After being wiped off and let down by Malcolm Turnbull, who left them with nothing more than a “whingeing three page letter”, the voters of Wentworth now have the opportunity to wash the dirty taste of Turnbull from their mouths and elect the candidate that Mafia-style branch stacking robbed them of and burdened them with Turnbull.

Peter King, the man who would have saved Australia from the worst prime minister ever by keeping Turnbull out of politics has policies to offer: national security, cheap energy, water security and housing affordability. The end of subsidies for wind farms that have made our electricity among the most expensive in the world. He wants our debt tackled, less red tape and regulation, and an end to political correctness. And, proper education, concentrating on the basics, not the bizarre. The very opposite of the egomaniac blather and ruin inflicted by Turnbull.

Will the Liberal Party choose Mr King as their
candidate? There's quite a few candidates hoping
to get that position - Mr King was banned from the
Liberal Party from 2004 for ten years for standing
against a pre-selected Liberal Party member (Malcolm
Turnbull). King re-joined the Liberal Party in 2015.
Will he be chosen as the Party's candidate this time
around? We shall have to wait and see. There are
other candidates with their hands up.

I heard on Radio this morning, the good Voters of Wentworth wish for a Lady to stand as the LNP Candidate. Otherwise after the abomination of Mr Malcolm TURNBULL, anyone other than a candidate from the conservative side will do?

King has as much hope as a flea dropped onto a hot griddle.

Is Miss,

Why?

The SMH thinks that a Dave Sharma is a cert for preselection. An SMH backing should put the mockers on him, particularly as he is also backed by the Left of the party, and as a former ambassador he is probably wet. Surely, after Turnbull, a conservative would be chosen. But, of course, the Liberal party is no longer very conservative, and they are not at all interested in what voters think anymore, so anything is possible. And, as the Morrison government is clearly stuffed, it might not matter who they put up. Abbott's sister is out, and the Liberals, still seem to favour capability over female quotas. King, a lawyer, has been out fighting for underdogs and is the only one with any sort of profile after being back-stabbed for the job last time by Turnbull. Anybody but him will likely see Labor winning the seat.

According to The Australian newspaper -

Scott Morrison faces losing his parliamentary majority
unless the Liberals choose a female candidate for the
Wentworth by-election according to private polling -
showing the government's primary vote has crashed to 39%
in the blue-ribbon seat vacated by Malcolm Turnbull.

The polling taken at the week-end and paid for by early
Liberal front-runner Andrew Bragg (who's since withdrawn)
showed that a female candidate would boost the Liberal vote
in the seat by 4%.

Malcolm Turnbull polled 62% in Wentworth at the 2016 election
but the Liberals now face a back lash over his dumping as
Prime Minister putting the Coalition's one seat majority in
jeopardy.

Dr Kerryn Phelps , an Independent, is another candidate who
may consider running for the seat in Wentworth. She would
be a formidable candidate as she's well known and very
popular in the area.

Interesting times ahead.

Call me a bigot, sexist or a chauvinist, but I for one, would not like to have a raving lesbian feminist , to represent any one of those in my constituency. Imagine, you'd have all the left leaning labour policies implemented. Anyway I think we can all rest fairly easily, given it's a pretty conservative electorate.

The electorate of Wentworth had the 4th highest YES
vote (80%) for same-sex marriage. The electorate's
huge vote for same sex marriage shows that a conservative
Liberal candidate might not be certain to bin a bye-election.

Ton Abbott's gay sister was going to run as an Independent,
then changed her mind.

Samantha Maiden on Twitter has stated that "Kerryn Phelps
will run in Wentworth and many senior Liberals believe she
will win. So there will be a female member for Wentworth
but not necessarily the one Andrew Bragg is standing aside
for on the promise of entering the Senate in a winnable
spot."

Dr Phelps is well-known and is a very credible Independent
candidate. She's also very popular in the electorate.
She's in with a good chance as there could be a backlash
against the Liberal Party's candidate due to the
dumping of Malcolm Turnbull as PM.

Putting up a female candidate just because she is a female would be the height of stupidity; nonsense best left to the Labor party. No self-respecting, proud woman would allow herself to be used that way, so any woman fronting up would be a dud. Because of the rubbish about quotas, ALL women in politics will always suspected of being second rate; and any woman who goes into politics knowing that WILL be second rate.

When Margaret Thatcher was asked what it was like being the first female prime minister, she said that she didn't know, because she had never been a make prime minister. There have been capable women in politics, and there have been pumpkins, e.g. Gillard here and May in the UK. The idiots who have made a huge thing out of female quotas have done nothing for women - in fact they have made female politicians suspect for all time.

At the present time, woman wannabes of inferior of average ability know they cannot compete with men, and that they need to have the field cleared of men to be elected.

Here's a remark from someone on twitter that's
appropriate:

"Mr Bragg's claim he selflessly stood aside for a
woman at Wentworth...

He gets a safe Senate spot and a woman gets to fight
for the government's life in a marginal seat!?

Interesting.

Hard one this, the Wentworth by-election. If I was having a vote on Thursday for the Liberal candidate, and I don't think they let Greens vote, I'd plug for Michael Feneley, who is well known to me. Michael's gone round more times in elections than the spin dryer in a washing machine.

Make it clear, Labor can't win Wentworth, Belly might not agree, but that's the reality. Turnbull was popular in the area, his personal vote was based on being PM and an economic conservative with good business connections, which endeared him to the old money around Vaucluse, where the Libs pull 80%-90% of the vote. Turnbull was seen as a enough of a social progressive with an economic conservative slant to satisfy the well heeled kids from up Paddington way, where the Libs are good for 70% of the vote.

Who can win? The Liberals, obviously have the best chance, but a high profile Independent woman, like former AMA President Dr Kerryn Phelps with a low Liberal primary vote, she would require a strong preference flow from Labor/Greens to win. Could happen.

The more conservative media has decided that Morrison has “made a good start to his prime ministership”, with his realisation that the Liberal party should be “centre-right, not centre-left”, but takes a crack at his religious beliefs, naming “fiery sermons” and “speaking in tongues”.

Not many of us would be comfortable with fire and brimstone and speaking in tongues; but both are harmless to the general public, who are at liberty to decide what they think about such things. Morrison has been long enough in politics to show that whatever he does on Sundays and in his private life will never impinge on his day job. His “praying for rain” to alleviate the drought hardly indicates that “his faith will be part of his leadership style”, as suggested by one media person. This same person finds it “worrying that he is an enthusiastic part of an evangelical movement that is not mainstream”.

Pardon? A harmless, if eccentric branch of Christianity is a 'worry’, while there are politicians of a certain alien religion in Australian parliaments whose dogma certainly is a worry for non-believers, homosexuals and the freedoms of women and freedom of speech itself. I'm no fan of Morrison as PM, but I take exception when media cowards take a swipe at Christian politicians, but slink away from discussing Muslims in government.

I would like to see Kerryn Phelps run for the seat. I think she would do well. Medical doctors often do well in politics, as they are seen by voters as ‘trustworthy’, whether that is true or not! I doubt the average modern voter will care what her sexual orientation is.

Neither sexual orientation nor religion should have any bearing on politics.
If Morrison brings up his ‘happy-clappy’ weekend activities too much, it will alienate a large number of our secular voters, so he is bound to try and keep it quiet.....

Hi Susi,

//I doubt the average modern voter will care what her sexual orientation is// and nor should it.

//Medical doctors often do well in politics, as they are seen by voters as ‘trustworthy’//

My bloke Michael Feneley is also a medical doctor, a leading cardiologist and head of St Vincent's Hospital, heart department. AND more importantly Michael come with his own (old) bus. Yep a dinky di 1960's bus, all decked out with Michael paraphernalia. Loud speakers on board the 'Mick Express' ready to blast out the good folk of Wentworth. Michael has gone around 4 or 5 times, at state and federal, never won one yet. However went close in 2013 in Kingsford-Smith, out polled Matt Thistlethwaite on the primary vote, but Matt won with Green preferences (thank us for that on Belly). I voted Green/Liberal that time, didn't like MT in those days, thought he was too close to Eddie Obeid, but he's turned out to be a good member. Michael had a couple of runs against Mick Daley in the state seat of Maroubra, unfortunately MD is too much of a local boy to knock off.
BUT Wentworth awaits the good doctor! And he would be an asset, politics in Australia certainly could do with some surgery. All jokes aside I don't know the Liberal candidates in Wentworth, except one, and truthfully Michael Feneley would be a very good local member, and he has done more for the Liberal Party than most males or females.

//Who can win? The Liberals, obviously have the best chance, but a high profile Independent woman, like former AMA President Dr Kerryn Phelps with a low Liberal primary vote, she would require a strong preference flow from Labor/Greens to win. Could happen.//

Vote 1 for the Science Party.

Surely whoever the candidates might be, surely they should be selected on merit not gender?

O sung wu, surely you mean she should be selected on merit not gender?
So much of this debate carries the implication that if selection was on merit, women would not get picked. My reading of the argument for quotas is that this is a process to ensure that women of merit do not get overlooked just because they are women.

O sung wu, you mentioned earlier that you wouldn't want a raving lefty feminist to represent you in your electorate.
Now fair's fair. Most of my life I have had to put up with being represented by raving rightwing macho men. I've never had anyone remotely like me as my representative.
Perhaps you need a raving lefty feminist rep to let you know what that feels like

It should only be about merit. Both men and women used to realise that that there are things that women do better than men and vice versa. This is still a fact; only the politics and attitudes have changed. If there is to be a battle of the sexes and scores given, I believe that women come out on top in many areas that men are hopeless at. However, politics is not one of those areas. Apart from Margaret Thatcher in modern times, and perhaps Golda Meir, women are just not up to it - certainly not in Australia, where we have suffered appalling failures such as Gillard, Lawrence and Kirner. Currently serving female politicians make no impression at all.

This took my fancy this morning: a comment on change of PM: “Great work, terrible timing. It must feel a bit like being promoted to Captain of the Titanic half way through her maiden voyage”.

HI there COSSOMBY...

Firstly I apologise if I've in anyway offended you, it was meant in general terms. However I have quite some knowledge apropos the antecedents of Dr Karen PHELPS, and the amount trouble this individual has caused in just about all she touches.

I wonder why she ever bothered to study medicine, not simply leap straight into politics and be done with it. She was a popular figure with the AMA especially those of the Left, the more moderate and conservative Medical Practitioners, only wished her gone. I have specific knowledge of that claim.

Again I apologise to you unreservedly. I can only imagine how anyone who's marginalised must feel - but definitely not Dr PHELPS, with her incessant stirring and troublemaking, I offer her no such apology.

Does that mean that Morrison will also go down with the
ship? Or perhaps he'll ensure that there will be enough
life-boats for everyone?

We'll have to wait and see.

Here's something else that popped up this morning for those who don't recognise the differences between men and women:

“ …. men account for 99.9 per cent of combat deaths, 94 per cent of workplace deaths, 76 per cent of homicide victims, 75 per cent of successful suicides, 71 per cent of homelessness….”.

Bet the girls won't be putting up their hands for some of that.

How about some evidence? A link will do.

Also this fine morning, a feminist lawyer has blamed “sexist” cops and judicial officers for the rise in women being arrested for violent crimes. Apparently the number of women arrested for violent crimes and domestic violence is rising at a rate five times that of men. All due to a “pervasive systemic gender bias”, of course! Seems that women are perfectly capable of copying the worst traits of men, if nothing else.

Here are two links that may explain a thing or two
for those interested in the full facts:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/millystilinovic/2017/03/07/how-far-has-australia-come-in-terms-of-gender-equality/#68d88e8c4eaf

http://www.harpersbazaar.com.au/culture/13-statistics-that-prove-we-have-a-long-way-to-go-regarding-gender-equality-5984

I certainly can't speak for others, but I'd much prefer to arrest a 'resistive' male than a 'resistive' female any day? When the ladies bung it on - it's 'really' on for sure!

Let the decision on the gender mix in Parliament be neither on gender nor merit, let the voters decide whom they want; as I've said before all that is needed is for the parties to put forward a male and a female candidate for each contested seat. Their combined vote would indicate the winning ticket and their personal total vote would decide which of the two was elected.

Can't be fairer than that.

Despite their claims about 'merit’, the Liberals are starting to talk about quotas to satisfy people who will never vote for them. Turnballism lives on in the likes of Craig Laundy and a few of the drones Morrison should have rid himself of. More interesting is this:-

The ABC has concocted a yarn that the Liberals will have problems in Wentworth because they cannot come with a reason for getting rid of Turnbull. I suggest that most voters know the answer or don't give sh-t. Anybody who still doesn't know the reason would have had to be living in a vacuum throughout Turnbull's leadership. Thanks to what the Liberals allowed Turnbull to do to the Liberal Party, they will have problems in all electorates for many years to come - who wants two socialist parties! The only thing that could save them, or water down their coming defeat somewhat, is the very fact that they did - belatedly - get rid of the horrible man. It's the ABC only that cannot see the reason for his demise.

Men in general are far better leaders than women if not emasculated like many in the Labour/Greens/Liberals. Occasionally you get a really good woman leader like Thatcher. Simply an inconvenient truth.

“ …. men account for 99.9 per cent of combat deaths, 94 per cent of workplace deaths, 76 per cent of homicide victims, 75 per cent of successful suicides, 71 per cent of homelessness….”.

100% of adults who die during child birth are WOMEN.

Bet the boys won't be putting up their hands for some of that.

And your point is ttbn?

BTW in the majority of wars non-combatant deaths are great than those of combatants.

WWII estimated number killed 70 million 60-67% non-combatants. many being female.

//Let the decision on the gender mix in Parliament be neither on gender nor merit, let the voters decide whom they want; as I've said before all that is needed is for the parties to put forward a male and a female candidate for each contested seat.//

Disenfranchises minor parties; many of them can't even find one candidate to run in a seat.

For some reason this thread seems to have taken unnecessary detour by way of gender theory, when the original post seems to have been about who will be the best candidate for the seat of Wentworth.

As I understand it the candidate standing for the Science Party is a woman. But the reason she gets my support is because she stands for the Science Party, and lord knows the parliament could do with a few more nerds. I'd still support her if she was a bloke. Seems to me that the policies she represents are more concern than the contents of her codpiece, but maybe I'm just weird.

ttbn, you are making plenty of anti-female claims there. As foxy asked, where are your links for proof of what you claim? Otherwise no one will believe you.

Paul,

Just as an aside, I had an uncle who went through hell on each of the three occasions that his wife was pregnant.
He experienced morning sickness etc., and my auntie breezed through; she reckoned that she would have had more children but he suffered enough!

During the birth process, he was sedated as he suffered some pain.
Not surprisingly they were a close and devoted couple.

Yes, runner. The truth is very inconvenient for some people here.

Posted by ttbn, Wednesday, 12 September 2018 12:36:31 PM-

Here's something else that popped up this morning for those who don't recognise the differences between men and women:
“ …. men account for 99.9 per cent of combat deaths, 94 per cent of workplace deaths, 76 per cent of homicide victims, 75 per cent of successful suicides, 71 per cent of homelessness….”.
Bet the girls won't be putting up their hands for some of that.

Answer- Here's some pages that may back up the above.

Men, women, and murder: gender-specific differences in rates of fatal violence and victimization.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1635092

Male vs. Female Statistics in the Workplace in America

http://work.chron.com/male-vs-female-statistics-workplace-america-23880.html

Suicide Risk and Risk of Death Among Recent Veterans

http://www.publichealth.va.gov/epidemiology/studies/suicide-risk-death-risk-recent-veterans.asp

Gender differences in suicide

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_differences_in_suicide

Men Dominate in Workplace Deaths

http://articles.latimes.com/1995-08-04/business/fi-31566_1_workplace-deaths

So, we have worked this out. We only want successful people in parliament. Therefore male suicides victims make the best candidates 75%. But for Prime Minister a woman is ideal, as men are very bad at dodging a bullet 99.9%, but 76% of men will bump off someone from the opposition, and 94% of male members will stab themselves with a paper clip in the chamber and that will be the end of them. BTW these guys were in action in the Liberal Party room just the other day, there was blood on the floor. And come the next election 71% of Liberal men will find themselves homeless.

Issy, obviously this Misses Man type uncle of yours needs to toughen up! Tell the fella to get a grip on it, and go down the pub when the kids are a commen'.

//Men in general are far better leaders than women// not so runner, Moses led the Israelites into the desert, which is about the size of Hyde Park, and he couldn't find his way out for 40 years. What kind of leader was that. Unless he was a Labour/Greens/Liberal type, given he got around in a dress and sandals he could have been.

CM,

You clearly have an enquiring mind and you are capable of looking things up for yourself, unlike many posters here who are always demanding references (which in most cases will receive as little respect as the opinions of those from whom they demand 'proof’). My opinions and comments are not based on any of the references mentioned by you; there are oodles of them, and I have no obligation to cite anyone else when expressing my opinions. I have given my reasons for not adding a lot of red type to my comments: people who choose not to agree with me (or anyone else) are not going to agree with my/their sources either. There are posters here who think that citing other people proves their own comments, when all it does is show that somebody else thinks what they think.

I read widely, all the time. I decide what I believe and don't believe, and pass it on for other people's consideration. Those people can agree or disagree, or they can ignore me.If they aren't sure, they can do a bit of research, just as you have. They can do a bit of research, just as I do. What they cannot do expect is me, or anyone else, to do it for them. We are expressing opinions, here, not running the country. In closing, I advise that I NEVER bother looking at references provided by posters because I assume that they will refer only to information that supports what they think and, if I don't agree with their opinions, I am not going to be swayed by someone else who thinks the same as they do, am I?

Whether the topic is politics, sport, television or
stamp collecting, make sure you are informed -
especially on the latest developments. An
imperative point to remember is to always know
your topic. Personal experience in the area is often
helpful in making you sound knowledgeable and sincere.
Also using evidence and statistics (preferably real,
not imagined) gives an element of authenticity
to your opinions. Providing a link to back up your
assertions always helps - and adds more credibility.
Then readers can make up their own minds as to what is
being said - by the evidence being provided.

ttbn,

The giving of references is to back up what you say, save people time and is a mark of thoughtfulness and politeness.

Is Mise,

“Politeness”? As in your refusal to answer my question?

There is probably nothing much more to say on this subject - apart from the usual suspects telling other people what they should say and think and how they should do both. People do not change their opinions very much, if at all, so it is ridiculous to kid others that, if only people you have always disagreed with provided references, you would suddenly change your opinion and agree with them. Anyone, no matter what they think, can find references to support them. People who repeatedly disagree with me always will - and vice versa. And who cares! Not one of us will have any influence on anything or anyone. Get over yourselves. OLO is just something to pass time for unimportant, anonymous people who have never made any difference to anything in real life, and never will. I’ve said it before; I promise not to say it again, but nobody on OLO has ever changed his or her mind that I remember, and I would bet everything I own that they never will

Kaz is current top-dog at Wentworth.
Maybe next season Marie Winter will take on Kaz.
'Lemon Tits' Vera is pregnant with Jakes child.
Liz has dementia; 'Boomer' got off the stitched up murder of Kim Chang by 'Drago'.
It was good to see 'The Freak' is actually dead, (buried alive) I feared she'd come back.
- But not as good as it was to see Sonia Stevens (Sigrid Thornton) fall off the roof.
And I really miss Frankie Doyle.

seems like the bitterness of the current king of Wentworth is boiling over and the sniping from the backbench(Bishop). Oh well the abc will love this now as it is their side doing the sniping.

Most people don't have their views set in concrete.
And many on this forum have changed their minds on issues.
Myself included. I love this forum precisely for the reason
that it does provide such a variety of different views.
They enable us to learn and grow.

Of course, we do get people with a distinctive set of
traits, which can include - conformity, intolerance, and
insecurity that seem typical of many who frequent public
forums. They tend to have anti-intellectual and
anti-scientific attitudes. They are usually people who
are disturbed by any ambiguity
in sexual or religious matters, and who see the world in very
rigid and stereotyped terms.

There's also people who tend to think in terms of general
categories, if only to enable them to make sense of the world
by simplifying its complexity.

Clearly we also do have prejudiced people on this forum
who are not concerned about genuine group
characteristics; they simply accept any negative statement
that feeds their existing hostility.

All of that is par for the course in the jungle of anonymous
internet inter-action

G'day there TTBN & CANEM MALUM...

BOTH of you have my vote absolutely, for two very different reasons.

I admire TTBN for his ability to quickly and adroitly establish the precise facts of a topic, without the usual manoeuvring and ruses that accompanies many of those from the LEFT. I'm now too old and cranky to emulate TTBN. However I support him and what he asserts absolutely. It's just a pity he never chose the vocation of detective - he would've made a superb interrogator. If I were to make a reference to a pug, you remind me of the great puncher, capable of taking out an opponent with either hand, the great 'Mr Knock-Out' himself, Ruben OLIVARES, winner of 67 out of 68 fights..

Whereas TTBN is quite capable of delivering a clean KO with many of his arguments...
My friend, CANEM MALUM prefers to take a more researched and academic approach, in order to convey his message, and in so doing, abolish his adversaries reasoning in a more measured way. Don't for a minute mistake his eloquence and deferential manner as a sign of weakness. He has his own way of demolishing the opposition's arguments. A case of winning by 'an unanimous points decision'. Similar to that great, Mexican pug, Jesus PIMENTAL a handy fighter who preferred to take his opponents out with a flurry of punches over the twelve rounds.

Between TTBN & CANEM MALUM lies an extraordinarily efficient and competent 'Tag Team'.

The forum - a boxing match?

Interesting.

ttbn,

There was no point in answering your question as numerous posters have answered it.

It is still polite to give references.

o sung wu,

Thanks for the vote of confidence.

To O Sung Wu- I'm honoured that you call me friend. And to be mentioned at the same time as ttbn. Thanks for your kind comments. And your sense of humour. ;)

Despite the pleading and begging from ScoMo, the dyed in the wool Liberals in Wentworth have defied the hapless PM, plugging for the North Shoreite, and well known silver tail, Dave Sharma as their boy for Wentworth.
At the end of the day, and true to form the Liberals didn't give the girls a look in. In true blokie tradition it turned out once more to be a contests between the fellas.

"Prime Minister Scott Morrison has been overruled after the NSW Liberals defied his push for a female candidate to run in Wentworth and instead backed former ambassador Dave Sharma". (SMH this morning).

So, no token woman, just someone with a multicultural name, never before heard before of by voters Wentworth. Another factional stooge no more suited to represent Wentworth than the local dogcatcher. A loss for woman whisperer Morrison this early in his reign.

“The deAnglicising of Australia has commenced” (Pickering). This comment is not directly related to the selection of a candidate for Wentworth with a sub-Continental name, nor the steady infiltration of the senate by non-Anglos rubbishing our values and claiming to be bullied, but it is a very apt observation.

ttbn

What is this "sub-Continental name" nonsense, playing some kind of race card are we. How low can you go "with a multicultural name", who was your choice Arthur Dungger, a good Aussie bloke, in your class. Devanand "Dave" Sharma was born in Canada, of Indian heritage, so what. Educated in Sydney, and at the University of Cambridge

Paul,

Not sure why you feel the need to repeat/confirm my comments about the Liberal candidate for Wentworth. I think what I said would be clear to most people.

Dear Paul,

Names certainly can be deceiving. As can appearances.
As we all know. They don't tell us all that much about
people. We need closer examination of the person to
be able to make any sort of judgement. For example -
The following Members of Parliament were born in
different places - Malcolm Roberts in India, Sussan Ley
in Nigeria, Eric Abetz in Germany, Mathias Cormann in
Belgium, and so it goes. The Liberal Party says that they
always want to see the best candidate selected.
I guess they've decided that David Sharma - the former
Ambassador to Israel (beat 7 other candidates) was the
best to win.

Malcolm Turnbull tweeted -

"As a diplomat Dave has represented Australia magnificently
overseas and now if elected will make a great contribution
in our national Parliament."

Apparently the Liberal Party was not concerned with his
name so much as his ability to do the job - which they
obviously thought he could do well. We'll see if the voters
in Wentworth agree.

Posted by Paul1405, Friday, 14 September 2018 9:32:49 AM- "Sharma was born in Canada, of Indian heritage"

Answer- I think Paul1405 just proved ttbn's point. "So, no token woman, just someone with a multicultural name, never before heard before of by voters Wentworth. "

Actually, although David Sharma may not be known to some
keyboard warriors - he is extremely well known
in political circles with his wide and diverse background
and years of experience. All one has to do is Google his
CV. And, more to the point he is well known in the electorate
of Wentworth.

On the other hand - how well known is Fraser Anning,
and many others in their electorates? How well known
are any of them when they first get a seat in Parliament?
People like - Jacqui Lambie, Malcolm
Roberts, Derryn Hinch - just to name a few - come to mind.

It's their performance that matters in the long term.
And you can't judge that by a name. Although, I have to
admit that the name - Peter Dutton conjurs up a bland,
unlikeable image while his nickname of "the potato"
is a comment as much on his appearance as his personality.

Still he'd hardly be the first Australian Member of Parliament
to lack "pizazz". We have Eric Abetz, Kevin Andrews, and
Tony Abbott - take your pick.

//just someone with a multicultural name//

Speaking of people with multicultural names, what's the go with Bernardi? What's that, like, Portugese or something?

Sorry ttbn, obviously you believe parliament should be the exclusive bastion of white Anglo Saxon males, preferably over the age of 70. Is that correct?

Paul,

You don't know what I “obviously” believe. I said that Australia is being ‘deAnglicised’. Fact. There is a deliberate policy of multiculturalism in Australia. Fact. The name 'Sharma’ is subcontinental. Fact. You agree that Mr. Sharma is of Indian race. Fact. You provide further information that Mr. Sharma is not Australian-born: thankyou, I accept that further fact.

I gave no opinion on which people I think should be in parliament; you are surmising that I have some sort of list. I know that you don't agree with my opinions on anything; but disagreeing with facts?

Hi Paul,

Malcolm Turnbull has stated in the past
that Australia was "The most successful
multicultural society in the world".
However, that success has not transferred to the seats
of our highest representatives in Parliament. 70% of
Malcolm Turnbull's own Cabinet had "Australian only" parents.

According to the Australian Human Rights
Commission 95% of Parliamentarians come from Anglo-Celtic-
European backgrounds.

Our Parliament is therefore overwhelmingly white and male,
and chronically under represents a growing Asian population
whilst it overemphasises the population of Australian-born
with British and European heritages.

We've had conversations about gender - but not cultural
representation and political parties have not regarded this
as an issue requiring special attention.

Perhaps it is time that this changed?

Hi Paul,

Talking about facts:

ttbn needs to re- read his comments on page 9, of this
discussion - where he states that:

"So, no token woman, (not fact)
just someone with a multicultural name(sic),
never before heard before of by voters Wentworth (not fact).
Another factional stooge (not fact) - no more suited to
represent Wentworth (not fact) than the local dog-catcher(not
fact). A loss for woeman whisperer - Morrison this early in
his reign (not fact)."

ttbn's comments are certainly clear to most people.

ttbn,

See,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Sharma
for a snapshot of this very Anglicized bloke, born in Canada and of Indian heritage, something he shares with all of us other Indo Europeans.

He is hardly unknown, had you done some research you'd never have made that blooper.

He'll probably be elected and will be as outstanding as a politician as he has been in everything else that he undertakes.

His 100% in the HSC was a good start.

I've just take a peek at Mr SHARMA'S Wikipedia background. He's one very smart gentleman for sure. In fact when you compare yourself with a bloke like him, you quickly realise how wanting you really are yourself. 100% in the HSC is amazing. I guess he possesses an IQ, of equally impressive proportions, circa above 150 - 160 perhaps?

My only worry if you will; might he be a professional student, amassing degrees and honours ad infinitum, to a point he has more degrees then the Masonic Lodge. He obviously didn't like medicine? Perhaps he should've looked more closely at the course, before commencing, rather than completing a year, thus denying another, from pursuing medicine as a career. Who knows? Anyway he's certainly smart enough to represent his new Electorate after Mr TURNBULL vacated his seat.

Still, does he have sufficient common 'dog f..k' together with his combined intellectual achievements, to do a good job for the LNP for the Wentworth Electorate. I guess well have to wait and see?

Dave Sharma doesn't appear to have done anything special for Australia. Yes 100 for HSC then some Arts undergraduate and graduate degrees. It indicates perhaps that that he had the money and resources to get a Masters degree. At least he appears to have integrated a little and perhaps has loyalty with Australian culture by having an apparently ethnically Angelo wife- something that many Indians immigrants do not- not sure how this translates within the family. Terrence Teo has shown more consistent world excellence perhaps- but maybe both came from families that pushed their children- something we should do with our own children- rather than trying to pick winners from foreign cultures- we should be creating our own excellence- by having systems and processes that breed it- and having world class teachers.

Academic qualifications, while desirable for anyone, have no relevance to politics. There is no training, no exams, to test the ability of wannabe politicians. It's pick someone who might appeal to the voters and hope for the best if he or she gets elected. Mr. Sharma's schooling etc is no different from that of millions of other people, and has nothing to do with the topic.

Sharma of course is just a variant spelling of that famous Anglo-Saxon name Sharman or Sherman (as in General Sherman of the United States). When Britain colonised India, the surname was adopted there by some Indians either to advance in the British world, (or because their dad was a Brit named Sharman).

Don't believe this? It's more credible than many of ttbn's posts.

The point, however, is that we shouldn't jump to conclusions about what is an truly anglo name. Having an anglo name doesn't mean you are of English descent; having a non-anglo name doesn't mean you have no English ancestry. In any case many of us of strictly anglo-saxon-celtic descent have biblical names which are definitely not of anglo origin - hi all you Barnabys, Johns, Marys, Annes and Johnsons and Davidsons etc. out there.

David Sharma's entire career has been involved in
politics. He's held so many high ranking positions both
in Australia and overseas - from advising people like
Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer, to being
appointed to the Australian Embassy in Washington DC, to
being - the head of the International Division of the
Prime Minister and Cabinet, advising Prime Ministers,
and many other positions -
including Ambassador to Israel.

He's fluent in several languages, has
several degrees but most importantly has acquired
skills that make
for a very successful political career - such as initiative, leadership,
drive, negotiating ability, willingness to take risks,
and persuasiveness - as can be seen from the positions
that he's held over the years.

It's no wonder that he was the choice of the Liberal
Party for Wentworth.

According to the Census the seat of Wentworth covers some
of the wealthiest suburbs in Australia and has the highest
proportion of high income families of all seats in
Australia.

The electorate
has a wide mix of people, more educated, and
socially progressive, so it's no wonder that the Liberal
Party's choice
was David Sharma. He ticks all the boxes - without a doubt.

He's definitely not a Fraser Anning type, - but someone like
Fraser Anning would not have had a chance in Wentworth.
He'd simply be out of his depth in the prestigious
electorate of Wentworth. Whereas David Sharma is an exact fit.

Thanks Cossomby for reminding us about names
and their origins.

What's in a name? Apparently for some - a great
deal.

Until the origins are checked.

But Foxy, his name is not "British" enough for some. Would he do better if he changed his name to Horatio Hornblower?

Maybe they prefer the Greens candidate Dominic (Darugland Boondi Boondi) Wy Kanak. The forums usual suspects will love HIM, he's a HIM for starters, but it goes down hill from there. Dominic has been an Indigenous boondiboondi Bondi Ward Waverley Greens Councillor since September 1999, a local BOY I stress BOY so the lads wont get the wrong idea that he's a shelia or worse. He has been Co-Chairperson of Waverley Council's, MULTICULTURAL Advisory Committee and Mayor's Nominee and Chairman of the Eastern Region Local Government ABORIGINAL TORRES STRAIT ISLANDERS Forum. Nah, I don't think so, not their kinda bloke.

Cossomby,

".... In any case many of us of strictly anglo-saxon-celtic descent..."

Don't you mean Indo-European?

What is 'strictly anglo-saxon-celtic' descent?

My grandparents were Irish and Scots, English and Irish and the G-grands were Irish+Irish, Scots+Scots, English+English and Irish+Irish
which should be a good Anglo-Saxon Celtic background except that as I go further back all sorts of other Indo-Europeans creep in along with a lot of Latins (another branch of the Indo-Europeans, but with a lot of North African infusions), by 1,000 AD it is getting complicated.
When I get back another thousand or so years to Gaius Julia Caesar III, C. 149-85 BC the ancestral mix can be anything.

Now, on the surface I am Celtic, my Anglos came from Dorset, where the people were pretty much Celtic and I identify as such, my Irish line goes back into the mythological era but an analysis of the rest throws up a plethora of "racial" groups from all over Europe, the East and from Russia and surrounds.

Race is a myth.

Culture is complicated but not a myth.

To Is Mise through the chair- With respect didn't you say in previous posts that you have an Indian wife? Just asking about the basis for your beliefs.

Canem Malum,

Yes, my wife is Indian.
That is she was born in India but her family tree reveals nowt but people of Portuguese origin, there is not one Hindu or Muslim name to be found in the many, many generations and there are links to some Portuguese ancestors in the 1500s,(there must, however, be Indian Indians in there as the Portuguese married locals).

It is not strange that they remained Portuguese as Catholics tend to marry Catholics and as do the Hindus and Muslims although among our friends there are Muslim Hindu marriages.

Thanks Is Mise.

Dear Paul,

Talking to some of these posters, is like playing
chess with a pigeon. He knocks over the pieces,
craps all over the board, then flies off and joins
his flock claiming victory.

Canem Malum said on another discussion - "Either
way those that want to sell off Australia are disloyal."
I presume he's referring to our Australian Government and
the big businesses who are selling off this country to
China and other interests. However I suspect he has
something else in mind.

I wonder what his ancestry is - who he's married to,
what his family background is, and what his real name
is? Also what level of education he's achieved and
what his profession is/was? It just might explain a
great deal.

Who started this no races/race is a myth bullsh-t! Most anthropologists divide the world's population into for major races - white/Caucasian; Mongoloid/Asian; Negroid/black, and Australoid. You have to be really thick to say that there is no such thing as race. Particularly you twats who call people 'racists' when you are losing an argument.

//Most anthropologists divide the world's population into for major races - white/Caucasian; Mongoloid/Asian; Negroid/black, and Australoid.//

No, they don't. And they haven't done for about 70-80 years now. Science changes over time. Apparently not everyone keeps up.

ttbn, no one has to call you a racists, you do that yourself through what you post. In the case of Devanand Sharma you seen it as necessary to describe him as "just someone with a multicultural name". Clearly if his name was David Smith you would not be referring to him as "just someone with a Anglo-Saxon name".

Is there a concern on your part that people with as you say, having multicultural names (new comers), are obtaining positions of decision making in Australian society. What is your opinion on prejudicism in Australia? Does it exists, is it necessary? Take that in the context that not all racists are irrational haters, some have genuine concerns about theirs, and others like them, being subjected to changes brought on by migration.

Toni Lavis would have us believe that for “70-80 years now” there has been no such thing as 'race'. There are now no white people, no black people, no swarthy people, no yellowish people; we all look the same. No telling us apart! We have gone back to pre-Babel days, and now all speak the same language. “Science” tell us so!

“Apparently  not everyone keeps up”, says Toni. Clearly Toni speaks through his backside, and needs to have his eyesight checked.

//Toni Lavis would have us believe that for “70-80 years now” there has been no such thing as 'race'. There are now no white people, no black people, no swarthy people, no yellowish people; we all look the same.//

No, that's not what I said. I said that anthropologists don't use the four race model that you described, and haven't done for the better part of a century. It's obsolete; like caloric theory or spontaneous generation. You can keep using obsolete scientific theories if you want; there's no law against it, it just seems a bit anachronistic.

No you did not say that. All you said, after quoting me was this:

"No, they don't. And they haven't done for about 70-80 years now. Science changes over time. Apparently not everyone keeps up."

Lying to others so obviously is one thing; lying to yourself is really peculiar. You didn't even check to see what you actually said before you blurted out your defence of the indefensible.

To ttbn- I think Toni Lavis considers himself a bit of a science buff. :)

Yes. Toni thinks like a proton -
always positive!

He's also not wishy-washy, flaky and unfocused.

Yay!

Just a short note to advise all you good people, that I've decided to take a break from OLO & the Forum. Lately I've allowed both my age and reasoning to overcome much of the content of my contributions, and that's simply not right. Finally I have age related dementia diagnosed, so it's a case of wait and see, the immediacy of this'll have on anything I might write.

As an aside, I must thank the Department of Veterans' Affairs for everything they've done for me and my dear wife. To employ a 'new phrase' - they're simply Gold!

Thank you also, to all my fantastic friends and antagonist's, without you all, I wouldn't have lasted as long as I have. A special thanks also to HASBEEN & STEELEREDUX the latter kept me honest. As well; to our lovely ladies; FOXY, SUSEONLINE & COSSOMBY. And the many other gentlemen - including; INDIVIDUAL, RUNNER, TTBN; CANEM MALLUM, IS MISE, BELLY, TONI LAVIS, PAUL1405, ARMCHAIR CRITIC, and many more of you, who's epithet I've forgotten, accordingly I apologise. All of you have taught me so much.

Maybe I'll see you again soon, who knows? Thank you all again.

CM,

Or a buff(oon), perhaps?

Dear O Sung Wu,

I want to include part of a poem that I gave
my mum on her 90th Birthday:

"...As wise as the tallest trees,
As grand as the mountains that reach to the heavens,
As free as a light-hearted breeze -
You're the best of God's gifts -
His most precious creation -
A one-of-a-kind, perfect you!
And this is a time to give Thanks and remember
That you are a miracle too!"

Wishing you and your family All The Best.
We've been friends for decades. I have valued and
respected your opinion very much. I also have learned
a great deal from you. Thank You. You shall be greatly
missed - And, I somehow hope that you shall be back
from time to time. Our thoughts are with you.
Take care.

o sung wu

Sorry to hear it. We need conservatives of your calibre and life experiences. Don't despair. Dementia is THE most MIS-DIAGNOSED disease of our times. Don't trust one diagnosis. Dementia is a fast growing industry for scientific and medical people who cannot be trusted just because they are called 'doctor’. They do make mistakes, some through human error like the rest of us (the misdiagnosis will eventually be apparent); some through incompetence but, worst of all, some with financial interests in nursing homes. The bastards are even building ‘villages’ for their victims.

Be wary like a fox, mate. The 'tests’ for dementia are risible. I can't help you, obviously, but at the very least get other opinions and DEMAND an MRI. You know how to fight. Good luck with this one.

Hi o sung wu,

I wish you the very best, in forum retirement. I regret our recent conflict, which was inappropriate and unnecessary, I sincerely mean that.

"Better than a thousand hollow words, is the one word that brings us peace." Buddha

To O Sung Wu

I'll miss you mate.

I'll imagine you watching the debate as we struggle.

Please look in on us every week or two.

I hope you like the verse below...

“Many a wassail-bout
Wore the long Winter out;
Often our midnight shout
Set the cocks crowing,
As we the Berserk’s tale
Measured in cups of ale,
Draining the oaken pail,
Filled to o’erflowing."

See you soon!

ttbn,

There are many races, the Equine, the Feline, the Canine etc; we happen to belong to the Human Race, which is divided into sub-groupings (as are the other races) but the distinguishing feature of any race is that they can breed only with members of the same race; although this may not be strictly true of the genus Ovis in New Zealand.

All members of the human race can breed together although, for health reasons, some should not do so.

Race, used to distinguish differing groups of the human race is a myth, moreover a myth that is long past its use by date.

Poor comprehension on your part ttbn; "I (Toni) said that anthropologists don't use the four race model that you described." and that's what he said; "No, they (anthropologists) don't (use the four race model). And they haven't done for about 70-80 years now."

Toni did not say that for “70-80 years now” there has been no such thing as 'race', he simply said your four race model was out of date and has not been in use for 70-80 years. He did not say if anthropologists use some other race model, or no race model at all.

You really are dense, Paul. This is what Toni said (his entire post) and that is what I referred to:

"Most anthropologists divide the world's population into for major races - white/Caucasian; Mongoloid/Asian; Negroid/black, and Australoid.// (That's him quoting me). Then he said:

No, they don't. And they haven't done for about 70-80 years now. Science changes over time. Apparently not everyone keeps up.
Posted by Toni Lavis, Friday, 14 September 2018 9:11:03 PM

//Toni did not say that for “70-80 years now” there has been no such thing as 'race', he simply said your four race model was out of date and has not been in use for 70-80 years.//

Don't worry about it Paul, ttbn and his sycophantic sidekick Yappy Chihuahua are not what you'd call the sharpest pencils in the box.

o sung wu,

Have a rest, Digger, and come back soon.

Yes Toni if a "dense" head such as me can easily understand what you were saying, it certainly makes ttbn somewhat more stupid than the average baboon.
Maybe he was disputing your assertion that "Science changes over time". Could he believe science is static in nature and no new discoveries leading to changed thinking have been possible since the year dot.

It appears the vote was all about money.
http://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/the-million-dollar-man-dave-sharma-and-his-fundraising-pull-20180914-p503t0.html

//It appears the vote was all about money.//

Well of course... they're Liberals.

Hi there...

To all those who sent me their best wishes - Thank you very much indeed.
And to those who didn't send their best - Thank you anyway.

With kind regards...o sung wu

Hi o sung wu,
I send my very best wishes to you right now.
Keep smiling.
Never give up.
Cheers
John F.

//To all those who sent me their best wishes - Thank you very much indeed.
And to those who didn't send their best - Thank you anyway.//

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless, me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Many thanks to you; JF AUS & TONI LAVIS - JF AUS, thank you for your kind words. They're most appreciated.

TONI thank you for sending me that great piece of prose, one of my favourites; would you believe, I can't even recall the name of the author? Also among my favourites?

Dear O Sung Wu,

It's so good to see you still posting.

The poem given to you by Toni Lavis was written by
the great Welsh poet - Dylan Thomas. It's a much
loved favourite. And very apt choice for you.
Toni Lavis as always is a very perceptive soul.

“ttbn,

There are many races, the Equine, the Feline, the Canine etc; we happen to belong to the Human Race, which is divided into sub-groupings (as are the other races) but the distinguishing feature of any race is that they can breed only with members of the same race; although this may not be strictly true of the genus Ovis in New Zealand.

All members of the human race can breed together although, for health reasons, some should not do so.

Race, used to distinguish differing groups of the human race is a myth, moreover a myth that is long past its use by date.
Posted by Is Mise, Saturday, 15 September 2018 2:16:46 PM”

It is appalling that anyone could believe this stuff

Thank you FOXY and TONI LAVIS; Dylan Thomas a remarkable poet in his time.

Dear O Sung Wu,

Talking about great poets, writers - they become important
because they fire our imagination and our emotion. We've
all heard the expression "movers and shakers." This term
comes from Arthur William Edgar O"Shaughnessy, a poet, wrote
these words:

"We are the music-makers,
And we are the dreamers of dreams,
Wandering by lone sea-breakers,
And sitting by desolate streams;
World-losers and world-forsakers,
On whom the pale moon gleams;
Yet we are the movers and shakers,
Of the world for ever, it seems."

May you continue to be a "mover and a shaker"
dear O Sung Wu.

ttbn,

"It is appalling that anyone could believe this stuff"

Yes, you must be appalled, understandably.

Dear Is Mise,

ttbn believes in being a great time saver.
He's able to form opinions without having
to get the facts. ;-)

Hi FOXY...I don't know about that so much? More like I 'shake' whenever I 'move' ?

Dear O Sung Wu,

You always try to put a positive spin on what
people are saying on this forum, and that
means a great deal. I, amongst so many here,
have learnt so much from you.

Is Mise,

You 'understand' why I am appalled. So, why earth do you spout such absolute garbage? If you believe such crap, you probably believe that bears live in a houses, sleep in beds, and eat porridge. And, you would feel a kinship with the Mad Hatter in 'Alice in Wonderland'. Being as 'mad as a hatter' is the only reason that might excuse your brain storm.

Back to the topic. We now know that the Liberal party has opted for the next worse thing to a woman candidate: a foreign-born ethnic. We also know that Morrison has no authority because he lost his panicked bid to impose a woman.

On the subject of female quotas, it is interesting that, although the Labor part has been chock-a-block with women whether those women are any good or not; and, despite the fact the the Liberal still chooses on merit not gender, since 1994, Labor has won government once only in its own right. It appears that the electorate is not as interested in woman politicians just for for the sake of it as are the Marxist Left - despite the fact that woman make up half the electorate.

What utter bollocks!

Take a look at the Liberal Party - and keep a straight face
when telling us that the men in there were elected on
merit - Kevin Andrews, Eric Abetz, Tony Abbott, Peter
(The Potato) Dutton - you've got to be joking! And without
the Nationals - they wouldn't have a prayer of getting elected.
Why do you think they formed the Coalition?

Get real! Before you criticise others about children's
stories - you need to clean out the bats in your belfry
first.

ttbn,

"You 'understand' why I am appalled. So, why [on] earth do you spout such absolute garbage?

Because it is scientific fact, except the part about the Ovis and NZ, that is merely scurrilous conjecture.

Look, Is Mise. You are obviously incapable of understanding anything that doesn't come out of your own fundamental orifice. There is no scientific evidence of your silly waffling or you would have presented it. Remember lecturing me on references and 'politeness'? No. That's probably slipped from your goldfish memory.

ttbn,

"There is no scientific evidence of your silly waffling or you would have presented it"

To the even mildly educated there is no need to present evidence that the Human race and the Equine race cannot breed together, despite legendary myths to the contrary; likewise Lacertidae with Serpentes although there may have been some getting together in the far past, now-a-days their joining for pleasure is one-sided with the bigger usually eating the smaller.

Yeah we know Foxy certainly Gillard, Payne, Bishop or Dwyer would not have had a fraction of the courage and skill needed to stop the flood of illegals welcomed by Rudd. You really should take off your glasses. The besty Payne could do with Defence was 'diversity' policy.

o sung wu,
I have only just opened this thread as i had thought it would not interest me.

However I see your message here and it would be remiss of me not to wish you all the best. I hope I am not too late for you to read this.

Best of luck and hope to see you back again. Banjo

//There is no scientific evidence of your silly waffling or you would have presented it. Remember lecturing me on references and 'politeness'? No. That's probably slipped from your goldfish memory.//

Or possibly he's been able to recall that you've stated you don't follow any links that anybody posts because you already know everything (paraphrasing), and thus reasoned that there was no point.

runner,

Have the boats been stopped?

'runner,

Have the boats been stopped?

watch the abc Foxy. You are bound to get the answer you want despite the facts proving you wrong.

runner,

The ABC does present the facts. That's why some
politicians and they're supporters want to cut the
funding to the ABC.

The ABC is required to present evidence based facts
- unlike the privately owned commercial
media outlets under the control of their vested interests.
Our politicians are fully aware of what the
facts really are - however they often choose to distort the facts -
as they please. That's the way the game of politics is played.
And some voters swallow their lines.

Not brain surgery.

Here are some extraordinary apparent ABC facts about king making.

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-09-18/liberal-leadership-spill-rupert-murdoch-kerry-stokes-influence/10262552?pfmredir=sm via