Weird blindness of the Right

What fun it is to watch the outrage of frustrated Abbott lovers (and Turnbull haters - he believes in global warming, after all) over the Niki Savva book.   (Which, it would seem, has been selling like hotcakes.  I'm even tempted myself.)

Rowan Dean, about the most obnoxious of right wing warrior commentators in Australia at the moment, is quoted by Bolt as writing:

Moreover, in interviews Ms Savva has repeatedly trotted out the claim that Ms Credlin attempted to have herself and Peter van Onselen fired from the Australian (an irrelevance given they are both still there), as an excuse for not following the normal procedure of putting allegations of an affair to her two subjects prior to publication.

Um, it's more than "a claim":  in the Australian this morning she has the communication from then editor Mitchell confirming that not only had Credlin demanded it, but Abbott was on the case too!

And, quite frankly, your average person might think it is a pretty damn good reason for a writer not to bother asking them about an affair, especially when the claim in the book is not even that there were having one, but that a large slab of their own party thought it looked that way and that it was causing problems within the government.  (And Abbott's - and I think Credlin's? -  denials to the messenger is in the book too.)    Working up indignation about her not asking them is therefore just piffle.

As for the hypocrisy of all of this - a word Bolt is flinging around with his lack of insight - I thought Righties considered it an outrage when Gillard did her nut at The Australian for running a Milne piece which contained a claim that had previously been nixed by their lawyers as defamatory.   We don't know if she asked for his sacking, but he got sacked, and then this was supposed to be the biggest outrage to freedom of speech ever.

Now, clear evidence that Credlin (and possibly Abbott) was specifically telling Mitchell to sack Savva for her reporting unfriendly stories, and we're supposed to feel sorry for Peta??

Gillard, as her reward for being uppity about a report she didn't like, got a plethora of Right wing purely politically motivated witch hunting lasting years over allegations involving her love life  20 years ago, which had already been aired and denied about (I think) 12 years ago, and which Bolt chose to help re-publicise.   The end result was always predictable - if none of her internal enemies had evidence 12 years ago, they were hardly likely to turn it up now.  And the relevance of this to how she was doing her job now - precisely nil.   (The relevance of the Abbott/Credlin relationship - huge within his own party, right now.)  The only good thing to come out of it was the utter humiliation of Michael Smith.

The right wing pundits are absurd.   (Oh, and to be fair, so is Bernard Keane on this.  He's way off mark on this.)

Filming has started

Star Wars redux: Send in the Clones . . . to Donegal

It would appear that the filming for the next Star Wars has started on the island where the last one ended.

How unusually chronological of them, for movie makers...

Heh

US pro-gun activist mother shot - by her four-year-old son

She's not dead, so it's OK to laugh.

Good Lord! Another columnist I wouldn't normally recommend...

...is Miranda Devine, but her take on the matter of Credlin/Abbott/various Lefty, feminist commentators' complaint that this is a matter of sexist attack is actually pretty good.   Also a bit funny (unintentionally, I think) in part:

She has denied the rumours and that should be the end of speculation based on evidence amounting to no more than Credlin feeding Abbott off her fork, buying them matching Tumi luggage, holidaying together, and various other tidbits, mainly unsourced, which have swirled around Canberra for years.

Yes, because a male boss and his female chief of staff holidaying together with matching luggage is never a reason to suspect something going on...

Anyhow, the bits I more-or-less approve of:

Savva’s book documents the avoidable trajectory of his downfall, with on-the-record recollections which fill in details about Credlin’s questionable behaviour and dominance of Abbott.

Despite the damage she was doing, Credlin remained in her job. Her response to criticism was to play the gender card. Abbott’s indulgence of this nonsense was surreal as he castigated his colleagues as sexist. “Do you really think that my chief of staff would be under this criticism if her name was P-e-t-e-r and not P-e-t-a?” he asked the ABC in 2014.

The week after Abbott was dumped, Credlin spoke at an Australian Women’s Weekly event and also blamed criticism of her on sexism. She also made the extraordinarily self-aggrandising claim that she “got them into government, from opposition I might add.”

Credlin’s harshest critics were women, not because they are self loathing misogynists, but because men are cowed into silence by exactly the arguments she mounts. Criticise a woman and it’s sexism. Criticise a man and it’s criticism.

Credlin continued to play the gender card yesterday in a column, saying she wasn’t the first woman to be attacked about the “nature of her professional relationships, and sadly I doubt I will be the last”. Abbott’s not the first man either, so it’s hardly a gender issue.

What a farce

Turnbull heckled by own party as NSW Liberals vote for climate debates - 9news.com.au: Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has reportedly been heckled by parts of his party at a meeting where NSW Liberals voted for his government to conduct public debates about climate change and whether the science is settled.

An overwhelming majority voted in favour of the motion at the party's state council meeting on the NSW central coast following a speech by Mr Turnbull at the weekend, revealing the persisting level of climate change scepticism among the party, the Sydney Morning Herald reports.

I am reminded of John Quiggin's "Parallel Universes" post of yesterday, too.

I think the right side of politics here is caught in the sort of credibility crisis that Labor suffered in the 50's and 60's, when (if I understand history correctly), it was hard to support a party that harboured too many with an intellectual sympathy to communism.

The climate change skeptics have to be purged before the Coalition can regain true credibility for political judgement.   As many of them are IPA influenced, and the nearest party to that mob is the LDP, they should be told to go join Leyonhjelm's outfit and follow him into electoral oblivion.

A Trump comparison

Boy, it's been many a year since I've recommended a Bret Stephens piece from the Wall Street Journal, but I think he makes many good points in this anti-Trump piece "The Return of the 1930s", which starts this way:

In temperament, he was “bombastic, inconsistent, shallow and vainglorious.” On political questions, “he made up his own reality as he went along.” Physically, the qualities that stood out were “the scowling forehead, the rolling eyes, the pouting mouth.” His “compulsive exhibitionism was part of his cult of machismo.” He spoke “in short, strident sentences.” Journalists mocked his “absurd attitudinizing.”

Remind you of someone?

The description of Benito Mussolini comes from English historian Piers Brendon’s definitive history of the 1930s, “The Dark Valley.” So does this mean that Donald Trump is the second coming of Il Duce, or that yesteryear’s Fascists are today’s Trumpkins? Not exactly. But that doesn’t mean we should be indifferent to the parallels with the last dark age of Western politics.

Stephens then goes to note how the current period of economic problems do not go anywhere near matching those of the 1920's and 30's.  In fact, he goes on to point to the positives in the American economy, as a way of deflating the Trump fanbase's feelings that the country needs a new, quasi-fascist,  style of leaderhsip.

But - and here's the big but - why doesn't Stephens then go onto to acknowledge that the Republican's own hyperbola about the economic crisis Obama was allegedly causing was not well founded, and it is their own behaviour that has caused the rise of the Trump base?

Typical Razer

Razer on Peta Credlin, Niki Savva and primordial female horror | Daily Review: film, stage and music reviews, interviews and more

This somewhat hyperbolic review of merely the extracts of Niki Savva's book displays all the qualities that I dislike in Helen Razor's writing style.   She's not even entertainingly bad, though:  she's just a self indulgent bore  whose clumsy sentences and allusions have to be re-read a couple of times to even try to follow her argument.   (Only to find it wasn't worth the effort.)

Does sound unusual for March

Mildura set to swelter - so supplier cuts power for scheduled maintenance work: Almost 200 households in Mildura will be without power on Tuesday thanks to scheduled maintenance work, despite temperatures forecast to hit 40 degrees for the eighth day in a row.

Age expired

I see that John Stone still writes trying to influence Australian politicians to cut, cut, cut:

That "fiscal path" comprised four components. First, "all ministers should now be put on notice that there will be no room for new spending proposals, no matter how 'worthy'". Second, existing spending needed to be cut hard. "The problem is not the absence of targets for cutting, but the government's faint-heartedness in approaching that task". Third, any and all tax increases should be firmly ruled out. Finally, as one carrot among these sticks, the government should legislate for a 5 (or preferably 10) percentage point cut in corporate taxation, introduced in five equal yearly stages beginning in 2015-16.

He seems to have been old forever, and indeed, I see that he is now 87.  Sorry, according to my rule of thumb, that is past the age where anyone is worth listening to.  (I'm really going to regret this age-ist approach when I'm 87 and still blogging - but by then I'll have had therapies that will mean 87 will be the new 67.  I hope...)

Anyhow, to stop being offensive about our elders, I suspect a 5% company tax reduction phased in over 5 years is probably OK.    But apart from that - the insistence that there is to be no new tax increases of any kind - that's just ideology put above good management. 

I wonder what he would have to say - if he was worth listening to - about the abject failure of the Laffer-isation of Kansas's finances.  That's working a treat.

Hedonism in the news, again

The poppers ban: will it criminalise gay users? | Society | The Guardian

I maintain my conservative line:  the self indulgent hedonism of artificial stimulation to increase the sensation of sex is not good for the individual or society overall.  

Dealer needed

Can very small doses of LSD make you a better worker? I decided to try it. - Vox

I see from the article, written by a man with a lot of previous drug experience, that all I need to beat an internet addiction is to "microdose" with LSD.  Huh.

Mind you, the article is probably best read to learn about some of the over the top pro-drug claims that are still made by later day versions of Thomas Leary.

The future of agriculture and climate change

Here are two stories that show how it's really hard to be confident as to what will happen to agriculture and climate change:

1.   A study looking at South America gives some concern:

The study, published in Nature Climate Change, focused on the Brazilian state of Mato Grosso, an emerging global breadbasket that as of 2013 supplied 10 percent of the world's soybeans. The researchers used variations in temperature and precipitation across the state over an eight-year period to estimate the sensitivity of the region's agricultural production to climate change. Those historical comparisons can help in making predictions about the sensitivity of agriculture to future climate change.

The study found that, if the patterns from 2002 to 2008 hold in the future, an increase in average temperature in Mato Grosso of just 1 degree Celsius will lead to a nine to 13 percent reduction in overall production of soy and corn. "This is worrisome given that the temperature in the study region is predicted to rise by as much as 2 degrees by midcentury under the range of plausible greenhouse gas emissions scenarios," said Avery Cohn, assistant professor of environment and resource policy at Tufts, who led the work while he was a visiting researcher at Brown.

2.  An Australian study, on the other hand, notes some possible compensating effects:

Elevated atmospheric [CO₂] can dramatically increase wheat yields in semi-arid environments and buffer against heat waves

PS:  don't tell the numbskulls at The Australian about that second one....

Transgender caution

Obviously, the politically correct name for sex change surgery is now "gender affirming surgery". 

Still, the article at that link is worth reading to see that a guy/woman who has had it noting that it is not the cure all that some hope for.

Just what the Liberals don't need

I've been meaning to comment on the Liberals selecting the IPA's James Paterson for its top Victorian
Senate seat. 

For a party that likes to rubbish career politicians with no "real life" work experience outside of politics on the Labor side (Young Labor, university student politics, brief stint at Union or political staffer, politician), how on Earth do they justify the exact equivalent on their side as being a good idea?  (See this short article about him at The Australian.*)

What's more, haven't they learnt from recent experience that the drier than dry right wing economic views that come from the IPA aren't actually that popular in the electorate?  

I don't really recall seeing Paterson on TV all that often, but I have the feeling what times I did see him I found him rather dull and overly earnest.   Chris Berg by far is the most personable of the IPA kiddy crew, but as I have said before, you can't really trust the ethics of anyone who is willing to be paid by a mob out to deceive the public on climate change and supporting the tobacco industry to make more money. 

*  I see that he is married already, too.  As is Berg.  Why do the heterosexuals who work for the IPA seem so keen on youthful marriage?   Not that there's anything wrong with that!  Just a bit odd...

Flood infrastructure beware

Global warming already driving increases in rainfall extremes : Nature News & Comment

Interesting study reported here.

I see that The Australian remains committed to climate change scoffing by claiming this paper shows a climate modelling fail in the headline:  "Deserts in a for a drenching as theories of climate change again", which is a ridiculous way to spin the study.   (And, as is often the case in the Australian, the body of the report tends to undermine the way it is headlined.)   

Peta speaks!

Well, that's funny.  All of The Australian's stories on the weekend about Niki Savva's book were able to be read via the old "Google around the paywall" trick, but none of the Peta Credlin response stories today were accessible that way.  (To me, anyway.)

But, it would appear that she (though not Abbott) has in an interview denied emphatically an affair with Abbott.


But, to be forensic about it, only her answer appears*, not the question, and she does use the line:

The idea that my relationship with the prime ­minister was anything other than professional is completely false

which leaves open the possibility that her comment is limited to the time he was PM.

Thus I'm not giving up on my theory - that there is something further back that has prevented them from outright complaining about the affair rumour and innuendo (or threatening defamation) until now.   (Though, granted, the way Savva has dealt with it does not leave open a defamation action against her.)

*  I actually brought a hard copy of the Australian to confirm - sorry to have spent money on Rupert.

Update:  and, by the way, I am aware of another rumour involving Abbott that does not involve Credlin.    Mind you, nearly all politicians are subject to such rumour, but with Abbott's behaviour and famously "blokey" demeanour I make special dispensation for him for believing there is fire behind the smoke.

Update 2:  Michelle Grattan's take on the whole matter is really quite harsh (on Abbott/Credlin), but fair.

Update 3:  Credlin's actual opinion piece in The Australian today (which doesn't contain the express denial) is really awful - it actually is so close in parts to what Abbott said yesterday that you have to wonder whether she wrote his response for him!

Clive for Donald

Why I’d Vote For Donald Trump

While it's not exactly an endorsement, it's still surprising to read Clive Hamilton saying that he'd vote for Trump (over Cruz, at least.)

Yet more Tony and Peta ...

A couple of other bits of intrigue about this:

*  why did The Australian, normally so pro-Coalition, run with this?  Well, I think the answer is pretty clear - Rupert met with them, later decided she was a liability.  It's with his approval that Savva was protected in her long campaign to publicise the trouble within the government that Credlin was causing.

*  one incident mentioned from the book has Credlin sounding like an uptight feminist:

In government Abbott held a meeting of cabinet ministers in his office and one of them told an off-colour joke about submarines. “Credlin stood up and stormed out of the room. A distressed Abbott took off after her. She walked back in a few minutes later, with Abbott following closely behind her. The prime minister addressed his bemused colleagues, saying: ‘I think we owe Peta an apology.’ He turned to the towering inferno beside him. ‘Sorry, Peta,’ he said. A couple of them, including Joe Hockey, chimed in: ‘Sorry, Peta.’ Credlin then launched into an angry lecture, telling them they were the reason the government was doing so badly among women.”

Yes, but - if she is that sensitive to sexism, how on earth did she put up with her boss's condescending treatment of Gillard?   Really, how can anyone sympathise with Credlin (even from a feminist perspective - like Jane Caro seems to be doing) given her supportive role with Abbott during that?  

An underwhelming set of reviews

*  From a couple of weeks back:  the last episode of the X Files reboot.  Terrible, just terrible.  The only possible explanation seems to be the suggestion I have read elsewhere:  that a studio forced reduction from an 8 part return to 6 episodes resulted in the compression of the crucial framing story to the point of nonsense.  Really, seriously, this needs to be the end of the show.

*  Kung Fu Hustle:  I mentioned last week how this was my first movie hire on Google Play, inspired as I was by Journey to the West to see more work by Cantonese writer/director/actor Stephen Chow.  Well, this earlier effort is not, in my books, anywhere near as good as Journey.  But it is interesting to note his humour style and imagination at play.  And most importantly:  the Google Play system worked well as a standard definition download watched on a big screen via a Chromecast.   The file download was just under 500 MB for a 90 minute movie, if I recall correctly, but the picture quality was fine enough.   Not sure I would bother with a HD download until I get a better TV.

*  Hail, Caesar:   the latest Coen brothers movie was interesting but, alas, a bit underwhelming.   The bits with George Clooney were all fine,  and the most memorable. But his story doesn't take up all that much screen time.  In many respects the movie was of unclear intent - some parts were suggesting an ironic take on big studio Hollywood, but they weren't quite playing that way.   Overall, it was a case of "not zany enough" compared to many of their earlier comedies.  As much as I like some of their earlier work, I still wonder if now critics see quality in their handicraft which isn't really there.  Their screenwriting help on Bridge of Spies, for example:  I didn't think the Coen-ish aspects of the final screenplay were particularly great.   Still, may they keep on working and (hopefully) one day reach a new comedy peak.

The Tony and Peta show

What's with all this kerfuffle about the matter of whether even Liberals thought Abbott and Credlin were having an affair?   The media is all over it due to Niki Savva's book, but as I noted in December, Peter Hartcher writing at Fairfax (perhaps using info from Savva) had written:

Some Liberals and even people from outside the party confronted Abbott before the February spill over the affair he was supposed to have been having with Credlin, the least original rumour in Australian politics. They were worried less about the reality than the perception.

So the news is actually at least 3 months old.  (And Hartcher might be a bit miffed about why it is that Savva can attract all the attention on this story, but it looks like no one reads his columns carefully!)

As I also wrote in December, it was clear that even News Ltd papers at the end of last year were making  innuendo about  their relationship.  Here's what I wrote:

...this seems to have attracted little attention from the rest of the media today.   (I find that odd.   But I find it even odder that both News Ltd and Fairfax outlets have taken to innuendo about Abbott and Credlin - going skiing together, staying in France together, Tony sleeping on her couch instead of spending his allowance on an actual hotel room - and neither of them, nor their spouses, come out to complain about it.  If I were the subject of such innuendo, and if I had not slept with my staffer, I think I could at least muster a press release of denial and then say I was not going to dignify it by addressing it again.  But just remaining silent despite the increasing openness of the innuendo?   Strange...)

Now, since I wrote that, we have had Abbott being accompanied by his wife on overseas trips, which is pretty strong evidence that if anything was ever on, it had probably long since finished.

But amongst (non Right wing) journalists, the only one who I have noticed who outright doesn't believe the rumour is Bernard Keane, who tweeted that it was "a lie".   I'd love to know why he thinks he can be so emphatic about that, given that the line every other journalist of credibility takes seems to me "I dunno, but it's a rumour that's been around a long, long time."

I note that the denials by Abbott and Credlin this weekend have been more along the lines of "we refuse to dignify this rumour with comment" rather than the more outright denial of "this is outrageous and hurtful to my family.  There has never been any affair."

So this is a great and (almost) entertaining mystery.

Let's list the "pro affair" evidence:

*  rumour of long standing amongst journalists and ALP members;  but also believed by many Coalition parliamentarians as the only explanation for his devotion to her keeping her job, and of their strange physical closeness in public;
*  lack of early and emphatic denial when clear innuendo appeared in press last year - even in Abbott friendly News Ltd papers;
*  lack of threat of defamation;

* the example of history regarding politicians and denials of affairs with staffers;
* some public address I saw some time ago where Abbott was joking about believing he had broken all of the 10 commandments, save for the one about murder (people who joke like that are usually sending a message that they hope humour will mask)
* for God's sake, just look at every photo of them taken together for the last 5 years!   They just look exceptionally close, and she has been by his side seemingly every minute when in public.

On the "no affair" side:

*  Credlin talking once about how Abbott knew about and helped her with attempts to fall pregnant by keeping her fertility stuff in the fridge in his office.  Would be remarkably unlikely that anything would be going on between them at that time;
*  despite many anti Abbott rumours about his marriage being shaky, no clear evidence I have ever seen that Marg was ever planning on leaving him;
*  Marg still travelling with him now;
*  his children not disowning him, either.

Using my powers of Holmes like deduction, I think that by far the most likely explanation is that there was some sexual indiscretion between them at some point in time,  one that "leaked" to some in Canberra, but that this was some years ago and (perhaps) was a very short term thing.    This would explain quite a few things:   the profile of Credlin some years ago (in the Australian?, the one where she talked about her fertility problems) which read as a pre-emptive strike about rumours of an affair;  the unwillingness of either of them to talk defamation or to deny in detail any affair;  the possible "giving the benefit of the doubt" of his wife and kids.

I am curious to see if I am ever vindicated in this theory.  

And as to why this matters:   politician's affairs generally don't, but if Abbot and Credlin had a "thing" going when he was trouncing around Australia on the election campaign as a family man with his daughters in tow,  his hypocrisy would be a thing to behold.  Especially given the appallingly sexist treatment Julia Gillard received on matters of her private life at the hands of Abbott and his supporters.  And besides, it is hard to remember any other PM who has taken on such a high profile staffer who can directly share blame for loss of internal support for her boss.   It's nothing like the interest in Jim Cairn's relationship with Junie Morosie, which really was just the conservative salaciousness of the day, as far as I know...

Update:  the more I read the way Credlin and Abbott have responded with variations on a "I won't dignify this with a response" theme, the more I think I am right.