Best blog pic found this week

A truly frightening pictorial comment on John McCain as a future US president.
Displayed by Club Troppo in its regular Missing Links feature.

You vs George W. Bush

Yesterday Barack Obama tried to make his e-mail money drive personal with this subject title:
You vs George W. Bush.

Right now you have a unique opportunity to go head-to-head with George W. Bush.
This week, John McCain and George Bush gathered behind closed doors, away from the cameras, to raise money for McCain's campaign.
McCain used Bush to raise a reported $3.5 million from a group of about 500 Republican contributors.
That's a lot of money that will undoubtedly be used to attack us and make the case to continue George Bush's failed policies.
But I have an idea about how we can match it. And we don't need George Bush.
Right now, someone who has already given once to the campaign is ready to give again -- but only if you make your first donation right now.
If you take the next step and decide to own a piece of this campaign, that supporter will double your gift.
You'll see the name and hometown of the person who matched your donation. And you can even choose to exchange a personal note about why you've decided to support a different kind of politics.
Double your impact -- your donation of $25 will equal $50 for our cause.
Now is the perfect time to make your first donation:
https://donate.barackobama.com/match
As the presumptive nominee of his party, John McCain has had a three-month head start to build his campaign. In that time, he's made his fundraising strategy clear.
In the words of one reporter, the gala fundraiser with Bush was "part of McCain's delicate effort to find the balance between embracing an unpopular president and taking advantage of his huge continuing draw with well-heeled Republicans."
We'll see more of this dance in the weeks and months ahead, but we already know the steps.
As we prepare to take on John McCain, now is our first chance to show that a grassroots movement of people giving only what they can afford can go toe-to-toe with the Bush-McCain fundraising machine.
And with the last three contests of the Democratic primary coming up in the next five days, the resources we're building right now are an urgent necessity.
Help build our movement by making a matching donation today:
https://donate.barackobama.com/match
John McCain can run from the cameras, but he can't hide from the fact that he's aiming to continue George Bush's policies for a disastrous third term.
Let's show that we're ready to take him on.
Thank you,
Barack

Exxon runs but it can't hide from DeSmogBlog

DeSmogBlog lays bare Exxon's claim that it no longer funds climate change denialist groups.

Exxon Mobil Corp. has cut funding to groups raising questions about climate change from human-generated carbon dioxide, a move taken on the eve of its annual meeting in the face of criticism that the oil giant isn't as green as some of its rivals.
Spokesman Gantt Walton confirmed Tuesday that in 2008, Exxon Mobil (XOM) scrapped funding for the Capital Research Center, the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow, the Frontiers of Freedom Institute, the George C. Marshall Institute and the Institute for Energy Research.
"We discontinued contributions to several public-policy research groups whose position on climate change could divert attention from the important discussion about how the world will secure the energy required for economic growth in an environmentally responsible manner," Walton said.

On the surface, this looks somewhat promising, especially considering that Exxon cut funding to the notorious climate change skeptics at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) last year.
But a healthy dose of skepticism on our side is important. Let's dig below that glossy corporate surface and follow the money.
Last year, Greenpeace pointed out that although Exxon stopped its handouts to the CEI, it was still up to no good:
ExxonSecrets has obtained the company's Exxon Foundation 2005 report to the IRS. Exxon told the IRS that that it funded 14 groups specifically for their climate change work. But somehow the company didn’t mention this in public.
[Emphasis added.]
In addition to those 14 groups, Exxon was also still giving millions to other front groups that faithfully pump out global warming denier propaganda (pdf , pp. 10-15).

Full article here.

farm machinery

I found a rotary hoe out in one of the machine dumps that that old farms seem to accumulate. It was covered with rust, crud and years of sediment. The basic structure looked sound enough, so I pulled it out and brought it into the house yard then hosed it off for closer inspection.

When I had taken the hoe arm out and removed the bearings, to my surprise the chain drive worked and looked in good condition, the gear box did not look to bad either. The bearing would need replacing since they had considerable wobble in them. I started to think that may be I could get this hoe working again.

I called an engineering place for their advice; they will be out next week. I also started an internet search for parts.

Then it struck me the hoe was a Howard Rotovator and I could not help comparing the hoe to the ex prime minister. Both are old, carrying the crud and rust of many years and both have lost their bearings.

This started me thinking what sort of farm equipment the current batch of politicians would b like.

Peter Garrett sprung to mind, he is defiantly a fence strainer, spare lean and under pressure.

Brendan Nelson's a star picket, extremely useful but mainly overlooked, place every where as a temporary support and bashed around a lot.

Malcolm Turnbull caused me some problems because as hard as I tied the best I could come up with was a ride on mower. Too much of a silvertail to be a true farm machine.

Kevin Rudd is obviously a laser level, sharp and to the point could miss the bigger picture?

If you have other examples I would be keen to hear them.

Look Mum, we're floating! Continuing inaction regarding projected sea-levels on Australian east coast

Local government and residents in New South Wales coastal areas were promised data, fine resolution mapping and specific projections on rising sea levels last year by both the Federal and State governments.

The map will identify coastal roads, homes, businesses, transport and port facilities in danger of going under water if sea levels continue rising.

A report from one or other of the two higher governments should have been lobbing onto desks in draft form by now.
Instead many coastal residents are still waiting for news, as it seems are some councils.

Central Coast residents have seen one version of their projections.
Ballina knows its in the firing line, but residents apparently have no firm details yet except for one specific area.
Clarence Coast residents are aware that there will be coastline change and some saltwater inundation, but only have CSIRO basic data to refer to.

There isn't a soul on the coast by now who isn't aware that property values and insurance cover are going to be affected by climate change impact predictions, yet the Rudd and Iemma Governments are seemingly intent on keeping us all in the dark for as long as possible.

All we are hearing is talk, talk, talk. For heavens sake, Prime Minister and Premier, don't wait until the water is lapping our ankles before giving us a choice of how we respond to rising sea levels.


The Sydney Morning Herald reported yesterday.

THE prospects for waterfront properties in NSW are "stark", say experts addressing a local government conference today on sea-level rises due to global warming.
Governments are planning for rises of up to a metre by the end of this century. That would flood tens of thousands of properties along Australia's east coast.
Councils have asked the State Government to reveal its interim projections for rising sea levels until 2100 so they can assess development applications properly and plan measures for coastal areas and estuaries.
Governments at all levels, and the public, are yet to appreciate the scale of the threat, some at the conference believe.
"At the moment, we're in a state of paralysis," said Peter Cowell, a marine scientist at the University of Sydney. "It's very difficult to get people to think long-term on this."

Rudd, Iemma, Scipione and all make fools of themselves for art

Recently I've been tripping over the media reports on Bill Henson's art and the move to lock it away (presumably along with artist, models and gallery directors).
Yesterday the media told us that our elected wowsers and their police lackeys were now going after images of Henson's art on the Internet.
This sounded rather an interesting exercise so I decided to see what Rudd, Iemma and Scipione would be up against.
Stone the crows! There are tens of thousands of copies of Henson's photographic art on thousands of sites out there on the world wide web.
Pick a country, gallery, media or blog type and Henson's art is likely to turn up somewhere.
Google Images is chocka.
Hey fellas, perhaps you need to give Tony Abbott, Brendan Nelson and Hetty an atlas and a large box of matches if you want the job done.
If you think I'm laughing at you all, you'd be right. But then I'm old enough to remember the last dying gasps of the long controversy over Norman Lindsay's art.
Psssst, Scippie - wanna buy a postcard?

Thought police rule: Senate internet surfing spy blocks senators from reading gay newspaper website

The Senate Standing Committee on Finance and Public Administration budget estimates hearing on Monday 26 May 2008 is throwing up some strange instances.

Apparently the desire to stop senators accessing inappropriate material on the internet, also known as research censorship, had resulted in a well-known gay newspaper being blocked from view.
It took Senator Nettles' staff a good week to get permission for, wait for it, "temporary access to the site".

Senator Nettles was also blocked when researching the ramifications of recently announced NSW Government policy on the agricultural production of industrial quality hemp. The site she was attempting to access was considered in the category of "illegal drugs".

It seems that the Senate IT filtering program is being supplied by Websense.

This is what Websense, with its head office in California and an office in North Sydney, has to say about itself.
Websense provides a unique combination of Web, content, and user intelligence to stop threats at their source, and accurately control the "who, what, where, and how" of network security.

The Senate appears to have opted for a filtering program which has the following features:
Websense Client Policy Manager (CPM) provides a comprehensive endpoint security solution for desktops, laptops, and servers that proactively protects organizations against known and unknown endpoint security threats. CPM prevents the installation and execution of unauthorized applications and enforces application use policies with its comprehensive database of categorized applications, which is updated daily. CPM is an easy-to-implement, low risk, and highly effective alternative to behavior-based Host Intrusion Prevention Systems (HIPS). The comprehensive coverage of both “whitelist” (good) and “blacklist” (bad) applications allows for granular, dynamic, and highly flexible application policies. This provides a critical layer of application awareness that complements desktop antivirus and personal firewalls while stopping today's fast-moving and blended security threats.

Websense Client Policy Manager benefits:
Addresses weaknesses in existing antivirus, anti-spyware, personal firewall, and patch management processes to render today’s attacks harmless.
Provides application awareness and usage policy enforcement on the endpoint for blocking malicious software while ensuring compliance and productivity.
Prevents malicious applications from changing registry settings and tracks suspicious registry activities.
Protects remote and mobile users operating outside of the network or without standard security updates or patches.
Includes protection from the threats and compliance risks around web access and URL content for remote and mobile users.
Works with Network Access Control (NAC) solutions to enforce policy on devices trying to enter the network, denying access to non-compliant endpoints.
Via integrations, enables network-level protection from inbound threats and creates dynamic and application-aware firewalling.
Provides multiple levels of control to prevent the launch or mitigate the propagation of security attacks.

What all this apparently means is that the Senate has blocked senators' PCs from seeing websites on a blacklist based on broad categories of 'bad' types (inclusion decided by Websense) and, that any use of a senator's PC can be tracked right down to the last millisecond of any search or email sent/received.

Although it is still rather strange that this supposed protection against security threats just happens to block the pet hates of Family First's only elected representative and self-appointed moral guardian of Australia, Senator Fielding.

A quick Google shows that Websense has a history of inappropriately blocking sites from Amnesty International, through to the Red Cross, Air America, service blogs and individual bloggers who make political comment. Last year it was blocking Yahoo mail.

As the problems with Websense seem to continue up to date, here is a website advising on how to bypass this filter.
Perhaps senators should consider using this information if the President of the Senate doesn't come to his senses, or alternatively switching to IE7 which Websense is said not to currently filter.

As it is unlikely that mere voters are going to get a straight answer from either Harry Evans or the Rudd Government on how much this gigantic invasion of privacy is costing or why it is even necessary, perhaps it's time to ask the source about blacklists, why it blocks certain content, why it takes so long to change instructions and costs associated with its security/filtering programs. Here is a Websense email contact.
Annoy the company as much as it is obviously annoying some senators.

Don't muck with the ducks

Five foot under the worst head cold of the season and I couldn't care less about politics.
So, in North Coast Voices just-for-fun tradition - a para from ANU's student mag Woroni on the wonderful world of Canberra ducks.

The ducks own the campus.
They own the creek. They own the ovals. They most definitely own the roads, defiantly taking way too long to waddle across the pedestrian crossings (yes, they use them) while cars are backed up into the distance. University regulations place harming a duck alongside killing a unicorn, and you must learn to respect their dominion.
You may wonder why I conclude with this observation. But by spring, you too, fresh first year, will understand the dominance of these creatures when you’re running for your life from a fiercely maternal duck going straight for your shins, after you dared to enjoy the sight of her ridiculously cute offspring.
Even as I write this, somewhere in the Chancellery, Professor Chubb is sitting at his desk, receiving orders from a militant duck barking over his shoulder.
Don’t muck with the ducks.

This sort of political self-indulgence has got to stop, Mr. Rudd

ABC News this morning.

 

The Senate Estimates Committee has been told that the 2020 summit in April has already cost the Government $1.9 million in contracts and other invoices are yet to be received.

The costs cover things such as uniforms, catering, events management and transport.

Liberal Senator Michael Ronaldson has been particularly critical of a funding for a time capsule he has described as self-indulgent.

"What a lot of fluff, honestly and truly, $11,000," he said.

The Federal Government has also faced a grilling over a media contract for the 2020 summit, which was awarded to the wife of the Defence Minister's media adviser.

The Opposition has questioned the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet about a contract that was given to a media company called CMAX.

 

On the NSW North Coast we have some of the least affordable housing, lowest individual incomes and longest public dental treatment waiting lists in Australia.

So it is a real slap in the face when the level of indulgence displayed by the Rudd Government is exposed.

This is the same government who cries it's budget is too restricted this year to bring disabled pensioners up to the same financial status as other pensioners receiving Centrelink or Dept. of Veteran's Affair's payments.

 

It is even more galling when it is revealed in the estimates committee hearing last Monday that taxpayers footed the bill for the Clerk of the Senate to attend because of the position he held but not in any official capacity.

Apparently the taxpayer was paying for all manner of politician and public servant to attend as recipients of unsolicited invitations.

It seems we paid a great deal of money for government shepherds to herd the summiteer flock.

The other side of the debate about Bill Henson's art

The Age has this full text of writer Alison Croggon's letter on behalf of "Creative Australia 2020 Summit representatives".

"As members of the Creative Stream of the Australia 2020 Summit, we wish to express our dismay at the police raid on Bill Henson's recent Sydney exhibition, the allegations that he is a child pornographer, and the subsequent reports that he and others may be charged with obscenity.

The potential prosecution of one of our most respected artists is no way to build a Creative Australia, and does untold damage to our cultural reputation. The public debate prompted by the Henson exhibition is welcome and important. We need to discuss the ethics of art and the issues that it raises. That is one of the things art is for: it is valuable because it gives rise to such debate and difference, because it raises difficult, sometimes unanswerable, questions about who we are, as individuals and as members of society. However, this on-going discussion, which is crucial to the healthy functioning of our democracy, cannot take place in a court of law.

We invite the Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, and the NSW Premier, Mr Iemma, to rethink their public comments about Mr Henson's work. We understand that they were made in the context of deep community concern about the sexual exploitation of children. We understand and respect also that they have every right to their personal opinions. However, as political leaders they are influential in forming public opinion, and we believe their words should be well considered. We also call on the Minister for Environment Heritage and the Arts, Mr Garrett, to stand up for artists against a trend of encroaching censorship which has recently resulted in the closure of this and other exhibitions.

We wish to make absolutely clear that none of us endorses, in any way, the abuse of children. Mr Henson's work has nothing to do with child pornography and, according to the judgment of some of the most respected curators and critics in the world, it is certainly art. We ask for the following points to be fairly considered:

1. Mr Henson is a highly distinguished artist. His work is held in all major Australian collections including the Art Gallery of NSW, Art Gallery of SA, Art Gallery of WA, National Gallery of Victoria and the National Gallery of Australia. Among international collections, his work is held in the Solomon R Guggenheim Museum, New York; the Victoria and Albert Museum, London; San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; the Los Angeles County Museum of Art; the Denver Art Museum; the Houston Museum of Fine Art; 21C Museum, Louisville; the Montreal Museum of Fine Art; Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris; the DG Bank Collection in Frankfurt and the Sammlung Volpinum and the Museum Moderner Kunst, Vienna. Major retrospectives of Mr Henson's work at the Art Galleries of NSW and Victoria attracted more than 115,000 people, and produced not one complaint of obscenity. His work has also been studied widely in schools for many years.

2. Mr Henson has been photographing young models for more than 15 years. Until now, there has been no suggestion by any of his subjects or their families of any abusive practices. On the contrary, his models have strongly defended his practice and the feeling of safety generated in his process, and have expressed pride in his work. We suggest that the media sensationalism and the criminalisation of laying charges against Mr Henson, his gallery and the parents of the young people depicted in his work, would be far more traumatic for the young people concerned than anything Mr Henson has done.

3. The work itself is not pornographic, even though it includes depictions of naked human beings. It is more justly seen in a tradition of the nude in art that stretches back to the ancient Greeks, and which includes painters such as Caravaggio and Michelangelo. Many of Henson's controversial images are not in fact sexual at all. Others depict the sexuality of young people, but in ways that are fundamentally different from how naked bodies are depicted in pornography. The intention of the art is not to titillate or to gratify perverse sexual desires, but rather to make the viewer consider the fragility, beauty, mystery and inviolabilty of the human body. In contrast, the defining essence of pornography is that it endorses, condones or encourages abusive sexual practice. We respectfully suggest that Henson's work, even when it is disturbing, does nothing of the sort. I would personally argue that, in its respect for the autonomy of its subjects, the work is a counter-argument to the exploitation and commodification of young people in both commercial media and in pornographic images. Many of us have children of our own. The sexual abuse and exploitation of children fills us all with abhorrence. But it is equally damaging to deny the obvious fact that adolescents are sexual beings. This very denial contributes to abusive behaviour, because it is part of the denial of the personhood of the young. In my opinion, Mr Henson's work shows the delicacy of the transition from childhood to adulthood, its troubledness and its beauty, in ways which do not violate the essential innocence of his subjects. It can be confronting, but that does not mean that it is pornography. Legal opinion is that if charges were laid against Mr Henson, he would be unlikely to be found guilty. The seizure of the photographs, and the possible prosecution of Mr Henson, the Rosyln Oxley9 Gallery or the parents of Henson's subjects, takes up valuable police and court time that would be much better spent pursuing those who actually do abuse children.

4. Perhaps the most distressing aspect of the trial-by-media to which Mr Henson and his work has been subject over the past few days, is how his art has been diminished and corrupted. The allegations that he is making child pornography have done more to promote his work to possible paedophiles than any art gallery, where the work is seen in its proper, contemplative context. It is notable that the attacks on Mr Henson's work have, almost without exception, come from those who are unfamiliar with the photographs, or who have seen them in mutilated or reduced images on the internet.

If an example is made of Bill Henson, one of Australia's most prominent artists, it is hard to believe that those who have sought to bring these charges will stop with him. Rather, this action will encourage a repressive climate of hysterical condemnation, backed by the threat of prosecution.

We are already seeing troubling signs in the pre-emptive self-censorship of some galleries. This is not the hallmark of an open democracy nor of a decent and civilised society. We should remember that an important index of social freedom, in earlier times or in repressive regimes elsewhere in the world, is how artists and art are treated by the state.

We urge our political leaders to follow the example of Neville Wran, when in 1982 a similar outcry greeted paintings by Juan Davila. At that time, Mr Wran said: "I do not believe that art has anything to do with the vice squad". With Mr Wran, we believe the proper place for debate is outside the courts of law."

Alison Croggon, Writer

Signatories:

Louise Adler, CEO & Publisher-in-Chief, Melbourne University Publishing
Geoffery Atherden, Writer
Stephen Armstrong, Executive Producer, Malthouse Theatre
James Baker, Tax advisor and accountant
Geraldine Barlow, Curator
Larissa Behrendt, Professor of Law, University of Technology Sydney
Cate Blanchett, Actor
Daryl Buckley, Musician
Leticia Cacares, Theatre Director
Karen Casey, Visual Artist
Kate Champion, Choreographer, Artistic Director Force Majeure
Rachel Dixon, New media developer
Phoebe Dunn, Chief Executive Officer, Australian Commercial Galleries Association
Jo Dyer, Executive Producer, Sydney Theatre Company
Kristy Edmunds, Artistic Director, Melbourne International Festival of the Arts
Saul Eslake, Economist
Richard Gill, Artistic Director, Victorian Opera
Peter Goldsworthy, Writer
Michael Gow, Playwright
Marieke Hardy, Writer and broadcaster
Sam Haren, Artistic Director, The Border Project
Frank Howarth
Cathy Hunt, Creative consultant
Nicholas Jose, Writer
Andrew Kay, Producer
Ana Kokkinos, Film maker
Sandra Levy
Matthew Lutton, Theatre director
Nick Marchand, Artistic Director, Griffin Theatre
Sue Maslin, Producer, Film Art Doco Pty Ltd
Elizabeth Ann Macgregor, Director, Museum of Contemporary Art
Callum Morton, Visual Artist
Rosemary Myers, Artistic Director, Windmill Performing Arts
Rachel Healy, Director Performing Arts, Sydney Opera House
Liza Lim, Composer
Jan Minchin, Director, Tolarno Galleries
Helen O'Neil, Executive producer
Charles Parkinson, Artistic Director, Tasmanian Theatre Company
David Pledger, Theatre director
Marion Potts, Theatre Director
Katrina Sedgwick, Festival Director, Adelaide Film Festival

Additional signatories:

The following support the appeal contained in this letter without necessarily endorsing the detailed argument:

John Coetzee, Novelist
Ramona Koval, Writer and broadcaster

Bloggers who may have posted Henson images as part of their participation in the public debate on this issue should be aware that NSW Police have issued thinly veiled threats relating to such postings.

They say that laughter's the best medicine

There's one thing you can always rely on a Aussie pollie for - a good laugh.

Liberal Party leader Brendan Nelson raised a laugh on Monday for calling the values police out on the Labor candidate in the Gippsland by-election because he was a Water Water cultural festival director when Beautiful Losers was performed.
The laugh arose because Nelson himself had so recently endorsed the anti-social behaviour, chair sniffing.
Yesterday we all found out that Nelson had forgotten to look into the history of this risque musical.
It seems that another festival director and a Liberal Party state leader to boot, was in the chair when the same musical was performed much earlier at the Melbourne International Comedy Festival.
So if Wee Brennie were to try to hold to his twisted logic, then 'Red' Ted Baillieu would also be displaying behaviour inconsistent with expected standards.
Can't have it both ways, mate.

The second guffaw of the week came when the Prime Minister was caught out in a very similar way.
Rudders has spent much of his air time since Budget night hammering the Opposition for its behind the scenes disunity over fuel policy, only to have one of his ministers outed as opposing his own pet petrol scheme, Fuel Watch.
The PM's mouth did the cat quince thing during Question Time everytime this was pointed out.
What's sauce for the goose....

Their hypocrisy appears to be plastered on so thickly, that I imagine before either Rudd or Nelson lay their heads on the pillow each night, their wives have to breakout a chisel and hammer to find the man underneath.