Christmas cheer
Andrew Bartlett responds to suggestions that the Democrats and Greens form a coalition:
Still, the two parties are quite different in our approach to politics and on business/economic issues and I don’t really see the point in even bothering to look at alliances at the moment.
That’s definitely good news, given that his idea of “a fine example of Greens & Democrats co-operation” is going out for a Christmas piss-up instead of turning up in the Senate chamber.
Bartlett’s blog also draws attention to this comment:
I think it is somewhat offensive to say to people who are not of a Christian religion, ‘Merry Christmas,’ as if the rest of the world shares your own world view. It is a multicultural world and there are differences. I do not think there is anything wrong with acknowledging them and choosing a form of greeting to include all people. Christians would say, ‘Merry Christmas.’ Saying, ‘Compliments of the season,’ includes all people. Not everybody happens to be of a Christian religion.
Is this, as Steve Edwards would have us believe, an example of sanctimonious Leftism? No — it’s Amanda Vanstone.
Destroying Western civilisation by undermining our Christian heritage, but kicking out those stinking towel-heads? I think Steve’s head will explode as he tries to grapple with that one.
(Incidentally, Vanstone didn’t let Christmas drinks get in the way of her attendance in the Chamber, as was apparent to anyone who watched proceedings during the final sitting week of the year.)
I do find it a bit odd that Bartlett says that. Because most of the people I know aren’t Christian but they have absolutely no problem with wishing me Merry Christmas or me wishing them back. It’s taken as a token of goodwill to be wished on a holiday whether you celebrate it or not. Occasionally I am wished for Islamic, Hindu and Buddhist holidays and it does not phase me in the least. In fact I am happy that they include me in their thoughts during their time of celebration and that they feel good enough towards me to wish me for the best. I don’t believe anyone who says it is a form of conversion.
Oh, this is just another symptom of the dominance of the Right in setting the current political agenda. With all of the horrible things being done in our name, we’re having a vicious battle-to-the-death over what to say to people at Christmas time.
I think I’ll make a point of wishing everybody a happy commemorative and militant worker’s holiday on May 1 this year.
Marisa: it wasn’t Bartlett who said that, but Amanda Vanstone.
I hope your family haven’t been caught up in the tsunamis.
I find it a bit odd that you think I’d be engaging in a Xmas piss-up. although it is (reasonably enough) not a problem for everyone else in the Senate, as you point out. Besides, going out for a piss-up would only be an example of cooperation with the Greens if the Greens were invited too. The cooperation aspect is letting them handle a Bill on behalf of both parties. This is not unprecedented when it is a Bill that the two major parties are agreeing on anyway.
Andrew, I didn’t say you drank anything — I don’t know, I wasn’t there — but if you really cared about the instant bill, you’d have been there to vote on it. It’s a simple concept really. I think most of the public understand it, even if it’s beyond the Democrats.
I think my post indicated that being there for debate on the Bill wasn’t that important, as Labor and Liberal had both agreed to push it through before the end of the week and the Greens had agreed to make our views known, as the Democrats do for them on occasion. It is a simple concept – allowing someone else to act on your behalf to record your views – I’m not sure why it should be beyond anyone.
If you want to give an accurate picture, you could detail who participated most in the debates on all the legislation through the year.