Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Why does Andrew Landeryou hate Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia?

Andrew Landeryou hates Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

A good reason why is here, with Wiki showing outstanding editorial excellence with the deletion of this rampant self promotion: "He is generally regarded as an Australian hero, patriot and freedom-fighter. "

Well done Wiki.

ps: Did anyone else know that Andy shares a birthday (19 August, 1970) with a rapper called Fat Joe! Believe it or not!

21 Truth On Comments:

Cait Catt said...

Slanderyou at work again with his attacks on the great man. Jealous of the Walkley Blog Award that Slanderyou will never win we now have more drivel with an attack on the entry in Wikipedia about the great Australian patriot, Andrew Landeryou.

Now we find Slanderyou in league with the Aged gossip writers in slime. Read the brilliant expose in today's Landeryou:


MONDAY MADNESS: Lawrence Money's Top Secret Rat-Hole


In conjunction with a network of spy satellites made available to patriots, the OC Investigations Unit is on the verge of a break-through in its longest-running mystery of all, locating convicted criminal Lawrence Money's secret hideout.

The Age's gossip columnist - once feared now frail and feeble - has kept his location one of Melbourne's best kept secrets to keep process servers and vigilante justice seekers at bay. In the cause of freedom, we have pledged to reveal it. He has arranged with the electoral authorities to suppress his address, a curiously sensitive approach to privacy given his daily attacks on others over the past four decades of gossip column writing. Even his mother before him - Doris van der Hagen - was a gossip columnist too. So we've had to unleash the full array of investigative tools on his sorry ass.

Having first cut loose on the OC's humble proprietor not long after we'd left school, the mission to take down this vile, dandruff flaking, walking conglomeration of puke has been the OC Investigation Unit's Priority One. We are now very close indeed to declaring "Mission Accomplished".

ON THE VERGE OF FINDING THE LIAR'S LAIR
As the above satellite imagery demonstrates, the Unit (as we prefer to be known) is now able to disclose at this time that Money's principal location is a quiet suburban street in inner city Melbourne. We have previously linked him with different locations including the Cranbourne Golf Club (where he remains under close scrutiny for cheating with a partner going by the name of Rosner over certain card irregularities), his "workplace" The Age (where he infrequently attends), Goldfingers strip joint (an Age sponsor known to comp the old geyser), the Victorian Arts Centre (where he wallows with snout in trough at every opening night going) and the suburb of Kensington in Melbourne where he is a known dine-and-dasher (more like hobbler these days).

Money - because of his extremely low reptile-like body temperature - has been able to escape our efforts to track his movements at night using infra-red technology. This has made the search difficult and requiring the use of satellite technology and the tracing of dandruff flakes from the Kensington shopping centre to other nearby mystery locations.

OC Satellite Analyst Freedom Freddy estimates that using the worldwide resources of the OC that we are only a matter of days from revealing the exact address of his rat-hole.

Game on.

Anonymous said...

Landeryou will never win a Walkley Blog Award either because one doen't exist

catter8 said...

That aint so. There is a Walkely Blog Award page on the net, and the inaugural award was won by Andrew Landeryou.

Anonymous said...

*yawn*

Anonymous said...

Why then isn't on Wiki as well?

Anonymous said...

What a beat up Landy's stuff on Money is.

Anonymous said...

Anon, don't u mean beat OFF!

Anonymous said...

And still quiet on that Federal politician lunching with Landeryou.

Is that information possibly a little too hot for Slanderyou to handle?

Anonymous said...

It was Alan Griffin.

Anonymous said...

"Is that information possibly a little too hot for Slanderyou to handle? "

What does that mean? You mean Landeryou. So far, Cait/Catter8/Landeryou have still to deny it. Much like they have yet to deny Landeryou's new car story

Anonymous said...

new car, gold amex
seems Andy's doing alright thankyou very much
better let those outstanding creditors know about this...

The Dark Rider said...

Actually, I don't think Landeryou has to deny anything here. If he says nothing, the post happily dies away and people lose interest.

However, naming the politician he lunched with opens up all sorts of interesting speculation as to why.

If nothing else, it might prompt some questions into how and why he is lunching a Federal politician fresh from the scandals of Brian Burke (of whom he is an ardent supporter).

Questions that I would humbly suggest are in the public interest.

The Dark Rider

Cait Catt said...

Where else but in the OC can we read the latest intelligence from the OC investigations unit about Diane Anderson and her lackey, the esteemed Owen Dixon Chambers barrister Rolf Sorensen:


HIGGINSPEWS: Diane and Rolf Are Back Nastier Than Ever




Sadly the infamous internal ALP slagsheet the Higgins News was getting more than a little sleepy after years of being grumpy. Snow White Comrade Diane Anderson and her gimp dwarf Rolf Sorenson must have been on the happy pills for some time because recent editions had disappointed all as lacking invective, insult, hysteria and hyperbole in their traditional mix.

Ever the crowd pleaser, Diane has fired up the engines Nascar style in a no holds barred extravaganza of complaint, malice, jealousy and even doing her level best to try to talk down the enthusiasm of a Party candidate.

Long may she rain over us. Heavily.

DIDAKTIKA, OR "THE EMPRORER'S (SIC) NEW CLOTHES"

Rolf Sorensen
(Higgins FEA Executive Member)

It was pleasing to note the success of the Second "Inaugural" Screening by the Watson Film Society in March. It marked in my view a momentary return to standards of administrative competence which characterised unfairly maligned past FEA Executives in Higgins. Sadly, subsequent events suggest that such standards are highly unlikely to be maintained under the current Executive. (OC: Quick kiss followed by a slap)

Since the outcome of the 2005 FEA Elections ushered in the era of the Messianic Higgins 'Renewal', our FEA President, Race Mathews, has made me increasingly aware of the need for members of FEA Executive like myself to report back to rank-and-file Branch Members in Higgins as a matter of transparency and accountability. (OC: Messianic, pour it on Rolfie)

Whilst the following account is no doubt deficient compared to those from the Masters who truly personify these ideals, it summarises lessons I have learned since the last FEA Elections.

LESSON 1: DENOUNCE PREDECESSORS TO LOWER EXPECTATIONS
If you create an impression that the previous FEA Executive was "moribund" (by repeating this word over and over again), you maximise your own chances of being able to claim "success", however deficient your actual performance. It can also serve as an excuse and smoke-screen for your own deficiencies. (OC: Race has more polysyllabic insults than just the one, he has recently criticised Evan Thornley for engaging in terminological inexactitudes over the Fabians)

LESSON 2: DON'T GET OBSESSED WITH MINOR FACTUAL DETAILS
In 2005, Race asserted the previous FEA Executive hadn't met since being elected in late 2003. As late as May 2005, a motion including this assertion was proposed to Prahran Branch by the current FEA President. I also recall Race repeating it at a 'Labor First' Forum at Melbourne University on Saturday 23th July 2005. (OC: Naturally the meetings of the Higgins FEA executive would be discussed far and wide)

Perhaps my understanding is deficient, but a more recent conversation left me with the impression he now doesn't recall having ever said it at all. The assertion was and is a falsehood. The facts [That the previous FEA Executive met shortly after its election in 2003 and deferred certain business (for which it was also duly attacked by Race) on the basis that one of their number, Bob Stensholt, was unable to attend the Meeting and it was desirable to operate inclusively] were finally blandly acknowledged by Bob at the first Meeting of the current Executive. Why not, once the FEA Elections were over and the untruth had been allowed to negatively impact on the previous Executive? Even accountability and transparency create no compulsion to inquire why it was that Joel Grant and Bob had seemingly previously been unaware of this long-standing false assertion or failed to defend the Executive of which they were Members against it. This is so even though Race went out of his way to stress how these members of the FEA Executive, as opposed to the ones not factionally-aligned with him, were willing to discuss the situation with him. (OC: If you read and comprehended the past paragraph and cared you are entitled to receive a fraternal tongue kiss from Diane Anderson)

In response to my suggestion it was hardly likely that an Executive which held a successful fund-raiser within some 6 months of election hadn't met (and didn't deserve denunciation as "moribund"); Race queried whether the fund-raiser which it had held was authorised. Though it clearly was, Race still seems to maintain some doubts about this. I suppose such doubts might provide some comfort about the fact that a year and more after the current Executive's Election, it still hadn't presided over any fund-raising. Despite his doubts, though, Race hasn't been over-eager to investigate more fully to ensure money raised should not properly be returned to those who attended the function. (OC: Nice put down, please return to a more ranting theme, that's what we're paying for Rolfie)

As for proper authorization (OC: Please note the spelling of US imperialism has been deployed) of "FEA Events" by the Executive, perhaps the model is the "joint Prahran Branch/ Higgins FEA Barbeque" at the end of 2006. I can't seem to recall the majority of FEA Executive endorsing this designation before the event. Perhaps I was distracted by listening to every other Branch in the FEA informing Race that they already had plans for End-Of-Year Functions (i.e.: try giving reasonable notice of these things) and did not endorse an "FEA Function". (OC: Oh my, could you imagine attending meetings with Rolfie?)

LESSON 3: DON'T OVER-RATE CONSISTENCY
Hysteria has also been generated in the past about "irregularities" in signatories to the FEA Bank Account. (OC: An outrageous breach of Diane Anderson's acknowledged monopoly on hysteria) It is of course impossible that these might have reflected more widespread difficulties in changing signatories to bank accounts of non-incorporated bodies. This reality only became relevant when changes to the signatories decided on by the current Executive still hadn't occurred 8 months after it was elected, notwithstanding the fact that the current FEA Treasurer could be recognised in the Guinness Book of Records for most repetitive whining criticism of "irregularities" regarding signatories to the bank account under previous FEA Executives (he could hardly criticise them for substantive lack of performance when their fund-raising was sufficiently vigorous to allow the current FEA President to concentrate on pontification for an entire year whilst sitting on top of the pile of funds accumulated under the previous "moribund" Executive). (OC: Prize for sentence length there) Signatories to accounts of other ALP constituent units seem to have been successfully changed over the same period, but this should also be ignored. I have also taken the initiative to retrieve for the FEA Treasurer bank statements sent to the former FEA Treasurer, who for some reason was still receiving them months later). (OC: An international banking conspiracy)

LESSON 4: EXCUSES, EXCUSES
Race graciously concedes that it took a while for the new FEA Executive to really get going, but of course it had to concentrate on building emergency housing for all the displaced rank-and-file members fleeing the tyranny (OC: gold-medal *sarcasm*) of the previous Executive and distributing food-parcels to them to save them from starvation (i.e.: Race sat on top of a pile of money accumulated under the sound administration of the supposedly "moribund" previous Executive and pontificated, while refraining from actually doing anything useful and emitting endless propaganda about how it would take time to rebuild from the ground up). The period of basic inactivity after the new Exec was elected was not due to reasons Race gives - a far more plausible explanation and also a kinder interpretation than some other possibilities is a pause for dramatic effect in support of the stream of propaganda about the need for "rejuvenation". (OC: There's something very Defence of the USSR about all this)

LESSON 5: IF ALL ELSE FAILS, RESORT TO PURE PROPAGANDA
According to Race, the FEA is now thriving due to sheer courage and persistence of the new Executive (i.e.: still no fund-raising until March this year, as Race insisted on inaction after we were elected and the schedule was too crowded once we were closer to a State Election - and who could have guessed that?). Race has basically attached the Higgins FEA's name to things others (eg: Local Branches, adjoining FEA's) did all or most the work organising. Then when he did "organise" something himself, he speculated that poor attendance at this Forum on Reforming the ALP was due his "overestimation of rank-and-file members interest in the topic" (i.e.: after blaming everyone else for lack of substantive performance, why not rank-and-file members too, just for novelty's sake?). Most members probably don't have the self-respect to object anyway, do you? (OC: That last sentence should be read as screamed) And you can always rely on factional allies to agree that everything is great. They like nothing better than constant propaganda about how great FEA Executive is, leaving members with the impression they don't really need to do anything themselves, as it's all is in the safe hands of a self-sacrificing retired politician.

LESSON 6: USE MODERN TECHNOLOGY
It is clear from observing Race that the telephone is an anachronistic (or moribund even?) means of communication, only useful for poisonous and misleading attacks on factional opponents during FEA Election Campaigns ( or in justifying not inviting an opponent to an FEA Executive Meeting because you don't have his number ). (OC: LOL, must happen to Rolfie quite a lot) How many of you have heard from Race by telephone since he was elected? (OC: Not me) Far better to just send constant E-Mails about unilateral initiatives without proper notice ( better still, have someone else do it for you ) and demand others get back to you with advice as to numbers attending - which requires phone calls, which requires more notice ). Then you're in a position to blame those to whom you've "delegated" work (without proper notice) for any failure.

LESSON 7: NO FALSE MODESTY
It was my inexcusable neglect in failing to video-tape FEA Executive Meetings which resulted in the FEA President being deprived of a further two potential entries in the Guinness Book of Records. If there's any objective criteria for "most bewildered look", these would surely have been satisfied by the look on Race's face when my fellow Executive Member Margo Carroll asked him: "Well, what's the point of any of the rest of us even being here, then?" during one of his interminable monologues at the Executive's first Meeting. (OC: The impertinence!) It was then that I pointed out to him that he had just used the perpendicular pronoun about 300 times in 2 minutes in outlining a proposed agenda for the FEA (if only more than a fraction of these pontifications had ever come to fruition….). (OC: Diane prefers a wider range of me, myself and I)

LESSON 8: BUT THERE'S STILL JUST ONE PROBLEM
The only remaining problem is that factional opponents may pre-empt your attempt to blame your failure on them, rather than letting you get away with another campaign of denunciation like Race conducted for almost a year before the last FEA Elections.

ROLF CONTEMPLATES KILLING
This can be particularly hard when they won't even "talk over" differences with you for a variety of spurious reasons, such as not wanting to be patronised to death, having already explained their position to you and consequently concluded that doing so again would be a waste of their time and that of the party members whose interests they're trying to serve and not wanting to commit homicide out of sheer frustration with the garbage they're listening to (in violation of the Sixth Commandment [you shall not murder]and probably the First [Protestant - You shall make no gods but me]as well).

Stalin's means of dealing with dissent were probably a bit extreme (OC: His view alone, Diane had no comment), but today's "dissidents" in Higgins would do well to remember these classic words of Max Gillies (aka Bob Hawke): "Consensus is an ideal which can only be reached by agreement and agreement can only be reached by saying: 'I agree with you' - even if you don't agree". Or as Race puts it when you express any dissatisfaction: "That's majority rule". It is sad that younger party members are not able to remember the great days of the Hartley/ Crawford era when an edict from Victorian State Office was issued to all Local Branches requiring an envelope containing a letter in which some trouble-maker was so impertinent as to criticize governance of the party to be forwarded on to State Office unopened. Ideally, the next Higgins FEA Elections will be modelled on the system used by Kenneth Kaunda when he was President of Zambia. Voters were given the choice of either re-electing Kaunda, or supporting his opponent, represented on the ballot-paper by a picture of a frog. (OC: In Diane's case I believe the pig or porcupine symbol would be more appropriate)

OC: Rolfie did pretty well there, let's see how Diane's feeling:

"THE KNOWLEDGE GAINED FROM HISTORY IS THE TRUEST EDUCATION AND TRAINING FOR POLITICAL ACTION" - POLYBUS IN THE HISTORIES

Diane Anderson - Tooronga Branch

I have repeatedly referred in the pages of Higgins News to the axiom that those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it (George Santayana). Now that the 2007 Federal Election is fast approaching, I fear that the lessons of past Higgins campaigns is about to be ignored yet again. Vaughan Duggan's dreams of raising thousands of dollars for a Higgins campaign that will defeat Costello is yet a repetition of past follies.

The excuse given for wanting to waste thousands of dollars on Higgins campaigns in one of the least winnable of Liberal seats is the example of Burwood. For those new to Higgins and/or to the ALP, to draw parallels between Higgins and Burwood is an exercise in delusion. The Higgins FEA contains what The Age newspaper pointed out are five of the ten least affordable areas in which to live in all of Australia. (OC: Diane takes such exception she lives in another electorate completely) While much of Marx is now discounted, his notions of class consciousness still ring true (OC: To Diane at least). It matters little if you deluge these wealthy folk with scores of professionally constructed glossy letterbox leaflets, a Labor Government that is doing what it is supposed to do, i.e. looking after the interests of the disadvantaged and the environment while dealing with inequalities in the tax system, will have little attraction for the wealthy burgers (OC: We assume she means burghers not the McDonald family) of Toorak, Armadale, Malvern, South Yarra and East Malvern. These people know it is not in their best interests to elect people with an agenda for making society fairer. (OC: But isn't Diane filthy rich?)

Burwood circa 1999 was a different matter. Until their recent yuppification, Burwood and Prahran were the parts of the Higgins FEA from which we drew the bulk of our support. Both had Housing Commission properties and smaller homes with working class people actually living in them. (OC: As distinct from Diane who doesn't actually live at her enrolled address)

For years, long time Higgins activists like myself told ALP Head Office that we needed to start running a good local candidate to build up that individual's profile in Burwood. (OC: Diane naturally thought herself to be pretty good) We repeatedly said that if Kennett were to leave the seat under ignominious circumstances, i.e. loss of government with Kennett retiring thereafter, the seat was winnable. Our advice was repeatedly ignored by the know-it-alls in the factions who control Head Office. (OC: An unusually cross-factional slap, have the SL gone cold on Diane)

In 1999, our predictions came true. Kennett's deeply disliked Government went out of office when three independent MLAs helped formed the minority Bracks Government. At the time, Labor Unity Faction had stacked their way to control of the FEA through the use of the notorious Cerritelli stacks. (OC: Poor old Joe Cerritelli, he recruited a few eager people to join up and Diane still hasn't got over it) When Pippy Watson went into retirement from the Party following her husband Ian Watson's much deserved elevation to the IRC, the credible face of LU disappeared. The 1998 expose of the Cerritelli stacks in the November edition of Higgins News coincided with Mr. Cerritelli's departure for another FEA, albeit with his stacks still in place. (OC: Presumably therefore disproving the assertion that they were his stacks in the first place, n'est ce pas?)

Kennett's resignation created a crisis for Labor Unity. They had no credible candidate on the ground. Bob Stensholt had just moved into Higgins, and he lives in Jickle Street which is in the Hawthorn Electorate. LU decided that Bob was their best hope, however. While I don't believe Bob has ever engaged in branch stacking, his preselection came as a gift of the presence of the Cerritelli LU stacks (as did his election to FEA Exec and FEA State Conference delegate positions). The word went out that it was pointless for anyone else to consider standing for Burwood as the LU Higgins stacks would deliver the preselection to the LU candidate. (OC: Everything could have different had Diane been selected instead of Burwood Bob)

The 1999 Burwood campaign was a by-election. All of the Party's personnel and its resources were directed to one seat. The media gave the campaign unlimited scrutiny. It was also a chance for the voters to send a personnel message to Kennett about what they thought of his social vandalism. Given these circumstances, it was anything but a surprise to seasoned Higgins campaigners that Labor won the seat. (OC: Diane knows all and sees the future)

To his credit, Bob recognised that the next time he would be fighting a very different campaign. He would have the advantage of incumbency for sure, but he would also no longer have the advantage of extraordinary resources, personnel and media coverage. He began non-stop campaigning. His efforts locally coupled with the honeymoon period of the Bracks Government that extended into the 2002 Election helped secure the seat for Labor. (OC: So the dodgy candidate of the broad right did rather well as it turned out. Kudos to the 'notorious' Cerritelli stacks)

In the past, Higgins ALP candidates understood that our job in Higgins was to fly the flag in a low cost high profile campaign. Jenni Bundy, Ken Penaluna and Laurie Walsh all ran good campaigns that did not break the bank. In my opinion, the best Higgins Campaign in my 29 year association with the Higgins FEA (I moved down from the Horsham Branch in 1978) was actually Joe Cerritelli's 1993 Campaign. We spent $700 yet got a swing higher than the national average. Joe made use of his contacts to get free coverage in the ethnic press. We did a targeted letterbox drop that we produced and ran off ourselves. Joe and I used "donated" paper from members to run off 10,000 leaflets at ALP Head Office. We distributed various issues flyers at train stations that were run off by individual members who took responsibility for their production and distribution. We did street walks. Joe attended community events. None of these were high cost activities. (OC: Is this not the same sleazy, chubby branch-stacking Italian we'd been slagging off in preceding paragraphs?)

We were concerned to conserve money because we knew that it is important to view the ALP in totality and to direct scarce money to marginal seats where that money can do the most good. We also had experienced a bad situation where a former candidate had spent money not authorized by the Higgins Campaign Committee. Barry Hirt and Michael Schafer wrote four figure cheques of their own money after the election to keep the local Party from ruin.

Despite these lessons, in 1998, what Senator Stephen Conroy once called "candidatitis "set in with a vengeance. Candidatitis is a condition whereby normally sane individuals, often starting with the candidate him/herself, come to believe the propaganda that we put out to the general community that an unwinnable seat is winnable. If you just throw a little more money into the campaign coffers, so the theory goes, the seat will fall to Labor. The theory has been proved demonstrably false not only in Higgins but throughout the country as well. (OC: This can apply in some safe held seats too)

The reason that I am repeating this message yet again is that I am alarmed at comments that I am hearing from Vaughan Duggan and some other Higgins members about fundraising. I have heard calls for extravagant events at a high cost to members to raise money to "defeat Costello and take Higgins as we took Burwood." It is one thing to make the 'Higgins is winnable like Burwood' analogy for the general public as part of our campaign strategy. It is another thing to delude ourselves to our detriment and the detriment of the Party as a whole.

The matter is further complicated because in 1998 at the behest of Bob Stensholt and the then candidate, Jude Wallace (OC: A lefty whose crime is not being pure lefty enough), the Higgins Campaign Committee became a discrete entity entirely separate from the FEA Executive. Up until that point, the two bodies effectively operated as one with everyone in the FEA welcome to participate in campaign activities but with the FEA Exec by and large taking responsibility for fundraising for the candidate. That means that FEA fundraisers and campaign committee fundraisers are different items run for different purposes.

Campaign Committee fundraisers are held for the purpose of raising funds for the candidate's campaign. It is important that there are low cost activities in which everyone can participate regardless of income. It is also understandable that in seats that Labor holds or has a genuine chance of winning, i.e. recognised marginal seats, there will be a need for some fundraisers whose cost will prohibit many members attending. Bob Stensholt, for example, runs expensive fundraisers that many of us cannot afford, but we wish him well in those endeavours. He also runs the enormously successful and low cost soup kitchen each year that draws many Higgins members who appreciate the great soup and the chance to engage in great conversation with their fellow Higgins members at a cost most everyone can afford. (OC: No soup for you, shrieks Diane at those who transgress her doctrines)

FEA fundraisers serve a different purpose. Over the years that I served on the FEA Executive, we always made donations to our candidates at both the state and the federal level. We knew, however, that it was important to reserve some of our money for the purpose of running the FEA. Aside from traditional operating expenses, during my time on the FEA Exec we held policy seminars, and as Women's Officer, I ran three Women's Seminars including one with Joan Kirner to which we invited women from other FEAs. The FEA Exec underwrote the costs of the functions. These FEA sponsored affairs were all reported in Higgins News. (OC: Huzzah for Diane!)

To fund these activities, we held one fundraiser each year, usually in May or June. To run more we knew would risk the danger of clashing with branch fundraisers and candidates' fundraisers. We saw the purpose of these FEA fundraisers as being social as well as financial. We invited good speakers who also fielded questions from members. The price was deliberately kept low - $25.00/$20.00 concession. We provided chicken, plates, cups, cutlery and non-alcoholic drinks while Higgins members donated salads and desserts and brought their own wine. That meant that on a $25.00 admission, we cleared about $20.00 in profits. FEA Exec members and often the RO as well donated bottles of wine for a raffle the proceeds of which all became profit. We left the FEA financially sound (OC: dubiously vague) despite imputations to the contrary during the last FEA Elections two years ago.

I am distressed that ¾ of the way through its term of office, this FEA Exec has run no such function. The Exec has spent money raised by previous Execs in the form of campaign donations rather than raising its own money. I know that members of the Exec are not happy about the high handed fashion in which the President now runs the FEA, so I will leave them to discuss those problems. I do know that causally (sic) suggesting that $50.00 tickets for Keating, the Musical of which only $5.00 is profit strikes me as a poor return for the work involved in getting people to attend. The cost also ensures that many people cannot go if they wish to do so. It's an indication of how out of touch with the economic reality of the lives of many of our members that some people who profess leadership skills appear to be. (OC: Says the millionaire heiress)

It appears that Barbara Norman will be the candidate for Higgins. Barbara is an intelligent and articulate woman capable of articulating Labor's message without spending vast sums of ALP money that could be better used in targeted marginals. She will be best served by a campaign committee that learns the lessons of past Higgins campaigns, the positive ones and the negative ones.

We do not need a high cost campaign to get out the Senate vote as some grandstanders like to suggest to rationalise their desire to run an expensive campaign. Higgins residents have education levels that match their economic levels making them among the best educated people in Australia. They are quite capable of putting one over the line without our telling them to do so with an elaborate publicity campaign. Compulsory voting means that we don't have the problem of getting out the vote that exists in the USA. (OC: Diane clearly believes less is more when it comes to campaigning, not a doctrine consistently applied to party journals however)

What we do have to do in Higgins is demonstrate a presence so that Costello knows he has an opposition and cannot completely ignore his own electorate during the campaign. Street stalls, train station activities, visits to community groups, calling in contacts in various community groups for publicity in their newsletters, monitoring talkback radio, writing letters to the papers, monitoring the Internet, etc. involve large numbers of enthusiastic campaigners, but far less cash than some would suggest. If we want value for money in terms of member participation and votes on polling day, we should learn the lessons of the 1993 Campaign. (OC: And do what Diane says, Amen)

Game on.

Anonymous said...

I have never for the life of me seen such a long posting. This Diane must have some attraction for Andy Landy.

Anonymous said...

Didn't Evan Thornley have the hots for Diane?

Anonymous said...

My name is not Cait Catt so I'm not a Landeryou sycophant. This item appeared tonight as a comment on the Landeryou blog:

Dianne can't be all that mad. She's been in love with Lyle Alan for years.

Lyle has to beat the chicks off with a stick. No doubt his sex appeal and charisma is what made the ALP make him a life member.
Anonymous | 05.08.07 - 1:51 pm | #


Is Diane looking for Lyle?

Anonymous said...

Who is promoting Diane Anderson?

Anonymous said...

Might be Lawrence Money. He did quite a story about Diane when she was expelled for heresy from the Unitarian Church.

Anonymous said...

Why is Landeryou posting material about the woman he calls a fruitloop on the Slanderyou blog in the name of his sock puppet Cait Catt?

Anonymous said...

Perhaps he thinks it will help him win another Walkley Blog Award, if he in fact did win a previous one as Catt is always suggesting he did on this blog.

Anonymous said...

Hi to all, for the reason that I am genuinely keen of reading this blog's post to be updated daily. It carries nice material.

Check out my site ... thermodynamics