Sorry Mike, but your integrity counts. We need to know
|
There is one annoying word that rears its head almost every time the debate about the sanctity of the private lives of politicians cranks up. Hypocrisy. Like so many high-profile political leaders, Mike Rann has been perfectly happy to exploit his private life when it suited him. Wedding pictures, family interviews, sporting scenes, intellectual pursuits, off to church, Womens Weekly covers: this is stuff of human interest that most politicians feed relentlessly and manipulatively to the media whenever it suits their political positioning requirements. Yet the moment there is even a hint of that other private human pursuit — sex — politicians and their boosters instantly flip the propaganda switch and demand silence in the name of privacy. Which is not to argue a case for unlimited or unregulated intrusion into the private lives of public figures, but to make the case for proportionality and public accountability. Under the rules of engagement for responsible media coverage, public officials’ private lives should be off limits unless:
Beyond those ground rules, there is arguably another less precise but equally important operating principle: politicians in positions of higher leadership — prime ministers, premiers and cabinet ministers — should be held to higher levels of personal behaviour than other public officials. Why? Because they are leaders, and character and integrity counts in leadership. And because higher-echelon leaders have access to more power and public resources, and should therefore be subjected to greater scrutiny. Politicians are entitled to private lives. But when they enter public life they give up, by definition, some of their privacy and, in many cases, compromise their right to a total wall of privacy when they selectively display aspects of their private lives to boost their image. None of which is to defend or justify the gross behaviour of certain media who invade privacy as routine practice on the basis that the worst possible penalty is that it may cost them a legal settlement long after the damage has been done. |
|
|
|
103 Comments
And of course Rann’s decison to sue for defamation to try to demonstrate his honesty makes it a public matter. Conveniently there is unlikely to be any pleadings or evidence published until after the election.
Wait… so if I were to tell any part of my life story to the media for some kind of promotional reason, that means I have instantly surrended any rights to any kind of privacy?
What a load of bollocks.
By the way, would you point me to the story where Rann “demands silence in the name of privacy”? I can’t seem to find it. Thanks.
So great to see Crikey jumping onto the latest tabloid beat-up.
I am interested to know why ‘Crikey’ continues this non event, media beat up?
Obviously not satisfied with yesterdays pathetic contibution from Stephen Mayne, which was roundly criticised by the vast majority of bloggers, we are now graced by the words of Eric Beecher who obviously enjoys a drop of the good ole backyard fence gossip and adds absolutely sweet fanny adams to this rediculous debate. The woman is a gold digger, nothing is more obvious, her ex is in on the game, also obvious, 7 and New Idea are interested in the commercial value (profit). It is hypocritical of Mr Beecher to continue the nonsense and conclude his remarks with…”None of which is to defend or justify the gross behaviour of certain media who invade privacy as routine practice on the basis that the worst possible penalty is that it may cost them a legal settlement long after the damage has been done”.
What is Crikey doing by continuing the gossip? Exactly what Mr Beecher declares
as the gross behaviour of certain media who invade privacy as routine…pray tell me how his article differs. Crikey often takes other media to task for being trivial, off the mark, boring. This is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle….
Its time to show some professionalism and drop this rubbish
I second Raymondchurch’s comments - enough of this tawdfest
I’m not interested in Rann’s sex life - I don’t believe that he should tell me either, before or after the event. I don’t believe mine is any of his concern either! If you want to really do the moralising nonsense, why not ask the woman concerned why she had an affair when she was married; why did she wait nearly 5 yrs to ‘go public’, and why did she accept a lot of money(I’ve heard $200,000?) if she was just outraged by his ‘immoral’ use of her. There’s no hint of abuse, so what is your problem Eric? He would’ve taken a big risk by engaging in sexual activity, both in the parliament and his office? As he says, it’s like Central Station(Sydney) in his office?
What if all journalists and TV presenters(particularly the crap that Channel 7 and others can put out - Today Tonight is a good example?)had their lives scrutinized? What skeletons are in your closet? Have you always behaved with decency and responsibility in your own sexual encounters? How about your colleagues? Do a job on them shall I? Truly! Are your hackles rising due to my questions? Ready to say, ‘none of your damned business’? Good - now you know what I’m talking about. Keep this up, and I’ll expect a full description of your sexual history, so I can assess whether you’re a fit and proper person for me to read your articles!!!!
Tomorrow is White Ribbon Day. How about writing an article about that, urging other men to ‘take the pledge’ and Swear on the WRD website. Now, that is a positive thing to do!
Strange how the next SA election is only a few months away? Funny how the agrieved husband only turned up a few weeks ago, to defend his honour or hers or, by allegedly assaulting the SA Premier - what took him so long to feel angry - just found out? I don’t think so???Then she goes public! How convenient!
I’m always on the side of women when I believe that the media is using double standards, pre-conceived stereotypes re sexual abuse, DV and the ‘ownership’ of girls and women, but this is just so blatantly a witch hunt, that I’m surprised that the media took the bait. I hope Ch 7 and New Idea get the ‘s**t’ kicked out of them in court.
I’m not even a resident of SA; I just have a low opinion of cheap so-called journalists, who’ll use absolute crap to sell papers, magazines and go for ratings on TV, or on Crikey.
Anyone who’s in favour of furthering this witch hunt, should automatically have their closets inspected, and those of their family members! Damned ridiculous!
I’m not interested in politicians sex lives, of either sex, unless it interferes with their paid job, or they use taxpayers money for their personal and social lives !
I 2nd and 3rd LIZ45 and Raymond Church!
Get over your lascivious little selves and report on the news.
Crikey seems to have changed it’s format AND changed it’s ability to separate ‘Public Interest’ from Scuttle Butt
And never forget the oldest of Commandments: Never betray trust - NEVER, NOT EVER!!
We’re currently in our 82nd hour of Mike Rann Penis Watch……
If the condom doesn’t fit you must acquit!
Holy shit a second penis has just hit the parliamentary waitress! This is incredible!
Oh for goodness sake just SHUT-UP about this. Who cares??? Politician bonks waitress. Or doesn’t. One of them was married to someone else at the time. The only surprise is that it wasn’t the pollie cheating on his/her spouse as is usually the case.
I used to be proud of living in a country where nobody gave a rat’s arse about which pollie bonked who - unless they were campaigning on “family values”. Remember that drunken philanderer Bob Hawke? Most popular Australian prime minister of all time who used his considerable charisma to push through massive much needed structural changes in Australian. The politician we had to have at the time - even if he was a lousy husband to poor suffering Hazel. Unfortunately it seems that America’s cultural imperialism has now extended into the moral hypocrisy of the bedrooms of our politicians.
I am appalled that this tabloid gossip is still the top so-called news story on every Australian radio station, news website and television report after two days. IT IS NOT NEWS.
Meanwhile, as the media fiddles, Australia and the world burn - the former more quickly in some very scary, very early bushfires and the latter more slowly through insidious, persistent, creeping climate change. Meanwhile parts of northern Europe are struggling with the impact of flood of “Biblical proportions” while Asia struggles yet again to rebuild from yet another “once in a century” earthquakes. Has anyone noticed that there are a hell of a lot more “once in a century” earthquakes/hurricanes/bushfires/floods etc in recent years.
Indigenous Australians are still dying at a scarily faster rate than other Australians, often of diseases that have been almost eradicated in much of the Western World. Thanks to persistent untreated ear and eye infections, many indigenous children in remote areas have little chance of achieving a full education - even if it was as readily available to them as to kids brought up in Australia’s capital cities.
There are a 100,000,000 more important stories that the media could be reporting on instead of the private lives of a politician and a waitress and a fling that may (or may not) have happened 3-4 years ago. Give us a break Crikey!
Stuff like this on Crikey really makes me wonder why I subscribe. Its just stuffy middle class moralising that doesn’t stand up to any logic, sense of fairness and decency. It also makes me wonder whether the Crikey editor has actually lived a full life.
Firstly to suggest Rann ‘exploits’ his family is really to just state the obvious fact that the public have an interest in the personal lives of politicians. No politician would choose to ‘exploit’ family - . In Rann’s case he’s got an Italian wife…has he exploited her eric by saying he loves her and being photographed by her? Interesting definition of exploitation!
Secondly, the import of his Office is really no more important, in fact in many ways less important than your’s Eric. Quality journalists are essential to a functional democracy and in short order. Do I care whether you shagged some women 4 years ago..or whether Rundle and Keane et al dropped there pants once or twice in a vaguely inappropriate manner…..do you care?…Will you out them on the front page of Crikey….are there no skeletons in your closet?
There are a myriad of ways that the public can determine the ‘integrity’ and principles of politicians - they deal in moral issues, matters of great import daily . I don’t know if you’ve noticed but politicians rank somewhere equivanlent to used care salesman on the public respectibility rankings. SO the Public have probably judged politician on the substantive stuff they do. We don’t need soft porn information on where the Premier was putting his wang 4 years ago to work it out.
There is not one iota of legitimate public interest in this story. Salacious public interest yes..the kind of interest that means that any advertisement or article with ‘sex’ in the heading is going to attract attention. Channel 7 paid for it on this basis - not because, moral guardians that they are, they were concerned about the values of our leaders.
And they paid a lot. Does that not concern you? Does that not suggest that the story may have been tweaked for dramatic effect - that channel 7 would have insisted on more ‘bang for their buck’ (literally) before handing over the loot. Throw in the obligatory grapple on the desk in parliament house and the deal is done honey…
And what, for all those confessional dollars, did we get. An unmarried politician had sex 4 years ago with a flakey bar maid. Thats got public interest all over it hasnt it.
Here’s a revelation for you. I had sex 4 years ago too outside of marriage…and my job has as a moral dimension to it. Hell, I’m a parent, what responsibility is greater than that. There its out now! I look forward to both myself and my family seeing my ugly dial posted all over the front pages of the papers tomorrow!
Obviously Eric you would now see an important frontier of investigate journalism as involving the scouring of the private lives of anybody in public office vis-a-vis what their genitals have been doing anywhere up to the last decade. I look forward to a special ‘sealed section’ of Crikey - you could title it ‘gratuitous sex outings…for the edification of the moral middle class”.
.
This whole thing leaves me in two minds
1) Obviously Mike Rann is lying - He is a politician and is speaking - therefore what he says is most likely to be B0ll*cks
2) I find it very difficult to believe that anyone would voluntarily submit to having sex with Mike Rann, $200,000 or two million would hardly be enough to cover the shame.
Well said Sean,
I like the idea of special sealed Crikey section .
The stories are so crap and predictable lately it should all be sealed …and buried.
What a bunch of hypocrites. You all clicked on a link to take you to this page from a link that took you to the detailed section of this email. Not interested in reading it, eh?
Dear Meski
I’m interested in justice.
I’m interested in respect and privacy.
I’m interested in screaming from the roof tops “NEVER, EVER BETRAY TRUST”
Very important issues indeed!!
I didn’t read this article.
@ Liz45, Margaret and Sean: agreed - this is tedious.
Had Mike Rann embezzled money with this lady 4 years ago, or taken bribes or whatever then, yes, that would raise questions over his integrity and make for interesting “News”.
The fact that he may or may not have had sex with a woman 4 years ago based on her paid allegations is as boring as it is irrelevant. In fact, to hear this supposed “adulturer” confess the “truth” like some virtuous act of contrition is a little sickening to be honest.
For those reasons above, I hope to see Mike Rann get through this, and quickly!!
The spin doctors are everywhere even here at Crikey.
Men do irrational things when lust is involved.
Here’s four questions for The Honourable Mr Rann:
Have you ever seen the movie “Unfaithful”?
Did you ever text (SMS) Michele Chantelois?
Did your then fiance (now wife) invite her and your husband to your home?
Why did you cease contact with Michele Chantelois?
Sorry Mike, but your penis counts. We need to know.
by Eric Beecher.
@spenny “Men do irrational things when lust is involved”.
Whereas women are completely rational and measured when it comes to lust; like all those fans of ‘Twilight’, and the women who pursue pro-sports players or throw bras at Tom Jones. Yeah, the sisters always keep it together on their lust (/s).
It’s awright Mr Beecher. I loves yer!
Sorry but the public has a right to know. Mike Rann’s got his spin doctors everywhere, even here it seems. He shouldn’t have won the last election, but the bloody problem is, there’s no viable alternative, the Libs are a bunch of idiots, and Xenophon, who was probably a serious threat inside of ten years, ahs taken to the national stage.
Cross out your ballot and write CROOKS on it.
You want integrity from a politician??? are you insane??
@Robyn: Yes, I’ve already commented on that, on at least 3 other articles. You must have seen.
what flip-flop. Crikey defended two federal politicians right to privacy because Glenn Milne aired a well known story. Each of the tests set out above applied to those two as much as to Rann.and yet Beecher demands Rann come clean Oh wait, Rann has come clean, he said it never happened and he’s suing Channel 7.
There are many many more important things available to judge Rann on than this fluff
There has been a cigar found in Mike’s bed ,oopps office. Has anyone checked You tube for the video ?
I’m sorry to disagree with a lot of Crikey’s readers but to me morals are an important thing in a politician. Screwing another man’s wife knowingly shows low moral character especially where it is obviously nothing more than a fling. Why shouldn’t those voters who expect a high level of personal honour from their elected representatives be entitled to know about conduct by their representatives that goes against their own personal moral framework? There is more to being a political leader than just balancing budgets. Behaviour like this also in my opinion shows extremely poor judgement. People get killed for doing stuff like that. Rann wants to be happy that the former husband hit him with nothing harder than a a rolled up magazine. Ask Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman’s families what husband’s are (allegedly) capable of doing to their spouses and new person in their life when they feel betrayed.
Personally I think any man who has sexual relations with married woman is completely nuts and lacks good judgement.
Eric, what’s really offensive about your article, is just how *badly* it’s written!
Good grief man, get an editor to run the pencil over it before clicking send.
It was all going fine for the first four paras, and then boom!!
All coherence went up in a puff of smoke.
I’ve read the bloody thing about 6 times now, and I still can’t quite figure WTF you’re trying to say.
I can only assume that you’re wary of the libel laws and are trying to get around them using the old “dog whistle”.
If you’ve got the evidence, print it. If you haven’t, then STFU.
What you’ve written is a tacky, trashy each-way bet that’s unworthy of you and Crikey.
I hate the smell of meretricious moralising in the afternoon. And the smell first thing in the morning is something you would not believe.
I heartily second the comments of Sean, Margaret Bozik, Liz 45 and Raymond Church. Eric Beecher should understand just how whiningly self-serving (“the more stuff to report the better”) his comments are.
The Right Honourable Rann has been holier than thou throughout his political career.
He and the Honourable Kevin Foley would be having a field day if this was a liberal leader.
If he’s been bonking the staff at parliment house then he should quit.
Labour wont lose the next election anyway as the SA Liberals are a joke. So they might as well get rid of some dead wood.
I’m leaving a comment on this because, like many others I want to let Crikey know that its not what I subscribe to read.
I can’t understand Crikey devoting so much space to it - yesterday was more than enough - its a non-issue.
PC: If you are anything like me you subscribed to Crikey primarily because of its political coverage. Like it or not, Rann is a politician.
I don’t give a stuff what he does in bed, or how many people he does it with, and as a Victorian I am not going to read a long article about a premier of a State I’ve always considered to be a quantum leap backwards from Victoria.
But I do think South Australians should be very interested. A) Because he is their Premier and they need to know if the man is likely to be politically dishonest. B) Because the woman is just another round-heeled American blonde, and if his judgement is that bad then his political judgement is bound to be suss.
Eric, as long as you’re happy to have your private life exposed all over the media, I couldn’t agree more. Alex
Phil, I completely agree with you regarding the importance of moral character in Policitians; however we disagree on what those morals are.
John Howard was never involved in a sex scandal, and for all his conservative values could be considered a man of high moral character. However its undeniable that he presided over several of the greatest moral failings in Australia’s history (the Iraq war, AWB scandal, tacit approval of the torture of Australian citizens etc etc)!! No resignations there however.
This is why I no longer care about a boring sex-scandal. In fact I think it distorts perspective on what is considered acceptable moral behaviour. And that’s pretty much my issue with the ‘religious right’, who ignore the moral values of humanity and solidarity, and focus instead on irrelevant issues like this.
PS can we drop the notion of spin doctors - its a little demeaning.
PC
You might want it to be a non issue!
But it isn’t!
Keep it coming Crikey!!!
[Edit - no insults please]
Insult away RaymondChurch. You’re nobody to me and you’re quite likely on some agenda to shout down and demean anyone with an opinion that doesn’t suit your political persuasion anyway.
I couldn’t give a monkey’s tossbag about the gossip.
I just want the closest thing I can get to honest representation in my state parliament.
I’m sick of spin and bullsh*t answers to straightforward questions.
I demand that the next time Premier Rann has sex with anyone who purports not to be his wife it should be in front of a live studio audience and worm-polled.
Note to Eric Beecher:
I can hear the COS’s words like it was yesterday:
“I need 10 pars on this…I don’t care what it is…just give me friggin’ 10 pars”
And if an aspiring D grade served up the tosh you’ve written, that same COS would throw it back in his/her face.
Low rent hypocrisy.
[Edit] this is no impressionable teenage girl. she’s a woman aged in her 30s. if the alleged affair actually took place, why did she consent to it? the south australian government has had a zero tolerance policy regarding sexual harrassment for many years, so why didn’t she just say no and report him? why has the husband waited three years to confront rann? [Edit] yet moronic journalists are automatically assuming rann’s guilt without any actual evidence. even if the allegations are true, so what? consensual sex between adults isn’t a crime. if his sexual activities don’t prevent him from doing the job of leading the state then i don’t give a rat’s posterior what he does in private. everybody, even you eric beecher, has something they would rather the public doesn’t know. for most of us it doesn’t prevent us from doing our jobs competently and our sexual relationships don’t affect our credibility in other areas of our lives. grow up.
Kevin Herbert= Bullseye!!!
Journalists just can’t accept that people have a right to privacy. It could stop them printing things that make them money. I thought we had got over the sex thing just like I thought we had got over the asylam seeker thing, but no. The meeja just have to ressurect them, because there is little journalistic effort involved and people love to read about it because it titillates their senses and prejudices without them ever having to use their brains.
PeteWN correction, no sex scandal invlving Howard was ever made public
PADDY: It was when Eric Beecher got into proportionality I became a) interested, b) confused.
Otherwise I’m happy to let the South Australians have their torments. However, I do notice that whenever a scandal does break, the messenger gets shot along with the perpetrator.
PETE WN: “John Howard was never involved in a sex scandal.” Jesus! Christ! Give over! Do me a tiny! You’ve got to be kidding?! What woman? What sexy, normal, heterosexual, life-loving, woman would possibly have had any desire to go to bed with that halitosis-ridden little dwarf? I’m sure Janette was born with a built-in radar-detector which enabled her to see into the future. But any normal woman would have committed sepuku if she thought she had just been marooned on a desert island with him.
PS: Shudder, shudder!
Venise said: “What sexy, normal, heterosexual, life-loving, woman would possibly have had any desire to go to bed with that halitosis-ridden little dwarf?”
They were asking the same thing about Billy McMahon (but I don’t think halitosis was an issue there).
Venise, I agree, what an absolutely hideous thought. I can’t find one woman-friend who disagrees.
Dear RaymondChurch,
You seem to be someone who can’t stand anybody who doesn’t agree with them and are unable make a point without insulting people. [Edit]
In actual fact I’m glad that my couple of posts here have given you a chance to vent your anger.
Hope you feel better now.
Love Spenny xxx
Pete Wn,
John Howard was involved in a sex scandal (allegedly) and it was the whole reason why Janette wouldn’t allow him to live at The Lodge in Canberra, to keep Howard and the fellow Liberal politician away form each other.
Raymond,
Why all the anger? Spenny has a right to blog an opinion without being attacked… just accept the fact that not everybody likes the ALP and not everybody lives in Sydney (I presume). Some bloggers, like myself, actually take an interest in South Australia.
It may have some elements of ‘gutter journalism’ but Media Mike has also been accused of using his office as a hotel room. For the interests of integrity, I view this as reasonably important.
As a fellow blogger implied to me, perhaps you should take a leaf out of Media Mikes book and try getting some, or atleast, pay to get some….
Eric … what a load of bollocks!
‘Like so many high-profile political leaders, Mike Rann has been perfectly happy to exploit his private life when it suited him.’
Like so many normal people actually … when did you last email your relatives a pic of you and your partner/son/daughter in the middle of a screaming argument? Don’t we ALL love to distribute the ‘family on the sofa’ photos?
Dear SPENNY.
What would be your position on each of Mr Wrann’s other possible responses to the question:
1. “Yes, I did have sex with her”;
2. “None of your business”.
Dear TAMO,
My issue is with honesty and polititians inability to answer a straight question.
Beyond that Mr Rann’s party must decide if he’s a political liability and what to do with him.
Its none of my business if its my next door neighbour or some bloke down the road I but if it questions the integrity of the leader of my state then unfortunately it is.
I’m amused by those whose position is clearly “I hate Rann, therefore I am delighted *cough* I mean outranged by recent events. Outraged!”
Thanks Venice,
for introducing your casual sex rating system (with the grotesque John Howard presumably near the bottom ?)
not bad for someone who subscribes for Crikey’s political coverage.
I’m guessing you are an attractive young strumpet to go down this path of rating the bonkworthiness of past and current politicians.
What a circus!!
touche Joal…. my thoughts exactly for those on the left that suggest it is not even newsworthy!
Not many crikey articles get 59 comments (60 now). And yet most of us think this is not a newsworthy story (I am one of them). But we all read it, and took time to reply. We played into the hands of those who like this kind of gossip in the news. Stupid aren’t we!
James B you’ld guess wrong, so very wrong
spenny you are incorrect on all counts, I am pleased to advise I am in excellent health, a non drinker, perfectly happy, married with 4 beautiful kids…my occupation brings me into contact with folk with mental disabilities, among other ailments. [Edit]
PHIL - “Screwing another man’s wife knowingly shows low moral character especially where it is obviously nothing more than a fling”.
Phil, this is 2009, it’s White Ribbon Day, and so it’s high time men(and women) started to get the message - men don’t own women, their wives or anyone else? Got it? Thank god for that! Tedious!
The woman concerned is a mature aged woman - not an innocent teenager - there’s no hint of abuse or force, even coersion - she was a willing participant, who apparently took 5 years to feel distressed? Don’t you find that a bit strange? He was not committed to anyone, she was. It was up to her to show some loyalty or honesty towards her husband, or leave him or whatever. Men don’t OWN women, morally or in any other respect? Understand???Lots and lots of women are sick to death of this air of ownership, men defending their injured man hood etc. It’s crap OK? I want to be treated as an adult; responsible for my own behaviour, and the same rights to equal justice as men - being OWNED is in conflict with this!
Who told you to set yourself up as the judge? Your past so squeaky clean is it? No sceletons? We can take a close look at your ‘copy book’ without causing you any embarrassment?
PADDY, VENISE and others - I agree with you. I shouldn’t even be responding I know, but it’s just so damned stupid. As I said, I don’t have any loyalty to Rann, I’m from NSW, but I don’t like someone spreading s**t just to be a drama queen, or to get money or? What if this has been organised by both husband & wife? He assaults Rann after 5 yrs, and wow! she get’s so distressed a few weeks later, sells her story(twice) and puts the cheque in their joint account?
Another scenario? The SA election is around the corner? Good attempt to turn public opinion? Libs?
If this woman was bullied, or sexually harrassed or abused in any way by a man in a position of power, I’d be on her side without question, but she’s had the opportunity to reveal that, if it was a factor - she didn’t!
The alleged affair of Howard is the worst kept secret in the country. The idea of ‘it’ makes me feel quite ill, but I’ve heard the rumour from several quarters. I couldn’t care less, it’s their business. Janette would be a ‘down trodden wife’ , he’d be a control freak anyway, with Howard’s 50’s view of women? He turned back the clock a long way re the status of women. Used DV educational money on frig magnets? Such was his view of men abusing women?
SPENNY - The leader of your state(or any other) is entitled to a private life, just like you. If he uses his position to bully people or make disgusting comments about women(like the Lib in WA re the ‘chair sniffing’ episode - did you demand that he be sacked?He’s a Minister now, disgusting little creature - how gross?)or uses taxpayers money to pay for his leering lifestyle, I agree with you, but he has the right to live a normal life, with a sex life as part of that - just like you and me?
So those on his side claiming it’s not newsworthy… on the other side crying out for his scalp. And where does the truth lie? The only conclusion I can draw is that it’s a hatchet job, and the only winner is the media. Once again.
Look at the number of comments! It must be a fine article!
Well, fancy that - Howard actually was getting some? Maybe he could work magic with those eyebrows.
So much for my earlier comments about his supposed moral character - I’m happy to be corrected on that one.
Dear Raymond “Happy & Healthy Teetotaler With 4 Kids” Church
Quote: “[Edit]”
What you need to do is take a good hard look at yourself my friend.
And yes there’s one in every blog Raymond …………………………..
Sorry Eric - Your integrity is shot to pieces and despite what you think you have no right to know at all. We can all spot a gold digger from miles away. You obviously can’t.
Give up your day job.
JAMES BENNETT: Are you related to John Bennett? It’s merely that I happen to be locked in battle with him as well and was wondering if it ran in the family?
Despite her Serene Bodily Harm also wishing to besmirch my character, I can tell you that there are two categories of men which I have never had, and shall never have been to bed with. Namely politicians and actors. Both professions field men who are so busy wondering how much they are impressing anyone and everyone that they seem to have forgotten the um; nuts and bolts of the exercise?
On each and every occasion I’ve ventured down this path I’ve had the good fortune to result the ultimate leap (of faith?). Only to be told later, by girl-friends, how wise I was.
PS: Second line from the bottom should have read…’good fortune to resist the’…..
not result.
besmirch?? Moi?? [Edit]
‘……and as a Victorian I am not going to read a long article about a premier of a State I’ve always considered to be a quantum leap backwards from Victoria. ’ (Quote: VenAl).
[Edit]
IF these current allegations are true, then our Premier has used his office (literally and metaphorically) in a manner that I have a bloody right to be unimpressed with!
I care little if he rogered the Dagenham Girl Pipers in his PRIVATE life, I care a great deal about his behaviour in office-literally. I care even more that the arrogant twot may well be lying about his liaison with this….’gold digger’ (sheesh!).
And guess what my pretentious little darlings,-I have the right to express that here even if it gives you (not all-TG!), the bleedin’ vapours.
Jeez! I really am looking forward to the interesting chats we’re going to have.
Back to my flagon and Chico….TTFN!
Elan- I agree. South Aussies are as insecure as the Victorians are of the New South Welshman. South Aussies lag behind the Vics and they lag behind the Sydneysiders, thats life!
I think Raymond Church just admitted himself, literally….
No TD, we don’t agree! I was quoting VA!
I’ve been in the New Dart for well over 30 years and am still amazed at the way each State puts the other down. I’ve never seen this before, and whilst not a child of the Universe,-I’ve travelled extensively.
I AM from SA. It irritates me to be talked down to by a fellow Australian. It becomes a ‘right back at yer’ thing for me. Joking is one thing, but much of this stuff is dead set.
Each State has its merits. The rationale appears to be bigger is better. Well whatever floats your boat. I love Vic far more than NSW,-but much prefer living here.
There is also a very apparent trend here to condescend to those who hold a different view. OK! fine;-I’ll play.
I agree with your posts- perhaps that will change-I know not. But I’ll be damned if I’ll put up with the guff of the self-appointed elite. It’s going to be a real pleasure….
I must profess to have not lived in SA for a number of years now, including 5 or so years in Melbourne and currently based in London, but Rann has squandered the development of SA for his own benefit. We only started to get our act together with mining as the boom was coming to an end.
I was back in Adelaide in October and asked dad why there seemed to be so many new projects that had only just been announced - “there is an election next year, son”. Rann was ok to begin with but is now just a joke and pretty much an employee of the media. His only aim was to be another Don Dunstan at all costs.
The thing with Melbourne is that the inner city is ok but I would not live in the burbs for anything, the Melbourne suburbs are horrible and uninspiring to say the very least. The same goes with Sydney!
Atleast Rupert Murdoch likes Adelaide haha…..
ELAN: I would hope you might have the elasticity and charm of your nom de guerre. Apparently not! You don’t even know irony when you come across it.
I must say I had no idea my flip remarks about your state of South Oz could engender such rabid hatred, or are we feeling a little over-awed by a more worldly-Victorian cousin?
I agree with you re: interstate big-noting. If you get the chance to research a few things I have written you will discover that no-one buckets my own state, Victoria, more than I do. And, in my humble opinion, no Victorian parliamentarian, albeit in a limited term of my own reference-I wouldn’t bonk a politician on principle; would be bed-worthy enough to well, bonk.
And, once you settle down a bit you might discover that South Australia, Victoria and NSW have, between them, rooted, savaged, and destroyed an entire river system, the MDB. You make think this is unimportant. Whereas I think it is a national tragedy. Which is why I will continue to bucket VIC and SA as often and wherever I can. I knew Victorian politicians and the VIC system of handing the Oz over to the rural brigade, are vile. I just didn’t realise the truth of my statement that SA was a quantum leap backwards from my own State. Thank you for illustrating the truth of my jibe.
Good night Veronica!
THE DUKE: I don’t know the last time you lived in Melbourne, but if you thought it was bad then you should see the cancer-like spread of even more tasteless McMansions. If you thought rabbits and camels were big reproducers of their own kind. They are amateurs compared to the housing and development industry.
No one had greater blame for the appalling bush-fires which swept Victoria earlier this year than our own morally bankrupt state Labor Party. As a Labor voter I am ashamed to add that the State Labor Party is totally bent. That John Brumby, is infinitely corrupt, may be debatable, but I doubt it. Hundreds of people and thousands of wild life and rural animals perished, because there was always a government hand waiting to receive the money of the shoddiest bidder. The low bid is usually successful because there is a large slice of the top of the cake which goes to vested interests.
Thus was born a Gothic suburban landscape, complete with cul-de-sacs which made it impossible for fire trucks to get from one area of fire to another. Concrete cover the places where grass and trees once grew and bird life almost vanished.
Sub-standard, el cheepo, sub-divisions were encouraged to be built right into national parks. At the end of it all, as I surveyed the devastation I said, Ok the next thing John Brumby will do is to call a Royal Commission. Why was I so perceptive? Because, as a small child, I had read a book called ‘The Power and the Glory. Its main character was a man called John Wren-as nasty a piece of garbage- trash I have ever read about. He said something I’ve never forgotten. “The only reason for a Royal Commission is to clear the guilty.”
The Duke
Right on!
Venise,
I was living in Melbourne not so long ago. I had a house in Armadale and avoided going further than Brighton, Caufield, Camberwell, Northcote, Essendon and Yarraville. I think Victorian suburbia is quite ordinary apart from the beachside suburbs like Mentone et al.
But yes, I know the McMansions, especially out in Craigieburn and that other massive residential development on the way to Geelong, the name escapes me.
Brumby is a status quo leader and is never going to transform the state in the same way that Kennett did. But the current Liberal Opposition blue blood leader is no good anyway, related to the Myer family is he not? Out of all the major cities in Australia, Melbourne has a definite class divide.
Oh Look Elan, you too have upset the always mordant VenAl. Ooh she gets so cross when people don’t think what she posts is funny.
ELAN: You should cheer up. [Edit]
And so it devolves into the usual state vs state argument. Why can’t you all just unite in picking on the Kiwis?
ooh the biting satire, ooh the wit, the irony
[Edit]
Meski: I have no interest in a State by State argument. Quite the opposite.
Duke: Murdoch has been very kind to Adders. He left. Melbourne? It was the city I was referring to,-it reminds me of a European city. And I love the Dandy’s!
And Rann? An odious slimeball!
“Why? Because they are leaders, and character and integrity counts in leadership. And because higher-echelon leaders have access to more power and public resources, and should therefore be subjected to greater scrutiny”
By this statement there isn’t a human being alive that should be a leader then.
Human beings are not perfect, and we all make mistakes. Integrity does NOT come from our ability to have a spotless record (and I would be dubious of anyone that does have one), it comes from the overall behaviour and reliability that they show as a whole.
Plus… why stop there? If you say that leaders are subject to greater scrutiny then surely anyone in a position of power should also have a greater scrutiny as well… So lets invade the private lives of police officers, teachers and everybody else… just to be sure that their “integrity” is satisfactory enough. What? They smoked a joint when they were 16 ONCE? Sack them! After all, thats proof that they have no integrity. They binge drank in their teens? Clearly thats an instant disqualification. They had sex when they were a single person??? Man what kind of low life is this?
Lets hold yourself up to the same scrutiny. Have you ever done something illegal? Maybe exceeded the speed limit? Drank underage? had sex in a public place? Wow… you must be a shady person and without integrity then seeing as you would do things like this.
Get it?
No. I don’t.
I DON’T give a toss what Rann did when he was 16.
I DO give a toss if a police officer IS (whilst serving) a wife-basher/has a criminal conviction/has an unhealthy interest in minors (ALL of these have occurred/occur).
Ditto teachers.
I stole a chocolate bar as a kid (it was not a Freddo Frog TG-and I’m caucasian…..so that’s OK).
I scrumped apples.
I DON’T want to be Premier, but if I was,-I would resist the choccy bars/scrumped apples/….AND keeping my hands off that cute waiter in the dining room.
Get it?
Elan,
Nice one… love it when people have to exaggerate to include wife bashing and child molesterers in the same boat as people conducting their own private lives WITHIN the bounds of the law. But last time I checked, Mr Rann wasn’t up on any CRIMINAL charges.
Kind of makes your point… completely unrelated?
SBH: I tried to be polite to you under a different thread. Obviously I wasted my time.
[Edit]
No he isn’t up on criminal charges, but be fair give him time!
You make a reasonable point, but YOU raised the ’ let he who is without sin, cast the first stone’ thing !! I am simply pointing out that it ain’t necessarily so.
You have your view-I have mine.
So I’ll repeat his behaviour INSIDE Parliament IS relevant. Not only that,-the behaviour of ANYONE who take decisions involving the lives of others SHOULD have their behaviour held to account by those they purport to tell how to behave! I went on to show that those who espouse the ‘private lives’ philosophy are effectively saying anything goes — if you do it in your private life! I showed examples of the flaw in this argument. Those examples aren’t allegations-they are on record.
Further, anyone who ratifies codes of behaviour need to be aware that that includes THEM!
And he wrote one up. Bless.
Thanks for responding though!
Rats! VenAl, You should have got your latest gem up a bit sooner, then I need not have wasted another post on you!
[Edit]
________________________________
I left Crikey when Stephen Mayne handed over the reins, I came back for a squizz. I’m appalled at the arrogant elitism of a few posters. This is Crikey FGS!
It is/was? renowned for telling it like it is. I care little about the moral compass some of you seek to impose on it. This is the real world.
Try to leave some room for us of the black tights/tee shirt/thongs/broken fag;-youse brigade.
We’se part of the Aussie family too youse know.
Snaganflagon time.
“… harping on and on about my apparent ‘lording it over other people in such a superior manner’ you are merely showing your own inferiority.”
Hahaha brilliant!! It’s a fail, and a win for irony, rolled into one.
I took it as you being mordant VA, can’t think why
Now see that got moderated ‘cause I pute “V*nise” in it
Elan, do youse have to use “thongs” and “broken fag” contiguously? It’s too much for a Friday afternoon.
Can’t help it Meski! Youse’ll see what the problem is when I tell you I had to look up what contiguously meant (true).
No clarse..alars!
Back to the bottle!
THE DUKE: Sorry to be so late in replying, but I’ve just come home from a short stretch in hospital with a broken thumb.
You were wise to restrict yourself to the areas you mentioned.
One of John Brumby’s many problems is that he mistakes bloody-minded determination for wisdom. He seems to have a bottomless well of self-certitude. Also many manic ideas. He wanted to break the traffic deadlock in Melbourne and came up with the astonishing idea of turning shopping strips into freeways-in the process he would destroy the lively-hood of all those wonderful small shops, chemists, and so on. Mass protests only convinced him that he was doing the right thing. And he went at it like a pit-bull terrier.
Out of the Faustian depths of a dark night it was revealed that all of the no parking signs that were due to go up. Were due to go up on the poles owned by local councils. And the last thing that local councils wanted was to lose the rates and benefits of those little gold-mines.
The state elections should be a disaster. There’s no way the Liberals deserve to get in. They are bitterly fragmented, with Peter Costello, Michael Kroger and Jeff Kennett all pulling in separate directions, although stoutly denying their lack of unity.
I suppose John Brumby will get back in. I’m sick of Oz politics always falling to the Party deemed to be the lesser of two evils.
PETE WN:
You wonderful man. I was thinking that no one ‘out there’ had got it.
You are a champion!
If you are going to edit me on this thread because of a complaint, why have you not done it on the original Mike Rann thread? Or is it that MALE members of Crikey do not get a fit of the vapours when they are subject to text they dislike?
Given your speed in deletion tonight, you could let me know fairly promptly.
Crikey playing favourites…who would have guessed!!!!
[Edit]
It will be interesting to be in Court (which I intend to do), a week tomorrow. Ms Chantelois who the ‘tiser asserts has ‘fled the State’, (ergo: Thanksgiving with family), may well return next week, who knows?
The children have indeed, (ostensibly??)-been ignored in this matter;-or have they? Mr Phillips is their father,-they face their father going to Court against the Premier of SA.
Chantelois is only too well aware she was the cause. To speak up after much delay cannot harm Phillips’ case,-and may assist. Graphic for the childy’s yes,-but seeing mum trying to help dad? There was no subtle way to do it. The Court was very unlikely to take evidence in camera on an issue involving the Prem..
SO;-lets see. For many (not all, I agree) South Australians this IS of import, so I make no apology for seeing it as an issue as valid as any other on this site.
The Rann Government does not have the best reputation for allowing the Courts to do their job. Their relationship with the DPP is at times volatile.
They can’t do it this time. I look forward to Monday…this should beat the ‘Monday blues’ hands down!
ELAN,
There is a difference here though…
When a person is at WORK and they do something which abuses that work, they go through the proper channels to have it dealt with. The general public are not privvy to the number of people caught out doing things like this in corporate australia.
Why is government any different?
If he did something which abused his position, made improper use of his place of employment or anything else of the sort then it should be handled by APPROPRIATE CHANNELS within the government… not splattered across the media for everybody to comment on. Only when something has been PROVED to have occurred should the public be informed. Failing to do this means people are opened up to unfair slander and “mud sticking” before anything has even been proved to be true.
To go to the media to handle something like this is blatant sensationalism, and the media should be ashamed of themselve for not only entering into it but also PAYING to perpetuate it. Now every man and his dog are going to think “Hey, I can get paid for spouting off about someone important… It doesn’t even need to be TRUE because the media don’t actually demand proof before giving me the money”
Hardly fair is it?
ENIGMATIC, thanks for responding.
We’re going to have to agree to disagree!
I understand what you are saying, but the Government IS different (in my view!).
They are elected by the people, for the people. To that end they are responsible to the people.
To clarify what I mean: matters of behaviour OUTSIDE the House are a private thing-UNLESS they impinge on the capacity to carry out ones duties. I agree that in this case, that is not so. However;-behaviour In Office-literally!- IS of public concern.
ENIG: there ARE no ‘appropriate channels’ in Government!! Governments are notorious for ‘covering up’. Oppositions…when there is an Election on the horizon,…become almost complicit, in that they are soooo careful to protect their profile for that coming election ( this being evidenced by the ludicrous and petty question asked of the Premier yesterday..about his reluctance to take a lie detector test! Is THAT all they’ve got for Crissakes!).
Any Inquiry will have the media present-so it WILL be public knowledge, anyway. And they achieve little or nothing.
As a lawyer I am fully aware of the basis of allegation. So what’s new? What else could be done? Not one damned thing! Do you suggest that this came as any surprise to many in Parliament House? Did anything happen at the time? What could a waitress say against a Premier?
Why did she delay? Why take payment? The last one first. Job prospects are now severely limited in the little village that is Adelaide. I would have negotiated the best financial deal I could. No apologies.
Delay?? This I suspect would never have come out, but for an angry husband realising that this man was in the same venue. The rest is history. It came as no surprise that she wants to reconcile. THIS is a way to POSSIBLY help the ex. Explaining WHY he did what he did.
AND.., today we hear that a lesser charge is to be brought against Phillips-a charge which will eliminate the need for a Jury. The charge is to be heard by a Magistrate alone!
Do I really need to say it??? Nah! Just being cynical eh??
I even doubt that I can get into the Court.
@Enigmatic: In the corporate world the owners are the shareholders. In the government world, the owners are the taxpayers.
ELAN,
I understand where you are coming from, but I have to question where we end up if we were to continue down the line of thinking that you are suggesting.
If indeed they are accountable to us then we should be able to walk into their office any time we like, perhaps even have video camera’s in there so we can view them at any time. Should we put a GPS on them so we know where they are located? Should be able to ring them at any time in order to satisfy ourselves they are doing the right thing?
For that matter… if indeed the public should know everything that is going on, then shouldn’t every person who meets or comes across a politician announce to the public what they said and saw? What if they spoke harshly to them, or ignored them? Do we hold every single thing they do up to scruitiny just because we as the public should know?
I agree wholeheartedly there should be some level of transparency in the government, but sadly there are so many people out there who are just out for money (Thank you Mrs Waitress), and you have no way of verifying the INTEGRITY of those who make claims. To open up everything that happens means you end up with so many lies and personal-agenda satisfying mistruths that no politician could ever stand up and do their job.
Surely having SOME way of ratifying the truth or the potential validity of something is better than just allowing anyone to say anything whenever they feel like it? This person provided absolutely no proof of their claims and yet the media greedily splashed it all over the place. Do they care if they are sued? Course not. They either have enough money to settle or they will retract what they said, but the damage is already done and all so that someone could sensationalize something that nobody has a SHRED of evidence to support.
That doesn’t sit well with me, that the media can act without any moral or ethical compunction at all, and everybody is focusing on the victim of the alleged claims, not on the dispicable way in which it was brought to light.
Hello ENIGMATIC, I’ll read your post in greater detail later. I don’t have much time at the moment, and hate to just skim posts.
Two general quick comments:
1) Doing nothing about such allegations is for me the FAR greater evil, than that what comes after, is in any way distorted and ‘value-added’.
2) The media’s role, and how they handle matters-ANY matters-will never meet with the satisfaction of all of us. The quality of media is also in the eye of the beholder. BUT: good/bad/indifferent;-we are at times, glad of media scrutiny in matters that WE consider important. I feel much happier that there is a public accountability on many/any issues, than no accountability at all.
We disagree on this! That’s democracy!
________________________
Listed for hearing:
Adelaide Magistrates Court- Criminal- 7/12/09
Before Magistrate Snopek 10am/ Court 2.
Richard Wayne Phillips-Commit Assault/Basic Offence.