominated her?

Do you get it yet? It's not about understanding the difference between voting and nominating; it's about discerning which of them is the better response.

It may well be that in his article which you didn't even link to, nominations are already in. Clearly Paul Collits wants to set the agenda even though it's not an agenda that most Aussies would be willing to go along with. But on this board his nominations are no more valid than mine or Foxy's.

He's been discredited by his peers
Foxy,
Just like this Ridd fellow when he disclosed the doings of many in Academia !

Hi indyvidual,

This Ridd fellow was the climate deniers hero.
Whose case was supported by such luminaries as
Andrew Bolt and Rowan Dean and of course he
was helped in his funding by the IPA (Institute
of Public Affairs) et al. The High Court however
found that Ridd's conduct justified his
termination and the Institute of Marine Science
found flaws in his claims.

Seeing that this thread has been wrecked by idiots, I'll use it to give credit where it is due to the Government for it's just announced decision to increase defence spending to the biggest level in our history. The Coalition was all talk, just blowing it out their bum.

I'd like to add - my approval of the government's
actions in maintaining COVID testing for people arriving here
from China. China's death toll is increasing from this
pandemic and it would not be wise for Australia not
to test people coming from that country. A sensible precaution.