Myeshia Johnson Deserves Better

A lot has been written & said about Donald Trump’s handling of his call to Sgt. Johnson’s widow. Myeshia Johnson is only a young woman. She is now facing life alone with two small children and another one on the way. She appears to have been completely forgotten as each side lines up to take aim at other. She is the priority here, not the President.

It doesn’t matter what Donald Trump, John Kelly, you or I believe about the call. It’s how Myeshia Johnson feels that’s important. From all accounts, including feedback from her mother Myeshia Johnson was very upset after speaking with the President. That appears to stem more from the fact that Donald Trump didn’t even remember her husband’s name. But I’m sure the comment (confirmed by Myeshia’s mother) that Trump said, “He knew what he signed up for,” add to the hurt.

I have sympathy for Myeshia Johnson. My husband died suddenly while on his morning run December 2015.  He was fit and healthy his death was unexpected and tragic because he died alone on the street.  On hearing of the circumstances of his death an acquaintance said, “Well that’s one of risks.” I felt like hitting her. That’s like saying to someone who just lost someone in a motor vehicle accident; well they knew the risks when they got behind the wheel. In my case the comment stung me for weeks. So, given Sgt. Johnson’s circumstances I can understand how Myeshia Johnson must be feeling.

Donald Trump could have handled things so much better. It’s not good enough for people like General Kelly to dismiss the issue in claiming Donald Trump did his best. Sometimes our best is not good enough and we need to be honest enough to admit it. Donald Trump compounded the problem with his petulant and idiotic tweets. This is his modus operandi whenever he is criticised.

To be honest, I’m surprised General Kelly has allowed himself to be drawn into this fiasco. He has even resorted to lying in his attack on Congresswoman Wilson which is very disappointing. As for John Kelly citing his own experience on the death of his son, he forgets some important key differences. One, he was much old than Myeshia Johnson when he got the news. He wasn’t pregnant. John Kelly was a serviceman as was his son, she isn’t. He is a father; she is a wife and trust me it makes all the difference. In saying that I am not being dismissive of the devastation associated with losing a child.  However losing a husband brings with it a whole new set of other emotions and problems not experienced on the death of a child. One thing I have learnt over past 20 months is women experience grief differently to men.

If Trump had any compassion or understanding, he would have apologised to Sgt Johnson’s widow for causing more hurt and upsetting her even if it was unintentional. It’s called showing respect. Trump would have won a lot of admiration if he had. But it takes a man of honour to admit his mistakes. It is such a shame because it appears Donald Trump is too proud and I suspect too arrogant to ever admit an error. But isn't a sign of weakness to admit mistakes in fact it is a sign of strength.

As an example of how leaders deal with these stressful situations, someone mentioned this incident which involved President Bush. “President George W. Bush listened while a woman whose brother died in Iraq screamed at him and then hugged her to console her. He did not lash out.” Because whatever his flaws, President Bush understood the distress of woman who had lost her brother. There is the stark difference two Presidents.  

I don’t care what side of politics you are on it should never be used as a justification for overlooking  lack of compassion. I hope Myeshia Johnson finds the strength to see her through what will be the toughest battle of her life. I wish her well.

I hope the public brawling including attacks from the White House on those who in reality were only standing up and defending a grieving Gold Star Widow stop. Myeshia Johnson deserves better than this.

Energy Policy

The energy policy announcement has highlighted what has been blatantly obvious for sometime. The resentment of so many towards Malcolm Turnbull overrides any willingness to analyse and judge policy on merit. Despite what was announced this week which delivers on many of people's demands, the knockers just keep moving the goalposts.

One deluded little soul even claimed the Government’s energy policy is just Tony Abbott’s policy minus the Paris targets. People agreed with him. If that was true I would expect Tony Abbott and those same pro-Abbott supporters to be cheering and claiming victory over Malcolm Turnbull however they’re not. Instead, they are whining their little heads off. This highlights the idiocy of political debate driven by identity politics. It’s not about policy for some it’s about getting one back on the other guy.

Back to energy. It’s about time we faced facts. There is no magic pudding that will fix our energy mess. It has been a long time in the making so it won’t be turned around a few weeks; it will take years. Even then not everyone will get everything they want or demand. It is impossible to deliver all things to all people. So it is a matter of priorities. Whilst there are different priorities two impact the most on individuals and business; reliability and cost.

Our energy recovery time line will be driven by several factors. There are current legal agreements that must run the course. There are the required political negotiations with a hostile opposition being Labor/Greens. You can add to that mix  Micros like Pauline Hanson and One Nation who are already in the Labor camp criticising. Heavens knows how long those negotiations will take. That’s just on the Government side.

There are business leaders who have to convince boards to change direction. That’s no easy task. Plus, there is the imperative of attracting new investment to expand our traditional power sources to deliver stability. Let’s not forget regulators and other interest groups.

Trying to balance the needs of so many diverse stakeholders, including consumers is hard. You’d have to be naïve to think it isn’t. Whilst many only think of themselves the challenge goes well beyond. It pays to remember that.

Work has already started on costs. Recent Government pressure on power suppliers has delivered results. My new energy deal is significantly lower as a result.  All things being equal I should see a reduction of about $150 a quarter. Around $600 per year. The lesson is, pick up the phone and shop around. Far too many expect the government to do all the work and to deliver all their demands on a silver tray.

People are complaining about the measly price reduction under the policy announced yesterday. However, what about the perceived savings that will be delivered due to costs not rising? Plus that’s on top of any reductions we are currently enjoying.

Kerry Schott, chair of the Energy Security Board in responding to a question on the ABC about the guarantee said. “The guarantee is about providing a reliable power system and meeting the emissions targets set in the Paris agreement. What will happen when those mechanisms are put in place is that prices are likely to come down and they're likely to keep coming down.” That last comment is important. So, if we get the frame work right that’s what we can expect; prices to keep coming down. Win, win.

Josh Frydenberg pointed out yesterday, by 2030 the coal/gas share of the energy mix would be in the range of 64% -72%. He also rightly mentioned there were “more likely” to be upgrades or extensions in coal plants.  That should please conservatives. Now, the industry has some certainty on direction, I expect Josh Frydenberg is right and we will see that happen. You can’t expect business to invest if they don’t understand where Government or the country is heading. Now they have some certainty. You can bet Josh Frydenberg will continue to work with industry to achieve the coal/gas target assuming the government is re-elected. Given identity politics is rife in Australia there is no guarantee they will be. If we end up with Shorten and Labor all bets are off. So let’s not forget that. We play a role here.

Josh Frydenberg has also pointed out the new model is premised on ideas of no subsidies, no taxes, no trading schemes. Isn’t that what everyone has been screaming for? We also have the commitment of guaranteed supply something individuals and business has demanded. I would have thought that would generate some acknowledgement and credit  from the conservative side, but no it didn’t. Why? Because for a significant number their loathing for Turnbull is so entrenched they can’t give him credit for anything. That has to be the classic cut off your nose off spite your face scenario is ever there was one.

From where I sit there is a lot more positives than negatives in what was announced. More detail needs to be released however, on what we’ve been given it is a significant shift in the right direction. More should be encouraged.

If conservative voters want additional things like more coal fired power stations and nuclear power, then give the conservative Government the power to deliver it. Stop playing  “I’ll place my bet each way” and stymying the Government in the Senate. Labor, Greens, Independents and cause parties are not the solution. I also ask myself this question. Why would any Government continue to battle against the tide, when so called supporters have tied Governments hands behind their back as they did in 2013 and again in 2016. Why would any decent candidate sign up for that?

As Australians we have always prided ourselves on fairness. Giving people a fair go. I include giving my elected Government a fair go as well, when deserved. As a nation, and to our shame we seem to have lost our way on a fair go. I hope commonsense returns soon. Because identity politics is wrecking this country. When it’s reaches the point where sensible policy is dismissed based on who delivers it and not what it contains that in my humble opinion is insanity.

Same Sex Marriage Delarations

I will not be sharing how I vote on SSM on Facebook or any other social media site. How I vote is my business, no one else's. 

I don't have the urge to join the public declaration crowd. Why? Because I don't need anyone’s validation on whether I'm doing the right or wrong thing. The only person I have to justify my decision to is myself. 

More importantly I have friends in both camps. Friends I greatly respect along with respecting their right to hold their views. I won't be pushing my opinion down their throats. Or trying to guilt trip them into changing their minds as some have attempted to do. 

When I read declarations from people stating they will no longer associate with people based on how they vote I think debate has reached a whole new level of crazy. I judge people for who they are not what they believe. On how they treat others and how they treat me. So, I will still think my friends are awesome whether they vote Yes or No. Ticking a box won't change that. 

George Orwell Was Right

I think we should drop the tired and overplayed hashtag #fakenews and replace that with one much closer to what’s happening with alarming frequency;  #ignoringthefacts. One of my twitter buddies suggested #youcanthaveyourfacts at the same time as lamenting the prevention of the use of apostrophes in hashtags. A lament I share but that’s another story.

I know I bang on (great descriptive bang on) about comments to media columns. If I had any sense, I wouldn’t read them. I usually just end up with a headache due to clenching my teeth. But it is a sign of what people think and what they believe. It’s alarming how frequently in an effort to outdo each other the keyboard warriors just blithely ignore the facts. Then along comes the ‘like lemmings’. Dependent on whom the target of the assault is the like buttons can go into meltdown. I sit here shaking my head thinking did you even bother to read what was written? Or question the veracity of an opinion piece. Or even check updated news. It’s blatantly obvious they don’t.

A graphic example was a piece in the Australian on Friday featuring George Brandis and the Tony Abbott head-butt. The attack was rightfully condemned as it should be. Then, Brandis stated the attack had nothing to do with the SSM vote as had been reported ad nauseam through the day. Brandis was attacked left right and centre by the key board warriors. Most of them appear to be exLibs who salivate over any opportunity to stick it to the Govt.

One of the more irrational claims came from someone who accused Brandis of being useless. We could debate that based on fact. However, he then on went to claim Brandis should be sacked and stated, “But, what else would expect from someone who wouldn’t step in over the young lady from Canberra who was sacked for using an It’s OK to Vote NO, frame on Facebook.”  When it was pointed out Brandis can’t step in, that was completely dismissed but about 50 odd people liked the original comment. Not one person acknowledged the response that Brandis didn’t have the authority to interfere in a perceived case of unfair dismissal. Facts tossed out the window. Hands over ears, “We don’t want to hear that.”

For my sins I also commented that the only person who knew why the attack took place was the attacker. George Brandis (unless he had been advised by the police given an arrest had been made) and the rest of the know-alls  were merely speculating. That is fact; any claim was pure speculation. The key board warriors turned on me because I had the temerity to state the obvious. I received some absurd replies. But you get used to that. I was even accused of making a PC comment. How strange that a statement of fact is considered PC. At least I dodged the “fake-news” slur.

As it turned out Brandis was correct. I suspect he was already aware of that. The attack wasn’t SSM related. The attacker confirmed that in a media interview. A person who aided Mr Abbott said no mention was made of SSM. In fact Tony Abbott made no mention of the words SSM being used. It had been assumed the attack was due to Abbott’s vote NO position because the attacker wore an SSM sticker. That was probably a reasonable assumption to make at the time.

Hours after the facts became known people continued to bang on throwing scorn at George Brandis. Others resorted to using capital letters. The angry language used by the less articulate. Even more bizarre responses were directed to people like me who had pointed out the updated events. But.. “He wore the badge they cried, of course it was about SSM.” So the attacker confessed why he did it, stating vehemently he just hated Tony Abbott and he was under the influence. The key board warriors weren’t having it. Fact and truth just hurled out the window again. It was all BS. Of course it was about SSM. The verdict was ‘guilt by sticker’ according to the keyboard warrior’s court.

 Malcolm Turnbull didn’t escape either. In response to another column on the assault people got stuck into him because he hadn’t come out in public and said anything based on THEIR acceptability timeline. “ITS 9am HE HASN’T SPOKEN YET. HE’S A DUD, SACK HIM.” Of course the baying hordes completely ignored that Turnbull was touring. He had in fact phoned Mr Abbott to check on his welfare and he did have the assault reported to the Federal Police. That’s what a PM should do. Then later in an interview on 3AW Turnbull was forthright in condemning the assault. Of course that was met with silence. No, No, NO.. “We don’t want to hear that.”

People with agendas appear incapable of determining fact from fantasy even when the facts are put in front of them. Research has highlighted our collective IQ in Australia has declined. I don’t know if that’s a contributing factor. Or if it is the case that people are so brainwashed they just refuse to accept the truth/facts because it doesn’t suit their agenda. Or if they are incapable of understanding what’s truth and what isn’t. Perhaps it’s an attempt to see who can outdo each other on the comments bizarre meter (I really wish we had one of those). Someone should come up with a bizarre meter emoji.

It was George Orwell who said, “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” Isn’t that the truth!! It’s happening before our eyes. Truth and fact is now considered irreverent and hateful.  Why is that and how did to get to this point? I wish I had the answers. For me, the scary part is that more and more people appear to be buying into that. It doesn’t matter that what is in front them is true/factual they are not going to budge. Whatever is driving this, it’s concerning. We are moving into very dangerous territory. I just hope people wake up before it’s too late.

Before I go, another gripe.  We Over Play The Cry Wolf Card…

I feel compelled to say something about the furore over Big W’s Christmas-less tree boxes. What a storm in a teacup. I’m convinced that people just spend their days looking for things to be outraged about. This is one of those instances.

Any number of items on display in Big W has Christmas plastered across the front of the packaging. The tree packaging doesn't. Cue the meltdown. Up goes the cry.. “BOYCOTT Big W.” That’s followed by headlines, news reports, interviews and social media rampage. Once the outrage machine swings into action it follows a very predicable path.

I listened to Big W’s GM’s explanation of why the tree packaging didn’t include the word Christmas. It seemed perfectly reasonable to me. The trees are displayed in an area festooned with Christmas delights branded Christmas. So you don’t have to be a genius to figure out the tree is a Christmas tree despite the missing word. The trees come in a range of colours and coordinate with decorations around colour themes. Nice; it makes it easier to put your theme together.

Let’s face it. You buy the tree. You take it home and you put it up. When Christmas is over the tree goes back in the box and is shoved into the cupboard until next year. Frankly, if you don’t know it’s a Christmas tree because the box didn’t say so, then you’ve got bigger issues to worry about.  Seriously guys, it’s time that people took a chill pill. Save the outrage for those who refuse to acknowledge Christmas exists. There are enough of those to go around. Leave Big W alone, they are not one of them.  

We need to stop the emotional blackmail and intimidation

I am growing very weary of being bombarded by various groups and individuals telling me how and why I should vote the same way they will in the SSM postal plebiscite. I'm also somewhat dismayed by articles I've read and comments people have made that if their position isn't adopted they will no longer be friends with those who hold an opposing view. Some have even declared they will not even associate with someone who doesn't support them. Seriously how melodramatic and childish is that?

We've always prided ourselves as a society who embraced different opinions and who respected the right of others who differed from us. That is a sign of an intelligent, caring, enlightened, colourful and mature society. But that has changed and not for the better.

I'm proud to acknowledge I have friends and associates within my various circles with whom I don’t share the same beliefs; culturally, politically, environmentally and also on the topic of religion. I've learnt a lot from those people. That has led to some unique and fascinating relationships over the years. Not to mention some highly entertaining and robust dinner party discussions. In some cases I've changed my position based on compelling arguments. But above all I respect them as individuals and I would never wipe them just because we hold different views. I value them for who they are and the richness they bring to my life, not what they believe.

I had two so-called friends completely wipe me because of all people Donald Trump. I was stunned by that. Whilst I am an avowed conservative I could not support someone like Trump. I gave my reasons but I was flicked anyway. If the same were to happen should anyone become aware of how I vote on SSM, I would now consider that a positive. Why? I don’t want to associate with people who would simply shut me out for no other reason than a different opinion. Or to associate with people who want to live in a one dimensional society. A society where to be respected and accepted we all have to think the same and believe in the same things they do.

How I vote is my decision, no one else’s. I will be making my decision based on several factors. I will take into consideration my personal views.  In addition I'll consider the potential changes (if any) in law and what that will mean in the shorter and longer term across a number of spectrums. I won't cave in to emotional blackmail or intimidation from either side; Yes or No. In fact I find that behaviour nauseating.

"You've got to do what's right, or what you think is right. And  you've got to make tough decisions. And you've got to be willing to take on your friends when they disagree with you." Antonio Villaraigosa

That's true, we do. But above all we have to be true to ourselves. If others choose to cast us out because of it, it's their loss.