When I was young I would see something I thought was unfair, have
a rant about it (obviously have not changed over the
years) and my dad would mutter under his
breath“bloody bleeding heart liberal”. As
a youngster I never really knew what that meant, though I did get
the gist that my dad thought I was being soft.
Reading the news about the highly anticipated or dreaded -
depending on how you feel about the future of Queensland
– Costello report yesterday afternoon, it is
pretty clear that the state I love is about to be parcelled up
& sold to the highest bidder. In a nutshell Mr Costello
is telling his liberal mate Mr Campbell Newman to “Sell assets and outsource health
services”. So where does that leave the people? I
am pretty sure I know, though Kay Rollison has expressed my
concerns very well in her recent article: “Privatisation: Coming to Public Schools
and Hospitals Near You”. Ms Rollison basically
infers that the LNP Qld Government is setting the blueprint for
what an Abbott Federal Government is planning to do to the
country as a whole. I have a terrible feeling she may be
right and again I ask, what about the people? The people
who can’t afford private schools, the people who can’t afford a
private hospital, the people who are already struggling to pay
their ever increasing electricity bill, are we destined to a
future of the rich being wealthier, healthier & educated,
whilst the less affluent become poorer, die waiting for a
hospital bed & more ignorant due to poor public education
standards?
Is this what a so-called “Liberal” party should be doing, lets
see how the party so proud of their "Liberal Party Values" stack
up against the definition of the word 'liberal'?
Being an old fashioned sort of girl, I hit the dictionary for
definition of liberal and you know
what... The political party we call the “Liberals” do not
seem to fit the definition that the trusty old Oxford Dictionary
shows me. Let’s see...
willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions
different from one’s own – I don’t think so, the
demonization of Asylum Seekers alone is not liberal by
definition. Recent comments by Morrison & Abetz display
exactly how ‘accepting’ the liberal party are – personally I
would prefer to be warned that one Morrison or Abetz was living
next to me than an asylum seeker trying to start a new life with
their family. (their
words and views)
open to new ideas – Gee that is a funny
one, pretty sure that the LGBT Australian’s are pretty sure that
there will be no gay marriage under a liberal government, in
fact, dialling back Civil Unions was on
the top of the LNP Qld Govt list when they rocked into power last
year...
favourable to or respectful of individual rights and
freedoms – Well if Mr Abbott has his way, women
definitely do not have reproductive rights or
freedoms? Now get back in that kitchen & make your
husbands dinner, unless of course you work for or are related to
Mr Abbott, then of course that is ok, you are obviously one of
the ‘good’ women...
(in a political context) favouring individual
liberty, free trade, and moderate political and social
reform – Free Trade I will give them, hell, they
will sell anything for a buck to the
highest bidder, on Economy & Industrial Relations being
the focus of why they should be elected. Social reform, not
so much, in fact, hitting the poorest with lowering the tax
threshold & and whatever Mr Abbott renames ‘Work
Choices’, is not exactly socially caring or responsible,
unless of course they are using the term “social reform”
literally and the reform is to make the poor poorer?
Theology regarding many traditional beliefs as
dispensable, invalidated by modern thought, or liable to
change. Oh I am sitting here laughing
again...
Climate Change Denial, no further explanation needed on that
one. Plenty of cash for chaplains in schools, don’t worry if the kid
can’t afford lunch, they have a chaplain to understand how
desperate their life is. But have to ensure that we stay
white & Christian, so get that indoctrination in young
UGH!
(of education) concerned with broadening a person’s
general knowledge and experience, rather than with technical or
professional training - Ahhh my personal
favourite. Well common education reform is ‘Gone-ski’
if Mr Abbott wins power, so again, maybe the Libs are only using
this definition to broaden the ‘general knowledge’ of the rich,
as they are the only ones who will be able to afford a quality
education for their kids. I won’t even start on how much
money the previous Lib Govt ripped out of
Universities.
(especially of an interpretation of a law) broadly
construed or understood; not strictly literal –
This may be the only part of the definition of liberal that this
party truly subscribes to, they are very liberal with legalities,
little things like it being OK for a liberal candidate to steal
pages from a MP's diary, Not declare pecuniary interests and
my personal favourite, the use of the term “Illegal” for asylum seekers.
given, used, or occurring in generous
amounts – I suppose they would get a 50% mark on
this one, as we can see in Qld, the LNP are very generous to
their donors, quite a few are getting nice outsourcing
contracts. Though pretty sure taking away the School kids bonus from families
already struggling is not exactly generous? Though, as long
as your rich you will still get your extra on Super & Private
Medical, oh and don’t let me forget the extra for your private
school, so apologies, the liberals are very generous, as long as
you are already affluent. The rest of the
population... yeah, sorry, stiff bikkies, no generosity for
you.
Last but not least... a person of liberal
views – The fact that Mr Abbott has backed what
Morrison & Abetz have said wipes this one out and the fact
that the charming “Cory Bernardi”, is still in the
Senate (resigned as parliamentary secretary, but still has a
job?) clearly illustrates Mr Abbotts liberals do not fit this
part of the liberal definition...
Now maths is not my strong point, but looking at the definition
of ‘liberal” in my old mate oxford, I don’t think the Liberal
Party of Australia even fit 25% of that definition? So I
guess my question to you friends is... If you only
subscribe liberal views to those that can afford to pay for the
privilege, are you “liberal”? Is the naming of this
party maybe false advertising & fraudulent?
Then again, I am just a punter, let me know what you think?
Maybe you have some other examples for me, toss them below in the
comments if you do :)
Cheers
Noely @YaThinkN
