good ol' democracy
- Thread starter Nitestick
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
Nitestick
Golden Master
- Messages
- 8,478
- Location
- Ñмерти Ð´Ð»Ñ Ñпаме
you got me there. i'm about as confused as you 
.
as far as i can tell all three referendums were pushed by the state Labor party, they have a reputation amongst liberal supporters (i'm sure world wide political division based on parties have the same sort of thing) as basically biding their time to be elected before they make a bunch of bizarre changes that end up having the opposing part re-elected. like all political parties though they try to divert attention from embarrassment.
event sequence:
police minister John D'Orazio (also a labor MP) sacked from ministerial job
education minister Liliana Ravlich changes state uniform policy for schools to dismay of majority
education minister Liliana Ravlich makes fool of self by denying knowledge of something there is publicly available video evidence proving she knows of (a report on students being abused by teachers)
D'Orazio proposes daylight savings which seems to quite effectively draw attention from things the party would rather have dissapear
D'Orazio now encourages people to lobby against DST after announcement of 4th trial
i can't speak of the veracity of this though. it seems logical as why else would one bring up something that they know will cause an uproar only to encourage people to fight the decision, unless the movement was not to serve it's own purpose but that of a diversion. now the diversion is complete it can go away again. i can't believe i've let myself tread such a fine line on talking politics. i think i get away with it purely because there are so few members from my state to have a potential argument
.as far as i can tell all three referendums were pushed by the state Labor party, they have a reputation amongst liberal supporters (i'm sure world wide political division based on parties have the same sort of thing) as basically biding their time to be elected before they make a bunch of bizarre changes that end up having the opposing part re-elected. like all political parties though they try to divert attention from embarrassment.
event sequence:
police minister John D'Orazio (also a labor MP) sacked from ministerial job
education minister Liliana Ravlich changes state uniform policy for schools to dismay of majority
education minister Liliana Ravlich makes fool of self by denying knowledge of something there is publicly available video evidence proving she knows of (a report on students being abused by teachers)
D'Orazio proposes daylight savings which seems to quite effectively draw attention from things the party would rather have dissapear
D'Orazio now encourages people to lobby against DST after announcement of 4th trial
i can't speak of the veracity of this though. it seems logical as why else would one bring up something that they know will cause an uproar only to encourage people to fight the decision, unless the movement was not to serve it's own purpose but that of a diversion. now the diversion is complete it can go away again. i can't believe i've let myself tread such a fine line on talking politics. i think i get away with it purely because there are so few members from my state to have a potential argument
- Status
