Archive for the 'Personal Rant' Category


the man who owns Zondervan

The man who controls a significant amount of the world’s media, (including “Christian” publisher Zondervan) revealed more of his character than he perhaps intended.

“AUST gets wake-call with Sydney terror. Only Daily Telegraph caught the bloody outcome at 2.00 am. Congrats,” Murdoch tweeted.

See here:


Who Do You Choose When There Is No Choice?

Only two days until the Federal Election and I’m still not sure what to do at the ballot box. Only two things are certain: 1) Voting is compulsory 2) I don’t feel I can vote for, or give preference to, either major party.

For some time I’ve been thinking of attending the polling booth but leaving my ballot paper blank. That way I’ll be fulfilling my legal obligation and also exercising my responsibility to vote for the candidate of my choice.

    Why I can’t vote for the Liberal-National Coalition?


I find them untrustworthy. Their refusal to reveal key budgetary data for scrutiny until a day or two before Election Day (to me) shows there is something they want to hide for as long as possible. They also rely too much on parroted slogans instead of intelligent debate. How often do we need to hear the “Stop the Boats” mantra? This is something I addressed in a post a couple of days ago where AGAIN we are faced with the likelihood of important information being withheld to hide facts.

Their tactic of misrepresenting economic reality through meaningless, unprovable slogans: first we had the “interest rates will always be lower under the coalition” replaced with “the economy will always be stronger under the coalition”. Such statements present a desirable outcome that can never be delivered in a provable way, as can be seen in the recent switch from the first slogan to the second after interest rates reached record lows under the current Labor government.

Interest rates and “the economy” are subject to International events as well as Government policy. And recently despite some of the worst EVER international conditions that decimated most world economies, the Australian economy was kept in very healthy territory. By accident? Or by shrewd economic measures courtesy of a Labor Government?

I also don’t take well to being bombarded with one-eyed political propaganda like we’ve had in the Murdoch press anti-labour campaign. The Murdoch headlines over recent weeks have been appallingly biased – remember this is the same Murdoch whose papers were at the centre of one of the worst ever media scandals in Britain recently (remember phone tapping anyone?).

And finally I don’t see Tony Abbott as Prime Minister material. (If Malcolm Turnbull had been the potential PM I think there would have been no doubt about where to allocate my vote).

    Why I can’t vote for Labor?

The thing that REALLY swung the balance relates to Kevin Rudd’s appearance on the ABC TV programme Q & A a few nights ago.
While I give him credit for appearing on the show and facing some very difficult questions (unlike Tony Abbott who declined), it was his response to one question that overshadowed everything else. The question came from a church pastor who asked about Rudd’s about-face on same sex marriage. (see here for my earlier comments on Rudd’s change of mind: )

Now it’s not Rudd’s decision to support same sex marriage that I find objectionable. For some time I’ve recognised that a secular government under which homosexuality is legal has no logical reason to deny same sex marriage. The issue I have with Rudd is his attempt to score political points by demonising a Christian pastor by misrepresenting, misquoting and effectively denigrating scripture. Not surprisingly he also showed considerable ignorance of the New Testament message, basically saying that it’s all about being nice and tolerant towards all of mankind.

Mr Rudd needs to know that scripture does not portray homosexuality as a natural way of life. In fact scripture has some very strong things to say about same gender sexual relations. It says things that homosexuals would find very offensive:

“God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men” (Romans 1:26)

He also needs to know that (despite his claim) the bible doesn’t portray slavery as being a natural condition – a claim he made clearly to undermine the validity and authority of scripture (Apparently it was Aristotle who made that claim, not anyone in scripture).

And he also needs to know that gospel isn’t about being nice to each other, it’s about turning away from our tendency for rebellion against God and His standards, through putting our faith in Jesus Christ. Choosing His way above our own desires and submitting ourselves to the changes He wants to make in our lives, turning from sin – not finding ways to convince ourselves that it’s acceptable.

If Rudd had justified his changed stance on same sex marriage on secular, logical, legal grounds then I would have found his response adequate and acceptable in the context of secular government, but he foolishly chose to present a religious stance and in the process showed the shallowness of his “Christian” faith foundations and did so in a way that belittled the REAL gospel of Jesus Christ. And that’s something I can’t accept from a “Christian” who hopes to lead his country.


Abbott’s New mantra

In yesterday’s post I mentioned the 180 degree turn in Liberal/National party rhetoric regarding Interest rates. (“Interest rates will always be lower under a coalition government “).

This morning I heard Tony Abbot’s “new” claim replacing that now discredited mantra. He’s now saying that the economy will always be stronger under a coalition government.

Almost Deja vu all over again with another unprovable, undeliverable promise?

And when can any “promise” made by Tony Abbot be trusted? [see here ].

It is clearly too late now, but if the coalition wanted to win the coming election on legitimate grounds rather than by default, that is by people voting FOR them instead of AGAINST Labor, they should have appointed (and kept) a more qualified leader. 


The Election Silly Season: Thoughts of Interest.

Australians are heading for a Federal election early next month and the silliness has started.

I clearly remember the rhetoric from previous elections regarding official interest rates. The standard Liberal party line insisted that there would always be lower interest rates under a Liberal government (presenting this as a good thing). Reference was always made to the 1980s when under the previous Labor government interest rates had skyrocketed during a period of recession.

Today the reserve bank are predicted to lower interest rates and I’ve seen that the Liberal shadow treasurer has said that lowering interest rates would be a bad thing.

Now personally I’m relatively uneducated when it comes to the economy – but I’m very familiar with political spin. Can I assume that politicians are confident that the average person has such a short memory that they won’t notice a 180 degree turn around in attitude?

In the last days of the former Liberal government lower interest rates were GOOD:  “vote for us and be guaranteed lower rates than Labor can deliver”. Clearly, when interest rates are at an all time low such a message can’t be used anymore .

Now my views on interest rates:

1) High interest rates are bad for those struggling with mortgages.

2) Low interest rates are bad for those relying on investments during their retirement.

3) Low interest rates may SEEM to make home ownership more accessible to those trying to buy their first home, but in reality low rates helps to push up property prices – thereby increasing the mortgage burden when rates inevitably increase again.

4) Even small interest rate increases can be crippling when larger amounts of money have been borrowed.

Am I writing this from an anti-Liberal, pro-Labor bias?

No. It is most likely I will vote for the Liberal candidate in my local area – Labor have yet to field a viable candidate who they are willing to invest time and money to promote. However given the choice between current Prime minister Kevin Rudd (Labor) and leader of the opposition Tony Abbott (Liberal),  I’d lean towards neither.

If given my choice I’d like to give Malcolm Turnbull a go – I don’t see a worthy candidate on the Labor side.

 And what about interest rates?

High is bad, low is bad – ideally there would always be a mid-range rate that suits self-funded retirees as well as new (and prospective) home buyers.


Disturbing? (What do you do part 2)

Is it only my impression or is there something disturbingly creepy about these statements from a commenter on the Revivalschool blog?

 “For me personally I go by what Jesus told me before He went back to heaven…” (He then quotes Acts 1)

“If He wants me to know any more than the basic things which He has already shared with me in Matthew 24…”

“Anything else the Lord wants to tell me I’m open for it – but I’m not focusing on it – It wasn’t the last instruction He gave me before He left planet earth…”


This commenter is the same person referred to here:


Dumb, sad, desperate or deluded?

spam5My latest blog stats show I’ve now received 12,096 deliveries of spam.
I don’t know Why anyone in their right mind would think that such garbled, often unintelligible babblings could be effective in promoting their cause.

But there is a more subtle way people try to promote their unwanted messages: by registering a “like” in the comments of a blog entry.
I usually try to follow-up people who “like” what I’ve posted and those who have chosen to follow my blog – in case their blog is something I’d find interesting. I’ve discovered several that are worthwhile.

However, around half of those “likers” and “followers” seem to have nothing in common with me or my blog. I’ve now lost count of the number of young American men who have blogs related to making money without working: letting a blog make money for you. I suspect these sad individuals must get payment for every hit on their blog site and they probably get a few cents from people like me who want to find out more about those who show interest in my own blog.

I had a similar experience with my (now former) phone “service”. On the two occasions when I had problems with my phone, I found their customer service was a call centre in the Philippines, and all they were interested in doing was getting me to ring them as many times as possible; putting obstacle after obstacle in the way so multiple calls had to be made. Obviously they were being paid per call – not per satisfied customer.

The volume of spam is perhaps one of the worst things about WordPress. It’s a problem I never had with my original blog through a different provider.


More anti-Body, anti-leader accusations…

I am so disgusted with the unscriptural “anti-Body” and “anti-leader” diatribes on this thread that I am shutting it down.

Blessings to all.

Andrew Strom

That is the closing comment of a recent thread on Andrew Storms Revival School blog. See the opening article and the following 214 comments here:

One of Strom’s most common complaints over recent months (maybe a year or two) is that too many followers of his blog are “anti-Body” and “anti-leader”. If that is the case, then maybe Strom can’t avoid some of the blame, having exploited the so-called “Out of Church Movement” for a considerable time before turning against those who he had labelled as “Out of Church”.

Like so many times in his Christian life, Strom added another “why I left the …… movement” (fill in the blank with the movement of choice) to his CV. Hopping from one “move” to another, Strom has never really settled to demonstrate his own recognition of leadership or body life. He has never really answered that unspoken question about his own relationship to leadership and the Christian body. Does HE practice what he preaches in this regard?

I know from personal experience how Strom will cut off anyone who tries to question his views, whether in comments on his forum, his blog or through personal email. Several people I know have been banned from his sites for making relevant comments and raising very reasonable questions.

Is this reluctance to accept counsel from others the same reason he has been unable to settle into any regular and consistent face to face fellowship for more than a short time? Is this why it seems he has been unable to practice what he preaches regarding leadership and body life?

I’ve approached Strom personally about his own leadership/fellowship situation and whether it meets the same expectations that he requires of others. He replied asking  “Since you don’t live anywhere near me, how do you claim to know what I am ‘not’ doing?”

I can assess his situation by what is NOT being said on his blog and what he will not say in personal emails. Add to this his past record and the example he has shown on his various sites as well as the  correspondence I’ve had with others who know him and have dealt with him in the past.

Maybe it’s time to set a public example and TELL his blog readers how he is fulfilling those things that he claims others are rejecting regarding leadership and body life, and tell them how it’s all working out so well.

Just a suggestion

Blog Stats

  • 78,462 hits

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 241 other followers