Local election wrap.

About a month ago I wrote a post about the upcoming Surf Coast council election and made the following prediction on who would get in.

Hodge, Mears, Tutt, Dean, McKinterick, Humphrey, Remenyi, Northeast, Schroeter.

Another commentator called Harry wrote

Lewis to Mckiterick
Foord to Remenyi
Foss to Mears
Webster to Coker
Wapshott to Kerr
Hodge to Northeast

My two doubtfull ones are Mears, because she has to poll well, and above Foss and Northeast, and that might prove difficult to do.
Also Hodge, as she will need to poll well on primaries, however, I believe Mc Kiterick will steal her votes, and therefore she will struggle.

So here we are. Let's stick them on the fridge and see who's closest.

Sorry to break this to you Harry, but my predictions were a lot closer than yours. The only one I got wrong was Humphrey. I thought he'd get in on name recognition alone, but he's bombed out and Libby Coker has taken his spot.

That makes a council with six progressive voices, two conservatives (Schroeter and Tutt), one person (Remenyi) who will be hard to read. But the great thing about this new council is the lack of one dysfunctional and downright nasty element who has done nothing, I repeat nothing to benifit the community.

And can I be the first to say, piss off Ron and don't let the door hit you on the way out.

UPDATE
First preference votes
McKITERICK, Brian 1487
MEARS, Libby 2181
LEWIS, Michael 797
FOSS, John 408
TUTT, Jim 1311
FOORD, Rodney 566
NORTHEAST, Simon 1806
WAPSHOTT, Elizabeth 356
HODGE, Rose 1574
SCHROETER, Lindsay A. 1936
KERR, Garry 731
WEBSTER, Dean 2339
REMENYI, Joe 967
COKER, Libby 2279
HUMPHREY, Ron 706


Elected: WEBSTER, Dean (1st elected)
Elected: COKER, Libby (2nd elected)
Elected: MEARS, Libby (3rd elected)
Elected: McKITERICK, Brian (4th elected)
Elected: SCHROETER, Lindsay A. (5th elected)
Elected: NORTHEAST, Simon (6th elected)
Elected: HODGE, Rose (7th elected)
Elected: TUTT, Jim (8th elected)
Elected: REMENYI, Joe (9th elected)

Enrolment: 27389
Formal Votes: 19444
Informal Votes: 971 (4.76% of the total votes)
Voter Turnout: 20415 (74.54% of the total enrolment)
Quota: 1945

Surf Coast Election

24 hours before the results are officially announced, my source has said it ain't looking good for Rodney Foord, John Foss, Garry Kerr, Michael Lewis, Ron Humphrey and his stooge Elizabeth Wapshott.

Apart from the rejection of the talented, hard working, and intelligent John Foss, it looks like the voters of the Surf Coast have made a very very good choice.

Can't wait to be at the announcement and see Ron's inevitable temper tantrum.

Get off the stage Anton

Can anyone tell why Anton Enus is hosting the Walkley's and WTF is that thing around his neck?

Anton is a credible journo but if the Walkleys want to be a ratings winner, they've got to get a new host.

I suggest a co-host situation with a Miranda Devine/Janet (the thieving racist) Albrectsen combo versus Mike Carlton and Stephen Mayne.

I also think someone should also be keeping Glen Milne well lubricated/in his normal state.

In the days when ratings mean everything, you know these suggestions make sense.

Southern Cross Pussies

This story about a bunch of racists hoods called the Southern Cross Soldiers isn't nearly as scary as it sounds.

The SCS boast of having 200 members, but I'm tipping the number would be a lot closer to 20. And believe me they are not too bright.

Sean's a member and he likes "Footy and shit, having fun with mates, chilin (sic), partys (sic), goin(sic) out, mototrbike(sic) riding" He was also "to (sic) cool 4 (sic) skool (sic) so i (sic) left and now im (sic) an apprentice carpenter" Too thick for school more like.

Spizz looks and sounds like a pure dumb bogan and I wonder what his employer, Reece Plumbing, thinks of his My Space page.



Ash calls himself
"The Enforcer" but he looks as soft as puppy shit.

My names ash,23, huge MMA fan, an extremely pround aussie. i wont take anyone speaking ill of this great country... do it in front of me and i'll smash your teeth out the back of your head. ..... thats all i can be farked writing, if ya wanna no anything else just ask... not that any one reads this shit anyway..... so why the hell do i keep writing.... what a looser......

To paraphrase Ash; he is a violent semi-literate racist, but at least he got one thing correct. He is a looser.

The rest of them are...

Going to shit themselves when challenged


Fake tough guys who need to make stupid poses to try and make themselves look big


And just plain ugly



At least the good people at Fight Dem Back are on the case and the little Nazi fucker's parents will be informed soon.

And one more thing you dumb little turds. WTF are you proud of having neo-nazi links and putting pictures of Australian soldiers on your web page. The diggers fought against nazis you idiots.

Sending a message.

When a sinking ship appeared near Ashmore reef the other day the conservative tossers that sit on the opposition benches got all excited about their chance to blow the dog whistle.

Immigration minister Senator Evans made the right call when he said, "As always, the health and wellbeing of the people is our primary concern".

And true to form, the Liberal cunts who would gladly whip up xenophobia for electoral gain said the federal government needed to send a stronger message to people smugglers.

What exactly does shadow minister Sharman Stone mean by sending a strong message to people smugglers? Is she harking back to the bad old days when her party locked up refugees on desolate islands and left them there to mentally disintegrate as a means to punish people smugglers?

Not only do the Libs have to explain their policy of punishing refugees to attack those making a buck from their suffering, they also have to get with the times. Things have changed. None of the papers are calling them "illegal immigrants" anymore.
There has been a massive editorial shift by all the Australian papers. And this shift represents a titanic movement away from the "fuck off we're full attitude" the Howard government made popular.

Don't you get it Stone? The vast majority of Australia's now know the previous government's policy attacking refugees was profoundly cruel, internationally embarrassing, and morally indefensible.

You fuckers are never going to bring back this shameful period in our history. It's hard to argue in favour of locking up children indefinitely behind razor wire from the opposition benchers. Don't even try you cum rags.

Somebody get Henderson a tissue.

Gerard Henderson's big whinge about the ABC documentary "The Howard Years" is predictably pathetic.

In typical modern day conservative fashion, Henderson claims an entire documentary is biased without actually producing any evidence.

He could have saved his judgement until he saw the whole series.

Henderson has seen two episodes of this four part documentary and all he has come up with, is one line "proving" bias.

What's more, the publicity flyer claims that Australia was "an early conscript for the war on terror". In fact, the Australian Army actually lobbied to be part of the United States-led force that invaded Afghanistan to attack the Taliban in 2001.

A semantic argument with a highly dubious claim that "the Australian Army actually lobbied to be part of the United States-led force" is no proof of bias. Finding factual errors would have improved Henderson's argument, but it's pretty hard to argue that Howard did take on Hanson as soon as she started mouthing off about Asians.

In another stunning display of stupidity, Henderson ignores the fact that everyone interviewed in the first show was a conservative insider. There is not one dissenting voice so far. If you want true balance, get someone on saying that Howard was a ruthless racist war-mongerring anti-environment mother fucker. Unlike Henderson, that non-existent person could find plenty of evidence to back up their view.

Henderson has sweet FA to support his claims of bias so he then attacks the documentary's narrator Fran Kelly, because, "her past interviews with Howard had been "confrontational and tense"". I know this would be hard for Henderson to understand, but that is exactly what the fourth estate should be doing, especially when faced with extremist policies.

One wonders why the SMH wastes valuable column space on this ridiculously biased Howard arse-kisser who couldn't back up an opinion with facts even if his life depended on it.

Down Anglesea way.

With teh local election campaign in full swing, Surf Coast council candidate signs have been popping up all over the shire. For those who don't know, placing signage up in public places without council permission is illegal, but that hasn't stopped Jim Tutt plastering twenty odd signs in Anglesea along the Great Ocean Road.

Green's candidate Simon Northeast also had one illegal sign up, and a complaint was made to the shire. I have been informed that the complainant, in a stunning display of arrogance and hypocricy, was none other than Jim tutt.

If this is true, the man has no shame. Last time I checked, Jim doesn't actually own the Great Ocean Road, and maybe it's time he stopped acting like he owns Anglesea.

Tutt has stood for many elections before and he knows the score when it comes to signage. The sheer volume of material and the length of time they've been up demonstrates he clearly doesn't give a toss about shire by-laws. He did exactly the same last election. Unforgiveable behaviour.

Northeast's one sign may have been the result of one over-zealous supporter. It should be pulled down ASAP.

Just beat your kids instead.

After reading this article about the severe health problems facing obese kids and seeing a ten year old weighing 90kgs struggling in the heat today, I can only conclude that parent's who make their kids grossly overweight are child abusers.

Yes, I did say "make", and I did say "child abusers".

Sure there will be some kids who are unlucky genetically, but, I'm tipping the vast majority of fat kids are obese because of the following: terrible diets forced on them by parents, no exercise (because their parent's don't do any), and parents who don't act as healthy role models.

Fucked arteries, skyrocketing cholesterol, diabetes, blindness, and gout are all long-term medical issues that will see fat kids have painful and unhealthy lives.

And now back to my child abuse theory. If you belt a kid in the face at a supermarket you can expect your fellow shoppers to be appalled and call the cops, but if you look at it dispassionately, a black eye (disgraceful as it may be) is nothing compared to years of parent-inflicted diabetes.

A belting is obviously abuse and this gets noticed by child services. What is more shocking, and much more consequential, is long term dietary and exercise neglect that leads to obese children. A black eye goes away in a week whereas the health effects of obesity can last a (short) lifetime.

I look forward to the day when the parents of grossly obese kids are treated in the same way as parents who belt their children, or leave them in cars while they go and play the pokies.

Perhaps the federal government should set a slightly better example and ban junk food advertising during children's TV shows, and introduce a fat tax as soon as possible.

Fire away

With Rupert Murdoch about to hack the hacks at News Limited, who would you like to see lining up for the dole most?
	Andrew Bolt
	Tim Blair
	Janet Albrechtsen
	Piers Ackerman
	Caroline Overington
	Eddie Maguire
	Bill O'rielly
	Sean Hannity
pollcode.com free polls

Face it boys, you were W-R-O-N-G

When Sarah Palin was announced as John McCain's running mate, Andrew Bolt's sometime moderator, Bernard Slattery, emptied his ball-bag with excitement

...an inspired choice: Smart, a looker, a mum of five - one disabled, a proud wife, a record of fighting corruption and big politics and a moose hunter.
Don’t be surprised if she turns out to be the most popular political figure in years, for just one reason: she’s from outside the political machine and it shows.

His comment section was more or less the same.

Look on the bright side boys, she may have lost the election, but at least her family now has a kick arse wardrobe and she now knows that Africa is a continent

Who is to blame?

Given that the result of tomorrow's US election is a foregone conclusion, I thought I'd give conservatives a chance to blame someone or something.
Clearly, the Democratic win was not the fault of GWB who has done such a wonderful job running the country in the last eight years. And it certainly isn't McCain's fault. He's a true blue American hero. It couldn't be Palin's fault. She is a patriotic, gun carrying, moose shootin', anti-abortion, God-fearing, uber-shopping hockey mom with foreign relations experience. It's obviously some other reason, but what?

Please vote in this scientific poll so I can find out why Americans want a communist Muslim, who pals around with terrorists, and hates Joe the Plumber for president.

What is the main reason for America voting out my beloved Republican Party
	The leftist media hate conservatives.
	Republicans got the blame for Clinton's sub-prime crisis
	God hates America
	The American people are stupid
	Too many people picked on Sarah Palin
	The North East and Hollywood elite hate small town America
	Americans hates true heroes like McCain
	Too many negros are allowed to vote
	Not enough people found out the truth about Obama's Muslim family
	The country is full of homos that vote Democrat
pollcode.com free polls

Preference Crunching

With only weeks to go before the local elections in Victoria, I have just crunched the preferences for the Surf Coast Shire poll.

Basically I've added up all the preferences for each candidate and summed them on a spreadsheet.

Generally the lower the number the better the chance of getting elected.

Local copper Brian McKiterick has come in with a total of 97, and he stands a really good chance of getting in, even if his primary vote is low.

Jim Tutt (99) looks good on the surface, but he is getting preferences from several weak candidates. Tutt will probably dominate the oldie vote in Anglesea and get in anyway. Especially if he spends as much cash on this election as he did on the last poll.

Joe Remenyi had the third lowest total of 103, but I personally think he has done the best deal by far. Joe is in every candidates top 9. He'd have to bomb out big-time on primary votes not to get in.

Ron Humphrey's stooge candidate Elizabeth Whapshott (141) has got the worst preferences by far. She only has five top 9 preferences and she has virtually no chance of getting in.

John Foss (141) didn't fare much better, but he does get in nine candidates top 9.

Michael Lewis (106) is sitting pretty with 13 top nine selections. His own preference decisions, are politically all over the place and he will be a bit of a wild card.

Libby Mears, Rodney Foord, Libby Coker, and Simon Northeast have all done reasonably well on the preference front.

The current Mayor, Dean Webster (139) has been targetted big time by the conservatives. He still should get in on a strong primary vote.

Garry Kerr (141) and only six top 9s won't be getting in if he has to rely on preferences.

Rose Hodge and Lindsay Schroeter have both struggled when it comes to preferences but both have a substantial core group of supporters. Schroeter will probably get back Livingstone's conservative Winchelsea constituents and he should get back in.

And finally you've got Ron Humphrey who has bagged a record 7 last preferences. Half the field have put Ron last. Personally I think this is a travesty. I'm voting for Ron, purely for the fact that he offers such great comedic material. Who else is going to suggest terrorists could be financially supporting council candidates? Who else is going to leak info to the papers with his name and fax number on the top of the page? Who else is going to campaign for the re-introduction of mayoral robes?

AND WHO ELSE IS GOING TO BULLSHIT ABOUT NOT RUNNING ON A TICKET?

Let's compare Ron's and Whapshott's preferences.

Both preferenced McKinterick 9, Mears 14, Lewis 8, Foss 12, Tutt 3, Northeast 11, Hodge 15, Webster 13 and Coker 10. Ron put Whapshott number 2 on his ticket and Whapshott returned the favour to Ron. The only other differences were Remenyi 6/7 and Foord 7/6 and Schroeter 4/5 and Kerr 5/4.

I think "Talking out your arse" sums up Ron's "no ticket" claim perfectly.

Who needs to have a leak?

This Story about Surf Coast Shire councillors alleged conflicts of interest demonstrates how dysfunctional the current council is.

Basically we have got four councillors, (Tutt, Humphrey, Livingstone, and Schroeter) having a big formal sook about their colleagues, and the Ombudsman dismissing virtually all those complaints.

The Ombudsman's legislative compliance director, Dallas Mischkulnig, dismissed several other complaints in the letter, including that the shire used briefing sessions to make decisions which should be decided at public meetings and that the shire had a conflict of interest with the Great Ocean Road Coast Committee when it approved a multi-million dollar beachside restaurant on Fishermans Beach.

Another rejected complaint involved a (non) conflict of interest between Mayor Webster and the proponents of a wind farm near Winchelsea. The idiot councillors who made the allegations thought that because Webster declared an "interest" in the Surf Coast Energy Group, this somehow meant he had an interest in a totally unrelated company involved in the windfarm at Winchelsea. In the minds of Tutt, Humphrey, Livingstone, and Schroeter having an interest in a not-for-profit environmental group should somehow rule out making a decision on a commercial wind farm.

The complainants also had a whinge about the Mayor's regular column in the Surf Coast Times. FFS, this column has been running for years and it is so benign it's not funny. It certainly does not raise concerns about the Shire's administrative procedures, as alleged by the four windbags.

Tutt, Humphrey, Livingstone, and Schroeter also unsuccessfully complained about the selection process for the shire's planning committee.

Another failed complaint involved a Surf Coast Times article in which the Mayor responded to a letter to the editor that was published in the same issue. The whingers thought this was biased reporting. It's called journalism idiots. Have you tools heard of a right of reply?

So after all the whinging, the only thing that is going to happen is, council grass-mowing proceedures would be further investigated to see if the Mayor has any undeclared financial interests. It's hardly a direct hit boys.

And now for the interesting bit. Who leaked the Ombudsman's letter to the paper? There is no point asking the journo Aleks Devic. He of course isn't going to breach the journalist's code of ethics and reveal his sources. Bravo Aleks.

As for me, I've got no problems telling BLL readers who the source of the Advertiser's story was. It's not my story after all.

Just a quick message to Ron Humphrey, when you leak stories to the papers, it's not very smart having your name and fax number at the top of the page.