Just Tuesday morning I wrote on X that, ‘To position oneself for leadership of the Liberal Party, one must distance oneself from Christ, conservatives, convictions, courage, and common sense. Lukewarm compromise is believed to be the career path to Prime Minister.’

As if in a hurry to prove me right the very next day, Andrew Hastie, long considered to be a possible future contender to lead the Liberal Party, wet himself when confronted by journalists about his belief that men are different from women.

Peter Dutton had lowered the bedwetting standard just over a fortnight ago by dis-endorsing a great candidate for no other reason than expressing views which ‘are inconsistent with the party’s position’, according to a party spokesman. Labor’s candidate in that seat accurately described the move as revealing a party ‘in chaos’.

Those views, that men are designed differently than women and women should not be in frontline combat roles, had been articulated by Andrew Hastie, an elite combat veteran and Liberal MP, in February 2018. He’d said, ‘The fighting DNA of a close combat unit is best preserved when it’s exclusively male.’

This came after then-Senator Cory Bernardi caused the Woke media to clutch their pearls in horror by also claiming women serving in combat roles could be against Australia’s national security interests.

In breaking news: Lying Harlot Media shrieks at conservatives speaking common sense!

Have I got this right? An elite SAS veteran gets elected, expresses a common sense view on women in combat, the media and Liberal feminists get their knickers in a knot, and the storm in a teacup predictably passes with the news cycle. Fast forward seven years to this election and another Liberal candidate expresses an almost identical common sense opinion positioning himself against politically correct policies impacting national security, but Peter Dutton panics and lets toxic feminists cancel a good Liberal candidate, then the SAS veteran turns to water when asked if he still has the common sense he expressed in 2018.

Journalist, ‘But you said it, right?’

Hastie, ‘When I think about some of the things I had to do in a close combat unit up at Bindoon, not far from here, live fire drills where you practice a man down, very aerobically intensive, you need fine motor skills, you’re firing live rounds. I remember picking up an 85-kilo mate with my pack and webbing and my legs buckling. Now I did that in training, but I worked with men who did that under fire in combat for a fallen mate.’

Journalist, ‘It sounds like from that answer that you still think women aren’t strong enough. Is that right? That women aren’t strong enough to deal with that sort of combat you described? Is that what you’re saying?’

Hastie, ‘No. I didn’t say that at all.’

I’ll explain this again, because the Liberals will prove me right again and again and again, as they did with bureaucrats working from home and the need to reduce the bloat in the public service.

To position oneself for leadership of the Liberal Party, one must distance oneself from Christ, conservatives, convictions, courage, and common sense. Lukewarm compromise is believed to be the career path to Prime Minister.

What Hastie should’ve said was, ‘Bloody oath I don’t think women aren’t strong enough, and I think I’ve earned the right to that opinion. I respect your right to be wrong, but our enemies have zero respect for your feelings or diversity, equity, and inclusion, so as Minister for Defence, I will make sure the Australian Army is battle-ready and as tough as possible.’

I can guarantee the media would’ve given him endless hours of free advertising, critical and scathing – sure, but it would win the respect and votes of more viewers than it would cost.

Right of Stalin and undecided voters don’t want convictionless, apologetic politicians who fail to inspire or fight. They all say they’ll fight, but they don’t. They surrender quickly when the media says boo.

The thing is, the real Andrew Hastie is the guy from 2018 who said what he believed and had conservative convictions borne of common sense. He didn’t care if you knew them then, but he’s changed. Liberal power brokers are probably whispering in his ear that he’ll be Prime Minister one day if he just plays the long game, doesn’t rock the boat, just waits his turn and plays his cards right. He believes that lukewarm compromise is believed to be the career path to Prime Minister.

Sadly, to a certain extent, that cynically low view of Australian voters is right, inasmuch as it’s a self-fulfilling policy. Australian voters often reward the ‘small target’ campaign strategy which effectively offers nothing except a party which makes the least mistakes, counting on the other party to stuff up.

The thing is, people want to be inspired. They want to be led, challenged, believed in and called to greatness. If only there was a party leader who could do that, but there can’t be in the modern Liberal Party.

The Liberal Party is set up to punish greatness of character and reformational vision for a better Australia. They treat morality, Truth and justice issues as political leprosy, and swiftly teach authentic conservatives that the power brokers will end their ambitions if they rock the boat.

The silver bullet fix to that self-destructive spiral of mediocrity is to take the election of party leaders out of the parliamentary party room and give the power to the grassroots members alone. Let leaders compete by appealing to the true believers of Menzian Liberalism, instead of factions and powerbrokers.

The majority of current Liberal Party MPs and executive are far too craven to let the members decide who should be the nation’s Opposition Leader or Prime Minister, for that would take from them the thing they covet more than national prosperity or security: their personal power.

The nation would be very different – for the better – if state and federal Liberal Party leaders could not be selected (or changed) by people who might prioritise their political careers above their political convictions. Let the annual conventions decide, even if by a conference of delegates from the annual state conventions, the year before each election is due.

Until then, observe the constant repetition of the Lazy Liberal Leader Effect: deliberate distance from Christ, conservatives, convictions, courage, and common sense in the leadership, policies and candidates of the Liberal Party.

Dave Pellowe is a Christian political educator, writer, and founder of Church And State ministries. Visit his website here or follow him on Facebook and X.