(forw) Re: [skeptic] Fw: [New post] Does Australia Need a Donald Trump?

'Catallaxy Files' is an Australian supposed right-libertarian blog site. Terry Colvin, a retired US military chap living in Thailand, sometimes sees fit to forward its blog postings to the Skeptic mailing list. ----- Forwarded message from "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1@mindspring.com> ----- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 17:27:09 +0700 (GMT+07:00) From: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1@mindspring.com> To: Skeptic <skeptic@linuxmafia.com> Subject: [skeptic] Fw: [New post] Does Australia Need a Donald Trump? X-Mailer: EarthLink Zoo Mail 1.0 Reply-To: "Terry W. Colvin" <fortean1@mindspring.com> -----Forwarded Message----- From: Catallaxy Files Sent: Mar 22, 2018 3:01 PM To: fortean1@mindspring.com Subject: [New post] Does Australia Need a Donald Trump? Sinclair Davidson posted: "DOES AUSTRALIA NEED A DONALD TRUMP? With Tom Switzer, Parnell McGuinness, James Morrow and Miranda Devine Join us after work for drinks and canapes in Sydney on April 3 as we debate whether Australia needs a disruptive leader like Donald Trump. " New post on Catallaxy Files [bla] Does Australia Need a Donald Trump? [2e8639] by Sinclair Davidson DOES AUSTRALIA NEED A DONALD TRUMP? With Tom Switzer, Parnell McGuinness, James Morrow and Miranda Devine Join us after work for drinks and canapes in Sydney on April 3 as we debate whether Australia needs a disruptive leader like Donald Trump. He has turned US politics upside-down by mocking the media, provoking critics, cutting bureaucracies, setting ambitious targets and pursuing them with the unpredictability of a world-class negotiator. By doing so, Donald Trump has revived investment, employment, share prices, consumer confidence and US global power, not to mention grass-roots patriotism. Australian politicians, meanwhile, are constrained by Canberran conventions. Could we use a maverick? Could a shrewd outsider with a showbiz streak do to Australia what Trump has done for the US? Join us as our two panels - Miranda Devine and James Morrow (for) and Tom Switzer and Parnell McGuinness (against) - imagine the consequences. DATE: Tuesday, 3 April 2018, 6pm-8pm VENUE: Hudson House, Level 15, 131 Macquarie Street, Sydney COST: $30 pp/ $15 members. Click here to book ENQUIRIES: Please contact James Mathias at events@menziesrc.org or (02) 6273 5608. Sinclair Davidson | March 22, 2018 at 7:01 pm | URL: https://wp.me/ pScng-kSX Comment See all comments Unsubscribe to no longer receive posts from Catallaxy Files. Change your email settings at Manage Subscriptions. Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://catallaxyfiles.com/2018/03/22/does-australia-need-a-donald-trump/ * _______________________________________________ skeptic mailing list skeptic@linuxmafia.com http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/skeptic To reach the listadmin, mail rick@linuxmafia.com ----- End forwarded message ----- ----- Forwarded message from Kevin France <kevinfrance0a@gmail.com> ----- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 11:11:31 +0000 From: Kevin France <kevinfrance0a@gmail.com> To: Skeptic <skeptic@linuxmafia.com> Subject: Re: [skeptic] Fw: [New post] Does Australia Need a Donald Trump? No one fucking needs Donald Trump. _______________________________________________ skeptic mailing list skeptic@linuxmafia.com http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/skeptic To reach the listadmin, mail rick@linuxmafia.com ----- End forwarded message ----- ----- Forwarded message from Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> ----- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2018 05:59:40 -0700 From: Rick Moen <rick@linuxmafia.com> To: skeptic@linuxmafia.com Subject: Re: [skeptic] Fw: [New post] Does Australia Need a Donald Trump? Organization: If you lived here, you'd be $HOME already. I note with appreciation my learned colleague Kevin France's comment. ;-> Further: Quoting Terry W. Colvin (fortean1@mindspring.com), citing Sinclair Davidson at Catallaxy Files:
Sinclair Davidson posted: "DOES AUSTRALIA NEED A DONALD TRUMP? With Tom Switzer, Parnell McGuinness, James Morrow and Miranda Devine Join us after work for drinks and canapes in Sydney on April 3 as we debate whether Australia needs a disruptive leader like Donald Trump. "
There are multiple errors in the question. First, the Toddler-in-Chief is nothing like a leader. He is merely a talentless hereditary mafia don (pun not entirely intended), an infantile third-rater. Second, the correct word is not 'disruptive' but rather chaotic. He doesn't even serve his _own_ agenda, because he doesn't have one.
He has turned US politics upside-down by mocking the media, provoking critics, cutting bureaucracies, setting ambitious targets and pursuing them with the unpredictability of a world-class negotiator.
Third, that's not turning US politics upside-down, but rather introducing a great deal of noise and debasing (his portion of) public discourse, along with emboldening Neo-Nazis and misogynists. Fourth, it's turned out he's an absolutely abysmal negotiator, who merely lied about that along with just about literally everything else.
By doing so, Donald Trump has revived investment, employment, share prices, consumer confidence and US global power, not to mention grass-roots patriotism.
He's done none of those things, actually. Economic indicators are declining, US global power is in tatters and the nation an international laughing-stock, and the only patriotism he's inspired is among those inspired to put an early end to his incompetent misrule.
Australian politicians, meanwhile, are constrained by Canberran conventions.
It's called a functional parliamentary democracy. Fscking it up by inviting a small-handed banana-republic strongman to seize power would be an epic own goal, and if I didnt't already know from repeated forwards that Catallaxy Files is the redoubt of morons, this suggestion would have proved it. _______________________________________________ skeptic mailing list skeptic@linuxmafia.com http://linuxmafia.com/mailman/listinfo/skeptic To reach the listadmin, mail rick@linuxmafia.com ----- End forwarded message -----

On Friday, 23 March 2018 12:09:35 AM AEDT Rick Moen via luv-talk wrote:
'Catallaxy Files' is an Australian supposed right-libertarian blog site. Terry Colvin, a retired US military chap living in Thailand, sometimes sees fit to forward its blog postings to the Skeptic mailing list.
It's a list of nobodies apart from Miranda Devine who's known for stupidity. Anyone who knows anything at all about Australian politics knows that electing a PM from Parliament doesn't allow someone to do what Trump does. If we could elect a GG then maybe they could be like Trump, but we can't - and apart from Carr there hasn't seemed to be any need to elect a GG. Libertarians oppose any age of consent laws. Let's consider why a man who lives in Thailand might support Libertarian politics... -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/

Quoting Russell Coker (russell@coker.com.au):
Anyone who knows anything at all about Australian politics knows that electing a PM from Parliament doesn't allow someone to do what Trump does. If we could elect a GG then maybe they could be like Trump, but we can't - and apart from Carr there hasn't seemed to be any need to elect a GG.
Certainly the powers of a PM are entirely different from those of the head of the USA Executive Branch, completely setting aside the check on PMs posed by the Governors-General. One thing many overseas observers may not realise is that the Toddler-in-Chief has been historically inept and _ineffective_ at using the powers of his office. He will go down in history as almost certainly, by far, the least effective President ever. Early on, he fooled even many of us domestic observers, because the habit of taking Presidents seriously dies hard. I found myself doing stunned double-takes on his early 'signing ceremonies', where I suddenly realised what he was signing was a statement constructed in a way where it had literally no effect, where he was doing the text equivalent of merely madly waving his arms and doing nothing in the real world. We-lot gradually realised over the first few months of Trump's reign of error that it's a Potemkin presidency, and that that is actually the good news. The evil he does while incompetent is bad enough; a replacement who knew what he was doing would be a great deal worse.
Libertarians oppose any age of consent laws. Let's consider why a man who lives in Thailand might support Libertarian politics...
In fairness, Terry having forwarded that blog post doesn't mean he agrees with it, nor 'support Libertarian [or libertarian] polices'. FWIW, he's anti-Trump.

On Friday, 23 March 2018 1:11:55 AM AEDT Rick Moen via luv-talk wrote:
Quoting Russell Coker (russell@coker.com.au):
Anyone who knows anything at all about Australian politics knows that electing a PM from Parliament doesn't allow someone to do what Trump does. If we could elect a GG then maybe they could be like Trump, but we can't - and apart from Carr there hasn't seemed to be any need to elect a GG.
Certainly the powers of a PM are entirely different from those of the head of the USA Executive Branch, completely setting aside the check on
It's not an issue of the powers being different. It's the process for election and removal. Australian history hasn't included a single PM being a tenth as incompetant, nasty, or stupid as Trump before being removed. Latham's mental health problems became apparent immediately after losing the election, we can only imagine how long he would have lasted if Labor had won (not very long IMHO). Abbot is widely regarded as brain damaged from boxing and is a religious extremist and asshole apart from that. He won multiple awards for misogyny, but did nothing to compare with Trump's pussy grabbing comments. He was removed by his own party for general incompetance (apparently largely due to being mentally incompetant to perform his job without his favourite advisor who other MPs hated).
PMs posed by the Governors-General. One thing many overseas observers may not realise is that the Toddler-in-Chief has been historically inept and _ineffective_ at using the powers of his office. He will go down in history as almost certainly, by far, the least effective President ever.
We can only hope.
We-lot gradually realised over the first few months of Trump's reign of error that it's a Potemkin presidency, and that that is actually the good news. The evil he does while incompetent is bad enough; a replacement who knew what he was doing would be a great deal worse.
True, which is why we don't want Pence.
Libertarians oppose any age of consent laws. Let's consider why a man who lives in Thailand might support Libertarian politics...
In fairness, Terry having forwarded that blog post doesn't mean he agrees with it, nor 'support Libertarian [or libertarian] polices'. FWIW, he's anti-Trump.
He reads Libertarian sites and forwards their postings on multiple occasions. That seems like support. I'm still wondering why he chose to live in Thailand... -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/

Quoting Russell Coker (russell@coker.com.au):
It's not an issue of the powers being different. It's the process for election and removal.
Yes, there certainly is that. The US Founding Fathers seem to have been ambivalent about no longer having a monarch, and also lastingly afraid of 'mob rule', hence the difficult process required for removal of Presidents, VPs, Federal judges, and some similar officers, and the peculiar and inflexible process for election. But, as I've stressed, it _was_ an experimental effort.
True, which is why we don't want Pence.
Indeed. I keep warning people about Mike 'Torquemada' Pence, that there is a 13th Century horror hiding behind the bland affability.
He reads Libertarian sites and forwards their postings on multiple occasions. That seems like support.
I am not sure. Terry forwards a variety of things. But he's very clear on being anti-Trump. He also forwards Forteana.
I'm still wondering why he chose to live in Thailand...
The obvious hypothesis: Because it was a cheap place to retire with his wife, which is the reason many other Vietnam-era service people from the USA have done so.

Rick Moen via luv-talk wrote:
[Terry] also forwards Forteana.
For lurkers unfamiliar with this Americanism, | Charles Fort (1874 – 1932) was an American writer and researcher who specialized in anomalous phenomena. | The terms Fortean and Forteana are sometimes used to characterize various such phenomena. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortean#Fortean_phenomena cf. http://www.weeklyworldnews.com (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weekly_World_News)

Quoting Trent W. Buck (trentbuck@gmail.com):
For lurkers unfamiliar with this Americanism,
| Charles Fort (1874 – 1932) was an American writer and researcher who specialized in anomalous phenomena. | The terms Fortean and Forteana are sometimes used to characterize various such phenomena.
My friend Leslie Fish has a musical version that I think captures the right light-hearted spirit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyTIt4AioEI

Quoting Trent W. Buck (trentbuck@gmail.com):
For lurkers unfamiliar with this Americanism,
| Charles Fort (1874 – 1932) was an American writer and researcher who specialized in anomalous phenomena. | The terms Fortean and Forteana are sometimes used to characterize various such phenomena.
Further to what I said a few minutes ago: Although Charles Fort was indeed an American writer and researcher, the Fortean... pursuit? passion? is an international phenomenon. I was Secretary (and Board of Directors member) and then Chair of the organisation Bay Area Skeptics for many long decades, and was (and am) not alone among participants in the skeptic movement (organisations favouring scientific scrutiny of fringe-science and fringe-medical claims of fact) in having decidedly warm regard for Forteans. They publish accounts of odd happenings, then metaphorically cackle madly and say 'How are you going to explain _that_, then?' Despite a reputation for being killjoys, we skeptics find the Forteans' sprit difficult to resist, and reply 'Maybe we can't. Weird stuff happens. We're fascinated by it, same as you.'

Russell Coker via luv-talk wrote:
Libertarians oppose any age of consent laws. Let's consider why a man who lives in Thailand might support Libertarian politics…
Age of consent in Thailand is 18yo (all sexes, all orientations). This is higher than ALL Australian polities, and higher than or equal to ALL US polities. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Thailand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Oceania#Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States IMO implying that all anarchocapitalists are ephebophiles is unreasonable and an argument ad hominem.

On Friday, 23 March 2018 11:54:14 AM AEDT Trent W. Buck wrote:
Russell Coker via luv-talk wrote:
Libertarians oppose any age of consent laws. Let's consider why a man who lives in Thailand might support Libertarian politics… Age of consent in Thailand is 18yo (all sexes, all orientations). This is higher than ALL Australian polities, and higher than or equal to ALL US polities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Asia#Thailand https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_Oceania#Australia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of_consent_in_the_United_States
Dutch law on wholesale drug production and sale loosened a bit since I lived there. But when I lived there it was illegal to buy or sell the quantities of drugs needed to run a coffee shop. I guess I must have imagined the coffee shops full of dozens of people smoking dope, as it was illegal for the coffee shops to buy such quantities of dope it mustn't have happened.
IMO implying that all anarchocapitalists are ephebophiles is unreasonable and an argument ad hominem.
I've had many discussions with Libertarians. There are some hipsters who don't like the modern definition of words and want to use the word Libertarian the same way it was used when their penny-farthing was in fashion. I think they should be ignored. Of all the people who identify as Libertarians in the modern meaning of the word (as defined by Murray Rothbard) I've encountered several who argue that there could theoretically be Libertarians who don't believe in the right to starve children to death or to have no limits on child sex. But so far I haven't encountered anyone who will say "I'm a Libertarian under the modern right-wing meaning of the word and I think that child sex and child starvation should be prohibited". -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
participants (3)
-
Rick Moen
-
Russell Coker
-
Trent W. Buck