Grumpy Old Nasho

When complaints are ignored and not addressed by our leftwing duopoly, it's only natural that further steps will be taken by the complainants, such as forming new parties opposing those who refuse to address the complaints.

There's far right parties all around the World, they are countering far left Govts, and that's most of them in the Western World, except the USA now, thank heavens. The human mind has a natural propensity to "balance out". A rusted-on lefty quite often will seek work in the dreaded private sector. A righty CEO of a large corporation may, and often does, support lefty causes. Palmer's T.O.P party will be just one more far right party joining many others globally, to continue leveling the political scales. Balance is stability, no matter how far the "weights" are apart, as long as they are equal in weight. The far right is adding more weight all the time to bring the scales down level. They're not there yet, but as the far left concede ground, which they must do, the quicker the scales will balance out.

Taking a neutral stance would help to understand what I'm saying. Stand back and look at the whole picture. For one thing, ask yourself why there is a bipartisan policy on immigration that cuts out all conversations on the subject. We can talk till we're blue in the face, but nothing changes, much to the frustration of those who speak in a reasonable and an intelligent way, expressing concern for the problems that mass non discriminatory immigration causes. What is mass immigration for anyway? For more tax income? To fill all the habitable land right up? No one seems to know. Can you offer a sensible reason, or would you say "It's just what the major parties want, and therefore we shouldn't interfere".

Menzies & Co were still fighting WW2, I reasoned much later when I'd put a few more years on. My mum and dad were the same. Menzies read the oldies right, but failed to read the 20y/olds right. We were cannon fodder and numbers, you should remember that. I was out before Whitlam come in, but even then, I sensed that his govt was too extreme, how long did he last? Frazer was another extremist before softening, but he softened the wrong way, he really didn't know what he was doing, he tried to side with Whitlam's policies, and got turfed out. They were moving to the left inexorably, with that union thug Hawke telling us all to shut up while he pretended to appease the business sector. The business sector fell in line with the new "Progressive Humanist" philosophy, as did the media. He wasn't a Rhode Scholar for nothing.

It's all about eliminating extremes. Given that there will always be left and right, why not keep the gap narrow between the two? At present, they are miles apart and prone to engage in ugly verbal stoushes and potential violence. New laws are coming into being for just those, when all they have to do is narrow the political divide by taking steps to reduce the number of politically disenfranchised constituents. This can be done by listening and acting on their complaints instead of pounding them into the ground. A typical far right constituent would more than likely be quietened if only a quarter of what they're asking for is met. The left would need to concede some political territory - give and take. Our problem is a lack of democracy, our democracy is the reserve of the strongest, with the most money, and now made worse by public funding changes that apparently favor the major parties, the very same parties who designed these new funding rules. We are going backwards, instead of moving forward by including everyone in the the democratic process. The amount of money a political party receives shouldn't be the determining factor for who is listened to, and who is reviled. Everyone needs to be listened to, and complaints acted upon in a positive and unselfish manner.

Labor is by nature leftwing, but they've gone even further to the left with their "Progressive Humanism" policies, evolving into "politically correct" socialist censorship commissars. Backed up by the Coalition who see votes in aspects of the Labor party's socialist policies, like no need to integrate multiculturalism, and undemocratic mass indiscriminate, non discriminatory immigration. What is the obvious conclusion of leftwing philosophy if it's given free rein? It's a type of communism that we end up thinking is normal by the time it comes around. We already think their current far left socialist policies are normal, they have crept up on us, starting in Whitlam's time. Nature is now providing a balance to this all this far left socialist policy making. The far right is fighting back. You should be grateful for the balance the human mind endows us with. There are two cerebral hemispheres to every brain, not just one. One is leftwing, and one is rightwing. If one becomes too dominate, the other will tell you, "Hey wait a minute".

That was a big surprise, who expected that in Australia? A far right party to counter the far left policies of Labor, providing balance in the political arena. The scales are leveling out, at last.

We already know that, it's nothing new, been like that since the 60s, through to the present day.

What we need at the moment is a far right minister of immigration. This would counter the entrenched far left leaning bipartisan policy we have right now, and always have had. Insanity is doing the same thing over and over hoping for a different result. In the US, Trump is busting up the established far left to bring back sanity to the economy, immigration, and to put the US back on a strong footing without the confusion of internationalism and wokism, ruining America.

Yes, a bit like the ALP and the Coalition have infiltrated into all levels of government and everything else in OZ. Nothing can be done without them approving it and being done their way. Trump is only copying what the two major parties do here. The major parties infiltrate into everything and making sure they have the right puppets as heads of all govt Departments, the RBA, the AFP, the AEC, the military, the ABC, etc, etc.

The Lycoming Studebaker engine looked very much like this Chrysler Spitfire straight 8. In those days the flat heads all looked the same, just that some were more compact than others. There was a modern straight 8, I just can't find it now but If I recall correctly, it was rear engine east-west in an Italian sports car, or racing car. https://silodrome.com/spitfire-straight-8-engine/

Go you good thing.

It doesn't matter much as long as the illegals are stopped, there's a halt to the Ukraine war, and the hostages are handed back.

It wasn't a Datona speedway car. It was a comfortable sedan for taking my GF out in, once I finished doing it up.

Not sure how. Nine bearings kept the crankshaft very steady, the engine ran as smooth as a Rolls.

Lycoming wasn't silly, they shortened the crankshaft and brought the cylinders closer together. The engine was not much longer than a Chevy six and about the same length as the biggest flat head sixes.

Here's a twist for youse. The straight 8 flat head engine in the 1939/40 Studebaker was designed by Lycoming. A beautifully smooth running nine main bearing engine with plenty of power. I had a 39 I was doing up but my dad sold it behind my back while I doing the two years conscription. I was really grumpy about that, I never forgave him, he thought he was doing me a favor by getting rid of it. He gave me $10 when I was home on leave. It's worth $25-30k now, and I know who's got it, unfortunately it's just not me.

That's been the major problem all along. A party has it's own policies, that differ from other parties, giving rise to fighting over control of the Treasury. The electorate needs to have the power to block the money supply (it's our money), until consensus is reached in Parliament on the best way to go forward with policy selection and implementation, with all players having an equal say and equal participation.

We're in the wrong thread for "Trump and his Administration" talk. We shouldn't continue it in here. Instead I'll reply to this post, which I meant to do when octave first posted it. What we need to remember and understand is that the major parties have ruled Australia since 1901 and still contesting elections 123 years later, but now they are battling to gather enough primary votes to ward off new players in the game, why? It's because the new players are not scared of the ancient political bullying major parties anymore. The new thinking is pushing the old thinking out, or should I say, pushing the old psyches' out. The psyches of the major parties are filled with aggression, lies, inflated egos, revenge, manipulation, and self importance. They will stop at nothing to stay in power, but now that is being challenged. We can't go on with their deep negativity, it's old hat and it's no longer suitable for Australia. If they don't change to become more friendly to the broad electorate in a conciliatory way with all constituents, their continued decline is inevitable. So they need to wake up and rid themselves of their damaging politically superior, overbearing, and negative dehumanizing attitudes that are entrenched deep in their inherented psyches, psyches from the distant past. The ALP and the Coalition think with their right and left cerebral hemispheres separately, but there's no Corpus callosum between them for free exchange of information for harmonious and friendly dialogue and reasoning. They are born to "assassinate" each other, and anyone else who annoys them. The major parties are playing the nice guys, but they're being found out, finally, we're realizing that the bullying that was always historically deep in their minds, is still in their minds, and won't go away, so we are now naturally rejecting them. "Naturally" is the key word here.

This is one of the things Vance was conveying in his speech. This happened a day ago, and it follows other Islamist attacks in the last few weeks in Germany.

Didn't know about the engine problems. My dad fitted one to his Kombi Microbus and could nearly do wheel stands, it was that powerful.

Very clever design - more power for your Cessna

The desperation from the ALP and the Coalition is climbing to greater heights. Not long ago they ruled that the minimum number of members in minor parties be increased to 1,500 from 500. What will they come up with next, ban minor parties altogether? ... in Australia's best interest?

The truth hurts, even when an election win is spread right across the board, and the winners know what the future holds.

It's applicable, sensible, and common sense $#!t though.