Hosier Lane, Melbourne

Photos can be purchased from RedBubble here.

I don't usually feel like I can talk about Melbourne. From friends who live down there, it results in, "MOVE BACK DOWN NOOOOOW!" and from friends and family up here, it's sort of like, "Well if it's so great down there, why don't you move back!" Which is somewhat awkward both ways, mainly because I don't have a job down there. Otherwise, I'd be ecstatic to be back down there. But I need a job for it. An income is useful for things like rent, food, transport, etc.

Visiting Melbourne recently w/ Clare and catching up with loads of friends, seeing the galleries, knowing my way around, going to Vegie Hut in Box Hill, exploring the BrandSmart DFO at Nunawading again (oh Oroton, I could not resist you, and your 50% off sale was brilliant! Plus the new design for the store is really nice), etc just made me miss it more. The little laneways and cafes and tasty, tasty things. Oh so good. And the way it feels so much more easily accessible than either Sydney or Newcastle.

Plus I don't mind the hipsters. It's like the emo thing a few years ago down there. It's just fashion, it's kind of amusing in a way and the moustaches make me laugh (especially on the girls... No, I jest there). That's one of the biggest differences between Sydney and Melbourne, really. Melbourne = hipsters. Sydney = people the colour of Cheezles in minimal clothing. People in Melbourne stared at me on the train when I wore knee-length shorts like it was all escandaloso! (it was also about 18 degrees that day and some people were wearing jackets and scarves, so maybe that's part of it). Sydney gets none of that when other people are wearing what looks like denim underwear, so that's kinda handy. The less escandaloso! stares the better, unless I find that t-shirt I got from Supre years ago that says "Hold my drink while I snog your boyfriend."

Admittedly, there was an element of it being rather "the past is another country," at least early on. But the past isn't really another country. You can go back to other countries, and even if it's different it's still the same. It's more like something that becomes eternally locked away and trying to make it happen again for the things you enjoyed about it fails. And when that fails, it makes the other memories of the past less pleasant somehow, less magical, more, "Was this how it actually was all along?"

Yet in the end, that worked itself out to be a positive because the friend that related to led to me being able to spend more time catching up with another friend. That was fantastic! Plus more exploration of Melbourne, a really great restaurant for dinner and the tastiest pasta dish I've had in years. I love pasta! Plus brunch the next day and miscellaneous other adventures with friends. It was so good.

Plus there was the afternoon spent in the NGV when the rain was absolutely hammering down outside. I saw Jon Cattapan's The Melbourne Panels, which is an artwork I really adore. It's like fragments and the whole, the part and its entirety, pieces and completeness. The unity of the individual elements is so well executed, plus there's the bold colours, streams of light, the freeness of it all. It's what I'd like to achieve with painting, but I feel like I get too hung up on the details, working on making it look absolutely like the original rather than the idea of it.

The Lace in Fashion exhibit was small but vastly satisfying, too. The photography thing about cities was slightly underwhelming. Although seeing the one single Gursky on display made up for it (it was his photo of LA at night). Still, it was all soul-refreshing to see.

Well, apart from one point when I was sitting in a quiet gallery admiring some paintings and a group came in led by a lady who talked so loudly you could hear her on the other side of Dartmoor (and her group of loudly-speaking oldies were pretty deafening too). She spent a while banging on about how if it were New York, all the paintings would be roped off, you'd have to queue in enormous lines and you'd hardly get to see the artworks. So we're lucky, aren't we.

The Sunday brought about Schmitchy's birthday, and it was fun to see him and Kez. And then I caught up with Tal and Joel, which was LOADS of fun. It was strange being out in Warburton again. Not much has changed, but it's got some different bits. Still fantastic. The Gladysdale Bakery for piiiiiiiiiie. I missed all of that sort of thing. We didn't have much time to spare, so couldn't really explore the main street or anything later, which was a bit disappointing. Still, can always go back. Or something. I felt a tad guilty for not taking time to catch up with any other ex-work people, but then who knows whether it would be awkward or not.

Still, there are some things you can go back to.

On the water at night

Photos can be purchased from RedBubble here.

The green corridor

Dictators.

Tyranny.

Traitors.

Socialists.

It's just like communist China.

If you read The Age's Minister threatens to use law to force people on NBN if states revolt (cue jokes along the lines of, "The states are revolting!" "Tell me something I don't know..."), those are some things you'll notice come up regularly in the comments. I always thought readers of The Age and SMH were relatively logical lefties, but apparently not.

I'm both amused and puzzled by people flinging around the words Communist and socialist again like they're Glenn Beck and using those words somehow makes their argument against policies, infrastructure and so on watertight. Because all of those filthy Commies are evil and are out to destroy the world as we know it and... yeah... the Cold War ended some time ago, there aren't Reds under every bed and crying, "Socialist! Communist!" about things that are aimed at benefiting the community seems bizarre at best. For a start, this isn't America. I thought we were somewhat more sensible than that. But judging by the comments on various news website, apparently not.

When the moral and political distinctions between Communists and liberals (and by that, I mean small-l liberals, not the political party) aren't made, reality risks being distorted severely and in a damaging fashion for individuals and society generally. Spending money on infrastructure - whether it's a hospital, some schools, railway lines, or a broadband network - does not a Communist make. Supporting things like welfare and health care systems don't make you a socialist (if anything, community-centred ethical perspectives on such matters seem to indicate that you're just a decent human being who has concern for other human beings).

This was something that struck me when Obama was working on health care reforms in the US. When people weren't clutching handkerchiefs over the possibility of government-subsidised abortion, there were people calling the plans "socialism," saying it was part of a "socialist agenda," etc. All the way back in November 1961, President Kennedy spoke out against "discordant voices of extremism" that "equate the Democratic Party with the welfare state, the welfare state with socialism, and socialism with Communism.”

And yet somehow in recent times and in the minds of some, doing things that benefit society as a whole have somehow become things only Communists/socialists would do. I'm not sure whether it's a severe case of right-wing resurgence or rabid individualism or a people being seriously NIMBY about basically everything. But it disappoints me because it seems sad to turn back to what Kennedy described 50 years ago as "counsels of fear and suspicion" from the far right.

I've still to work out what people fear about the NBN.

But it seems like the a lot of the newspapers (and commenters on their sites) in Australia see it as something to be feared, judging by their coverage of it all. I suppose at least the media's demands for a cost benefits analysis for the NBN seem to have disappeared for the time being (however, if you want to go back in time and read some interesting commentary on that whole issue, Cost benefit delusions of the NBN from Pollytics is good) (additionally, apparently Malcolm Turnbull introduced a private member's bill yesterday to try to make the government do a CBA on the NBN, which is interesting...).

Perhaps the fear of it stems from a lack of understanding, not just of the technologies involved, but also of what the NBN is about as a whole. I don't think news coverage of it has been the best (perfect example for the day: The Australian's Stephen Conroy having 'hissy fit' over The Australian's NBN coverage: Chris Mitchell - it comes across as wanting to be the news rather than report it, not least because that article is actually longer than their one about the NBN not raising the cost of landlines).

Considering how long the NBN stuff has been around - the Senate site itself says, "On 25 June 2008, the Senate established the Select Committee on the National Broadband Network (NBN) to inquire into and report on the government's proposal to partner with the private sector to upgrade parts of the existing network to fibre to provide minimum broadband speeds of 12 megabits per second to 98 per cent of Australian homes and businesses on an open access basis" - the hysteria about it now seems strange.

Yet the NBN is something that has the potential to benefit everyone. Yes, it will cost money. But infrastructure does actually cost money. The wiring currently serving as our phone system cost money to put in. Railways cost money to lay down. Roads cost money. The sewerage system your house is connected to cost money. From what I recall of Telstra trying to woo me over to broadband years ago when I was on dial-up, that cost money too (for the modem in particular).

While I think of it, dial-up is a great example of "My intermawebz are perfect as they are, thankyouverymuch, I do not wish to change anything!" As if people would want to go back to dial-up now days when they've got fast intermawebz and quick access to amusing time-wasting videos of cats on YouTube.

But back to the point of cost. Last night on Lateline, Senator Stephen Conroy (yes, he annoys me as much as he annoys others) explained that there is no cost whatsoever to having the NBN connected to ones home. Although he added, "If we then roll through your suburb and roll on a few more suburbs and you suddenly change your mind, the NBN Co haven't made a final decision on this, but there's been some suggestions there could be a cost if we've gotta come back and re-do your home. But no final decision has been made on that issue."

To me, it makes sense for there to be some cost if people have to come back and do work on a place when they could have knocked it all off in one go while they were there the first time around. This is not forcing people to join up to the NBN. If you do get it connected, you don't have to use it. People can also choose to just keep what they have now - it just means that if they change their mind in the future because they had refused connection to the rollout earlier, they might have to pay for it. And to me, that seems to be their own fault. Conroy also speaks about the "furphy" relating to fixed lines and phone calls.

The stupidity about "Communists" and "tyrants" forcing everyone to have the NBN whether they want it or not makes my brain ache. Especially when people say that it's just a way for the government to go all 1984 on people (also, just a random thought, but I do wonder how many people who bring out the Communist/Marxist/socialist/1984/Brave New World/etc stuff have actually read the manifestos/philosophies/novels or just comment with it because they've heard others do so before?). Conspiracy theories, general wilful ignorance and apparent desire to not move with the times are just sad.

Besides, I didn't notice a massive outcry about switching over to digital television, even though that costs money (either to get a set-top box or upgrade your telly). If there was media coverage, I've missed it, along with all of the outraged comments from anonymous people from all over redneck Australia saying how they're perfectly happy with the television they've got only giving them five channels and how dare the government be so socialist/Communist/whateverist as to force them to have an option to look at more channels, more content and more choice. It's outrageous!

But really, much more of this sort of stuff and we will be confirming the survey that ranked Australia as "the world's dumb blonde."

Oi! You're nicked!

"Well, there goes my Saturday night entertainment.
Guess I'm going to have to go out more now..."

Tonight I watched the final episode of The Bill.

And I had a bit of a cry at the end of it.

Okay, I know, I know. It's a TV show. It's just television, just acting, just 45 minutes a week, just a show that's been in my regular viewing schedule for as long as I can remember - in fact, almost as long as I've been alive. Woodentop, the precursor to The Bill, was on days after I'd been born.

When I was a kid, my family and I would watch The Bill every Saturday night and would occasionally watch the repeats ABC used to run on Tuesday nights if it was a particularly good couple of episodes or we'd missed it for some reason. It was always the double half-hour episodes that started out with the crime, it got investigated and solved and was done and dusted within 30 minutes. Unless it was an extra-special one and then both of the episodes would be dedicated to it.

Somehow you sort of became attached to the characters - PC Reg Hollis was one of my favourite characters, probably due to the underdog status. I can still remember one episode where he gets a date with someone and one of the other PCs disbelievingly asked what Reg had that he didn't, to which Reg replied, "Well, a working deodorant for a start."

I also really liked PC Tony Stamp, Sgt June Ackland, Sgt Bob Cryer and Superintendent Jack Meadows. But my favourite character was probably Inspector Dale 'Smithy' Smith. And no, not just because the guy who played him is hot. I liked how the character was sort of like a strong moral compass for the show or something like that. I think some amazing storylines tied in around his character, particularly the Carly Samuels one.

The worst thing for The Bill was when it went all soap-opera-esque in the early 00's. Unfortunately, it seemed like it didn't recover its viewership when they tried to fix that mistake. And it was unfortunate that the soapie-style plots were allowed to run for so long, dragging it away from the policing that had made it such an enjoyable show.

I actually stopped watching it when that happened.

Then when I was living in Victoria, I turned it on one night randomly, thinking it would be interesting to see what had happened with the show I used to love. And amazingly, it was back to policing more or less. And from there on, I'd end up watching The Bill every Saturday night. I know it's said the latest revamp was a flop, but honestly, I thought it wasn't too bad. There were some really interesting story arcs. That said, at least the ABC was consistent with its broadcast schedule and didn't knob around with the show like ITV apparently did.

Of course my love of The Bill is mostly because I grew up with it.

But I think it was a fantastic show at its best. And I wouldn't swap the time I've spent watching it for any other police show out there. Well... Maybe Midsomer Murders. But they don't have quite so many hot British guys in police uniform to drool over.

So thank you to everyone who made The Bill so enjoyable for so many years.

Alyssum

The photo can be purchased from RedBubble here.

Ensnared by creepers

The photo can be purchased from RedBubble here.

Light through paint

The photo at the top of the set can be purchased from RedBubble here.

While the family was away, I worked on doing some painting. There's something about painting that I really can't do if people are around. I need absolutely no distractions, other than the ones I provide myself with (music mostly), or I'll give up and not do any work on it. Or won't even make a start.

That said, there are a lot of arty kind of things I do that I'm not all that keen on having people around while doing them - photography's one. Which means I'll never be a portrait photographer. Tragedy. But no, I jest - it's hardly a tragedy when I have no interest in photographing people.

Painting is both relaxing and irritating. I like the feeling of being absorbed in the effort and losing hours in making something. But at the same time, if it doesn't look great, then I'm irritated. Or if it takes a long time it can become frustrating. I'm mainly working on a painting based around a photograph I took when leaving New Zealand earlier this year. It's fiddly, there's lots of blending work, all of these little detailed bits, I worry that when it comes to adding in the clouds I'll muck it up and have lost hours on end of work.

But so far, it's something I'm really proud of. It's the toughest painting task I've ever set myself and it's taken about 15 hours so far, although it looks like it shouldn't have for what's actually on the canvas. I'd thought before I started working on it that it'd be another matter of slapping the paint on and it'd be done in about eight hours (my usual time to paint something on that size of canvas). Instead, tiny sections of mountains have been painstaking two-hours-at-a-time processes. The photo below is some of what's been done so far. And yes, those scribbly lines on it are more mountains to paint. Oh joy!

Pansies after rain

This photo can be purchased from RedBubble here.

Kingfisher

An iris study

These photos can be purchased from RedBubble here.

Busy bee in a golden flower

Bushland exploration

Poking around in bushland near here, I found some things to take photos of. Other than photos, the main thing I got out of the bushland exploration was scratched legs. And the theatre of walking into a spider's web exactly at face-height, which I didn't notice because I was keeping my eyes on the ground on the look-out for snakes. Cue involuntary noises and flailing for that part.

On #groggate

Early this morning while lying in bed and reading the news on my phone, I came across a story about Nationals MP Tony Crook deciding to sit as an independent. This led to actually getting up and turning on my computer to see if I could find out more about this. Maybe I didn't look hard enough on The Age or SMH as I didn't find anything about Crook on there, so I went over to news.com.au. Not finding anything on the front page, I scrolled down to the bottom of it, thinking at least a link to The Australian might give me something about it.

Instead, on the top five news stories for The Australian, I see "Controversial political blogger unmasked."

Totally forgetting about finding news about Crook, I click the link and discover that James Massola had decided to out the writer of Grog's Gamut, which has been my favourite political blog since discovering it just before the election in August. The commentary provided on Grog's Gamut about the election, policies and so on was excellent. It was a nice change to be able to read incisive coverage of politics that actually explored issues, rather than Julia Gillard's earlobe size, whether or not she was married or Tony Abbott's budgie smugglers.

Grog's criticism of the mainstream media for their lack of quality coverage during the election was something that resounded with many readers and was an issue a number of other bloggers had also written about from a variety of angles (Possum's Pollytics for example has had some great coverage of the poor mainstream media coverage of the NBN, and Possum's Let the Great Unhinging begin is particularly interesting - although also worryingly likely).

But back to the #groggate issue.

Grog has written a response to the outing, titled Spartacus no more. There's been a lot of outrage about it on Twitter under both #groggate and #jamesmassola. Interestingly, Jack The Insider outed himself in response to this all as well.

There are lots of other bloggers writing about this issue today (you can see more at Pure Poison, Gutter Trash, B Sides and mUmBRELLA for a start, plus Conscience Vote's Who has the right to speak? is interesting).

The whole outing thing has concerned me, not just because it seems unnecessary. When considered in the light of Grog's posts about the lack of quality political coverage in the Australian media currently, it could be taken as being vindictive, particularly due to bringing his employment details into the matter. Massola writes in the article:

'The prolific blogger shows a strong preference for the ALP, despite the Public Service code of conduct stating that "the APS is apolitical, performing its functions in an impartial and professional manner".'

Which Grog responds to in his entry about the matter (read it here if you haven't already). If Grog has kept the two issues of work and home life separate, then why should there be punishment for it? Whether or not he leans towards the ALP really shouldn't matter. There are loads of other public servants who have political leanings - some are even members of political parties. I can't help but wonder whether he ever would have been outed if he had LNP leanings.

A wee while ago John Hewson wrote Fourth Estate corrupting the political system for Unleashed, which contains this:

"I most vividly remember an early meeting with Paul Kelly, then editor of The Australian. Kelly stated quite emphatically that The Oz had a specific policy agenda, and if I said the right things, consistent with that agenda, I would "get a run". If I erred, I could expect to get a drubbing."

And that incident was back in the 90s!

It bothers me that there are news organisations out there who seem to think they are the ones to set policy agendas and make or break politicians and parties. And anyone who holds opinions on the political issues they "cover" that are different need to be exposed, "punished," made unelectable if they're a politician, etc. Opinion masquerading as news is also bothersome, particularly when combined with an apparent agenda.

There's also the issue of double standards. If they're going to expose an anonymous blogger, why not expose whoever wrote that piece in The Australian that said: "We believe he and his Green colleagues are hypocrites; that they are bad for the nation; and that they should be destroyed at the ballot box" (found here). I mean, that's definitely trying to influence/drive political opinion. And what about all of the stories with "A Liberal source says..." or "A Labor source says..." stuff? Additionally, what about all the stories that bang on about Labor's "faceless men" - such a furphy - and never unmask them, so why a blogger who's done nothing more than write in their personal time about things that are going on in the world of Australian politics?

Instead of encouraging debate about the issues of political coverage in the mainstream media in Australia, journalists have seemed to be terrified of it. This is disappointing, even though the ABC's managing director Mark Scott said in his Melbourne Writers Festival speech that the criticism of news coverage had been raised at a meeting because "dynamic political news was crowding out proper reporting of policy initiatives in some news bulletins . . . We adjusted our strategy as we listened to critics, our audiences - and critiqued our own coverage."

If the ABC is brave enough to do this, then why not other media sources?

Another thing that worries me is which Australian political bloggers are next? It seems almost like a threat in some ways aimed at individuals who have taken the time to explore political matters and may or may not have come to a different conclusion about matters to those The Australian draws.

Extra linky update stuff:
> The whys and wherefores of bureaucratic blogging by Bernard Keane on Crikey.

> Grog-gate: outing as bullying by An Onymous Lefty.

Imperfect magnolia

This photo can be purchased from RedBubble here.

Spoonbill

This photo can be purchased from RedBubble here.

I miss him

A very orange purse

*Note: this isn't an advertorial blog entry. I'm just having a rambling reminisce/happy customer sort of moment, so if you don't really want to read about Oroton, please feel free to skip ahead and look at other things on here. There are some soothing beach photos down further.

Anyway. It's time for some reminiscing.

Back when I was doing my degree, some friends and I were addicted to op shopping. This was before op shopping hit that popularity boom a while back and stores ended up being a) picked over and b) rather pricey for second-hand tat. We'd go most Fridays and find all sorts of stuff. One friend once found a Gucci bag, I picked up loads of vintage/antique jewellery and the other friend fed their Glo-Mesh addiction (which we all suffered from to some degree).

One of my favourite items that I picked up in that time was a white Oroton Glo-Mesh-style handbag. I didn't like it at first, apart from its gorgeous purple silky lining, but came to adore the bag after a few months. I'll have to find it in the moving boxes, take a photo and post it sometime as an update to this post. I also picked up a matching coin purse at another op shop a few weeks after that, although someone had written "50 cents" on the lining of it in biro.

Still, my love of all things Oroton has grown from that experience back in 2002. Later, when I lived near Melbourne, the friend who found the Gucci bag and I would make outings to the DFOs, including the BrandSmart one in Nunawading. They have an Oroton outlet there. Far too tempting. I bought four handbags there - three for myself, one as a present. The justification was that they were quality items, and I wouldn't buy other handbags. Which I actually didn't.

Then with having to move and ending up in a place that's near the beach - hurrah! - but not anywhere near BrandSmart, I found out they have a website, www.oroton.com. Which has been great for buying little items now and then for presents (or the lovely Alpine hobo handbag I got Mum for her birthday - got it months before her birthday on a giant sale).

I know people often don't seem to think buying brand-name accessories are worth it unless they actually have the money to do so - why put down a few hundred dollars (or thousand) when you can pick up a fake major designer item for $50? For a start, most people can spot the fakes. Plus they're generally poorly made and the emphasis seems to be on flash fashion over substance/quality.

The vintage Oroton and Glo-Mesh handbags and purses sum it up for me. They've stood the test of time and are still going strong as practical, beautiful items. Other handbags I've bought that were brand-new but cheap have fallen apart within months of buying them. Since buying the new Oroton handbags, I haven't needed to purchase other bags. The only thing that's been necessary has been some leather-care product now and then.

Although I have to say, I don't have the same attitude towards clothes as I do towards accessories. Clothes are made to come and go - fabric doesn't last forever, even if there are some items we'd love to have that happen for. But with accessories, if you choose the right ones you can keep them for years, coordinate them with all kinds of outfits and perhaps hand them down to your children/grandchildren.

The occasional indulgence with something like this isn't all bad.

"Take care of the luxuries and the necessities will take care of themselves." - Dorothy Parker (1893 - 1967)

A very green building

On job hunting

The close of September is upon us and I am still job hunting. I'm trying to not worry about it too much, seeing as I've only really been seriously looking since I got back from England in the middle of June. Prior to that, I thought it was entirely justified to indulge in some relaxation, holidays and looking at beautiful things (like the beach - anyone who's visited the blog will notice my adoration of that). Especially after the hell on wheels that was last year.*

But people do keep asking, "Have you found a job yet?" and all sorts of questions like that.

In short, no.

In less short, stop asking unless you're going to add, "Because if you're still looking, I've got a job that would be brilliant and I'd love you to start right now."

I know people mean well when they ask and they're just expressing concern about me as a person (and interest in my life). But when things have changed, I'll definitely let people know. Possibly by running down the street screaming, "YAAAAAAY! I HAVE A JOB!" while flailing my arms in the air.

There are lots of jobs out there in the world. Lots of jobs that I'm not qualified for, mostly. If I'd have known that jobs in media would be so difficult to find years ago, I probably would have been a bit more practical and just had marketing as a minor instead of marketing and English. Or done something else entirely. Become a vet. Scaled Everest. Started my own television show based around adventures in the wilderness that would often end in bobsledding down a hill on a dead moose. Something that would mean less job searches where the results in my area of expertise being all "Senior management/senior journalist/senior communicator with at least 15 years of experience, knowledge of at least five languages essential, management skills a must, ability to negotiate hostage situations looked upon favourably."

So I keep on looking. There are generally enough things for me to apply to equal about five jobs per week. Some weeks there are more than others - the weeks when they're not only looking for multi-lingual senior managers who can build a website, Photoshop images and write the content for an entire magazine while negotiating a hostage situation in Uzbekistan.

Hopefully something will turn up.

In the mean time, there's been many positives. Spending more time with family (hopefully they can still stand me). Spending more time with friends I hadn't seen in ages. Getting to do something about getting my driver's licence FIIIINALLY (although I suspect people have realised I'm only doing it so I can drive to the beach). Oh, and going to the beach of course (if I learn how to surf and have at least five children with bogan names to five different bogan men, then that could really work towards fitting the Centrelink stereotype!).

Plus I've finally gotten around to joining RedBubble and posting some stuff on there. If you've ever looked at some of my photos and thought, "I'd love me one of them on a greeting card or perhaps as a mounted print!" you can now get them through the link below.



*Would write about it, but it'd probably be snarky and really, it's nice to have gotten away from that entire situation :)

Close to a camellia

Cloudy beach outing

Pigface

More beach

Waves

And now for something completely different

Election 2010, people smugglers, budgie smugglers, media coverage, voting

Okay, it's been a long time since I posted anything on here. Let alone anything serious. And I'm sitting here, staring at the screen, trying to think of something serious to write about right now (which isn't being helped by listening to Flight of the Conchords songs - "That's the sock factory, hence the giant sock.").

But it's the final week of the election campaign in Australia. In some respects, it's been mercifully short. Having voted this morning, I'm feeling enormous relief in not paying all that much attention to what the news has to say about how Australia will vote or some inane chatter about the politicians involved with it all (while almost completely avoiding talk of policies).

Right now, I feel like I should be watching Q&A. But I'm not. Although Clansi is telling me that Tony Abbott's getting skewered and working on dancing around questions. So I guess that means tomorrow I'll be reading the transcripts. I particularly am interested in finding out more about the issue of taking money from the tabacco industry (apparently he's rather, "I'm certainly not going to refuse their money!" which is something you'd kind of wonder about coming from a former health minister).

Anyway, I'm sure religious faith has entered the discussion at some point on Q&A. The intermawebs tells me that he said that he's not made a decision based on his religion (hmm, RU486 much?). I also don't think atheism equals a "lack of conviction."

Honestly, as a Christian, I voted Labor, mainly because I believe they have conviction and will hopefully be the most beneficial for the country. Yes, I voted for the party led by a lady who's an atheist, hasn't popped out children and has a de facto partner. Gasp! But I did this because I believe the Labor party offers a better alternative than the Liberals.

Their policies are generally ones I agree with. Our country needs government spending on key national infrastructure like the National Broadband Network and the fast train stuff. National Trade Cadetships are great (although the Libs have a similar policy, too). Education reform is important, particularly if combined with their policy about early intervention services for disabled children. If you want to read more policy stuff from the ALP, it can be viewed here. And in the interest of fairness, the LNP stuff can be viewed here. Surprise, surprise, there's actually stuff on the Lib's site about climate change.

But there's also the usual, "This is how Labor is full of fail," which I find a yawn. Regardless of which party is saying it or which party it's directed at. I'd rather hear what your party has to offer, rather than what you think the other one doesn't. Otherwise things get lost in the blah-blah-blah-blah.

As an aside, the marginal seat pandering has also irritated me. It's always irritated me. I don't think it's a healthy thing to try to convince people to vote for a party based on policies that target a narrow group of people who may or may not know what they want, other than more money from the government. It just seems to turn things into a race to the bottom.

After the last election, I lived in a seriously marginal seat. It meant I got to take part in lots of phone polls, which I always enjoyed. Do I have 10 to 15 minutes to go through some questions with you about politics? Why yes, I do. And that's probably why I also am more than happy to fill out polls online too. It's fun, bizarrely.

But back to losing things in the blah-blah-blah-blah, I've been disappointed with the media coverage of the campaign (for all parties involved). It's appeared to be quite personality-focused and the lack of serious, relevant questions relating to policy and plans bothers me. Most people probably won't take the time to explore the sites of the parties campaigning and are likely to rely on information from the media. News coverage should be able to provide people with the outlines of policies and point them toward where they can get more information about it if that's what they're into. Otherwise, things are ending up being soundbites, boat phone bad jokes and whatnot.

Anyway, Grog's Gamut has written about that way more sensibly than I could at this time of night. You can read that here.

I should be sleeping instead.

Oh, actually, one last thing that's annoyed me about the whole thing! People commenting on how Julia Gillard took over from Kevin Rudd. As if Tony Abbott didn't take over from Malcolm Turnbull. Who took over from Brendan Nelson. Plus we don't vote for the individual leaders to be the leaders of the parties. The parties themselves choose them. Unless you live in the leader's electorate, you're not actually voting for them. Why there seem to be people who don't grasp this just makes me wonder how much we've all learned in Australian Studies -_- I know we learned the lyrics to that dreadful "I'm a bloke, I'm an ocker..." song.