The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Abbott: Australia’s Sarah Palin > Comments

Abbott: Australia’s Sarah Palin : Comments

By Kellie Tranter, published 19/8/2010

Tony Abbott: can you really trust someone willing to opportunistically disclaim his entrenched values and opinions?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. All
kellie writing a negative and desperate piece to help prop up PM Gillard of the extreme left (though in disguise for the sake of the election), by smearing Tony Abbott - what a surprise!

If Gillard loses kellie, try not to be as poisonous as the American left is about Sarah .. oh, too late, you're already there.
Posted by Amicus, Thursday, 19 August 2010 9:21:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a joke, comparing Abbott to Palin. Another article to appeal to the football mentality of the simplistic left.

Kellie, my personal opinion is that Abbott would rip you to shreds debating on most (if not all) issues.

You are another commentator who thinks he or she knows best on almost everything. That is all Australia needs. Another John Pilger.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:09:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What Tony Abbott could get away with doing (and to a certain extent, saying) as PM would depend on how much he was countered in Caucus and Cabinet, and that might depend on the Catholic and non-Catholic religious Liberal colleagues he is going to have in his inner sanctum.
Posted by McReal, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:18:07 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanka be that if he wins, the Greens will control his excesses in the Senate.
Posted by sarnian, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:21:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Amicus and Chris Lewis
Most of Kellie Tranter's comments were based on what Tony Abbott has said in recent years. You may believe that the leopard can change his spots quickly. I think Voltaire was correct.
As for Catholic morality, as mentioned by a priest in regard to Tony Abbott I find such morality very doubtful even neglecting the recent paedophilia by priests and the cover up.
There is something quite evil in the Jesuit attitude of "Give us the child until the age of seven...". If we respect the rights of the child we should be teaching them how to think clearly not how to swallow dogma.
Posted by Foyle, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:29:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kellie seems a little nervous that the one she hates might sneak into power. 80000 abortions a year under Mr Howard not enough for you Kellie. Of course its about the woman who got raped, oh no we changed our mind its about a woman's right to do what she wants with the babies body and now its about killing the child up to nine months. Your reasoning is very sick Kellie. No doubt the science is settled is backing your opinion. A baby is not a child at nine months unless of course someone punches a pregnant woman.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:34:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Being a tedious bore as usual, this image sums up Tony's world-view--or rather formative emotional-sexual patterning.

http://www.availableimages.com/images/pictures/2004/the-passion/aph_6.jpg

Which could explain why he is always punishing his body by extreme "sporting" efforts, and when he was a boxer at Oxford

Plus once again the applied politics that inevitably flows from such a vision.

http://www.logosjournal.com/hammer_kellner.htm

http://www.matthewfox.org/sys-tmpl/htmlpage7

Remember too that under the leadership of George Pell "catholic" Sydney is infested with opus dei hacks.

Bill Muehlenberg also subscribes too, and actively promotes the same essentially psychotic vision
Posted by Ho Hum, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:45:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner, Most would agree we ought to push and work for a lower abortion rate. Your fixation on the very, very rare late-term abortions for foetuses that will be non-viable outside the womb is bizarre.
Posted by McReal, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:51:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a ridiculous article.

Tony Abbott is a Rode Scholar, and Sarah Palin is an idiot.

I argue that a Rode Scholar is certainly smarter than the author of this trash who I guess has never heard of a Rode Scholar, and who most certainly never attended a school that produced one!

With you understanding, I bet a vote for the Greens would be popular in your circle.
PS You do know that the Greens are not an environmental party!
Posted by Angry Oak, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:52:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
foyle "You may believe that the leopard can change his spots quickly. I think Voltaire was correct."

Ah, so you also believe then that Comrade Gillard also does not change her spots? Is that what you're saying, that her past is squeaky clean, moving forward of course so no one looks back at what she truly believes - do you think she has abandoned all her socialist left views, that she learned at the family dinner table, then went on to make her entire life?

She's even lied about her socialist past (Tony hasn't lied about his past, has he?), do you believe she was "just a typist" for the movement she turns out to have been on the management level of?

So you can't believe Tony Abbot, but you can believe Julia Gillard.

She's a socialist, through and through, and this campaign is using whatever it takes to make her look rational and appealing - it's a facade.

You go on to make smearing comments then about the church, what about some smearing comments about the socialists, (You know of course the Nazis were national Socialists of course, evil) What about the union movements with their criminal behavior, their dirty laundry.

What utter rubbish .. it's just blind faith and selective hatred and any excuse for it, typical of the one eyed leftist.

So what did Voltaire say about leopards?
Posted by Amicus, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:55:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Amicus,

You are just a fool.

and in reply to your long winded rants, I simply quote Winston Churchill

“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.”

out!
Posted by Angry Oak, Thursday, 19 August 2010 10:59:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.”

Indeed

"Tony Abbott is a Rode Scholar" ? ? ? ?

AO

That is "Rhodes Scholar", what were you saying about fools?
Posted by Johnny Rotten, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:03:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Amicus,

I Apologise, Foyle was the target of my anger.

So I now say to Foyle

You are just a fool.

and in reply to your long winded rants, I simply quote Winston Churchill

“Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.”

out!
Posted by Angry Oak, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:05:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
angry oak .. not a problem, I understand completely
Posted by Amicus, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:24:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The article is a mish mash of half baked ideas, long filler quotes from some from known and some from unknown people,and,like a Bob Brown speech, relies on rhetoric not logic and doesn't come to any conclusions, just makes end statements. The article is an ill thought out pre-election conservatives put down. That's all.

Its quite ironic that Kellie Tranter along with a multitude of other lefty women put Sarah Palin down more than did any man. The same people, of course,will blame the 'patriarchy' for preventing women entering Politics.

Kellie, you say you want more women in Politics but apparently only as long as they follow YOUR ideology. You can now be seen for what you are - an ideologue hiding behind the 'justice for women' banner. A wolf in sheeps clothing.

The author is doing more to disenfranchise women then any man could through her outright rejection of conservative females, who make up about 1/2 of the female electorate.

A perfect example of how the Left is intolerant to diversity. How about a fair go for ALL women?
Posted by Atman, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:40:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Just becasue someone is a Rhodes Scholar doesn't mean they have any common sense...doesn't mean they haven't got it either...but either way, I wouldn't get caught up in academic achievement when talking about running a country. I have come across many very bright people who have no idea about the practicalities of ordinary life and struggle to boil rice when asked to cook dinner
Posted by Phil Matimein, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:48:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It is totally biased to claim Tony Abbott is Australia's Sarah Palin for two reasons:

Abbott doesn't shoot moose.

Palin isn't a Rhodes Scholar.
Posted by Johnny Rotten, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:55:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Even blind Freddie can see through Sarah Palin. Abbott supporting her and her ideals is about what one would have expected from such a feckless person. By the same token, Gillard is so compromised by the Melbourne Zionists that can't even spell Palestine. She is pathetic in her lack of compassion and humanity.
Never in the history of this country have the poor voters ever been faced with such a dilemma. Tweedledum or Tweedledee.

The values represented in the two candidates is dismal. I am out of words on this subject but ask those readers who still have some reservations about both of the aspiring Prime Ministers to at least ensure that neither party controls the Senate. I consider after the last 64 hours analysing the statements made by the 'leaders' that the accounting errors are staggering on both sides of the fence and following the sincere presentation at the Press Club yesterday by Bob Brown, my confidence in the need for a third and active party in Australia is confirmed.

As much as the entrenched system favours the major parties, the opportunity on this occasion to construct a new organisation with decent ideals, fair and equitable policies across the board was certainly there in June but the timeframe was inadequate. But it needs to be done. It needs to follow public meetings where real people can elect real and sincere politicians not the likes of Abbott, Bishop, Arbib, Gillard and her compromised connections. We do not deserve such people and will never have a feeling of pride in their actions, particularly on the international stage, while they have policies that do not address the problems here. Water is a problem, so is population, food production, pollution, education and health and the candy-covered policies dished out on this campaign can never be seen as ever solving our problems.

Whatever the result, a party needs to be established that takes into account all viewpoints to attract decent candidates, not opportunitstic incompetents, thick on the hustings in 2010.

As I said, a dismal prospect.
Posted by rexw, Thursday, 19 August 2010 12:00:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What a convenient model of feminism for women to follow. They can do whatever they want (except join the American Republican Party) and anyone who comments on their behaviour is being controlling. No man is ever allowed to disagree with any woman at any time without facing this criticism. Many Christians believe that abortion is murdering a baby. I'm not sure that freedom of choice extends quite that far.

Meanwhile, Tony isn't even free to keep his religous convictions.
Posted by benk, Thursday, 19 August 2010 12:30:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Angry Oak
So six lines of comment is a long rant?
Why not comment on the morality issue I raised?
I did comment that the article was mainly based on recent quotes from Tony Abbott. As one who supports a mixed economy and believes political action should be secular in nature I am disappointed in Julia Gillard's attitude on some issues.
However I think Tony Abbott has been deceitful in regard to government debt and the benefits obtained from the stimulus packages. The housing crisis which hit the USA was avoided in Australia because employment was maintained, not because of anything Howard and Costello had done. A couple of days ago Crikey had an excellent bar chart showing how our debt related to the debts of other nations. Australia's debt is minuscule.
Before the GFC our debt was low because we as citizens no longer owned many real assets such as the Commonwealth Bank, Telstra and the Commonwealth Serum Laboratories,etc. Those real assets had been converted to cash to make the books look good and achieve the goals of Howard's conservative philosophy.
Prior to Howard we collectively owned more assets but now we individually owe more money.
I have in my file a letter sent to Howard warning that the policies being followed in 1998 would price many young people out of buying their own home. That didn't happen?
Posted by Foyle, Thursday, 19 August 2010 12:52:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have been saying this about mr abbot all along.
A windvane of a flipflopper who will do and say whatever he thinks will get him elected.

Either he is willing to summarily abandon his deeply held (religious) beliefs in a quest for power in which case he should be condemned as a shallow lightweight populist.

Or he still possess his long held beliefs and he is lying about them until he gains power whereupon the "real" tony will emerge in which case he should stand condemned as a dishonest toerag out to con his way to office.

Either way it would be a mistake to vote for this idiot and his party.
Posted by mikk, Thursday, 19 August 2010 1:00:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Abbott hasn't changes his spots. His position on abortion has been consistent for a number of years: that abortions should be safe, legal and rare.

No whatever your views on abortion, this is not an extreme position. This is a conservative pro-choice view.

If there is one candidate who's changing their spots, it's Julia Gillard. She is the one who in 2007 claimed she was an economic conservative (as did Rudd and Swan). We now know that's not true. In 2010 she has said that:
- she does not support a "big Australia"
- she shares people's concerns about boat people
- has announced that she does not support gay marriage.

Does anyone believe that Gillard really believes these things, or do you instead believe that she is saying whatever she thinks will buy her more votes, including espousing the exact opposite views to the one she privately holds?
Posted by AJFA, Thursday, 19 August 2010 1:10:40 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kellie, this article seriously denigrates Sarah Palin.

To liken her to Abbott is grossly unfair. She is better looking than Abbott and she can do things with crowds that Abbott could never do.

Sure, she is a bit flaky but Abbott is profoundly flaky and he can change his mind in a nano-second and happily go in the opposite direction. An example? Not only does he want to cancel the mining super-profits tax but he wants to give miners taxpayer's money to help them explore.

Kellie, please send Palin an apology in case she gets to read your article!
Posted by David G, Thursday, 19 August 2010 2:22:03 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Tony Abbott is nothing like Sarah Palin!

Abbott is at least a decent guy with a brain. Abbott was a Rhodes scholar whereas Palin would flat-out qualifying to get into a Tafe.

Other than the fact that they're both on the conservative side, what else is the similarity?

I know some people are scared that Abbott might win but this seriously takes the cake.
Posted by David Jennings, Thursday, 19 August 2010 2:39:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Although I'm no fan of Mr Abbott, I have to agree that comparing him to Sarah Palin is ludicrous. Palin is a product of Tea Party America - inward looking and uncompromising in its self-interest...and she's none too bright either.
Posted by Poirot, Thursday, 19 August 2010 2:50:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Anti-abortionists believe a bundle of cells has more rights than a fully grown woman. funnily enough, they also seem to be more prone to abuse of children too. So they really only care about foetuses, but lose interest once out of the womb...they say this is "protecting those without a voice", yet ignore those without voices that are born and actually living!
Yep, I'd say the anti-abortion stance is about ignorance (most fertilised eggs are rejected naturally: natures quality control given such a hit and miss process having evolved.)...but most importantly *power*. Being holier than thou and getting militant is the religious creed. Protecting "innocents" who cannot say "mind your own business" is a convenient little cloak of virtue that attempts to hide their grubby little egos. Yes the smart ones cover it up, but this type of person is not good for society.
Posted by Ozandy, Thursday, 19 August 2010 3:03:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bob Hawke was a Rhodes Scholar too but any similarity between him and Rabbott is purely coincidental, kind of like comparing a real leader with a box of used tissues.

At least Hawke was consistent in his positions. Phoney has had more positions than the Karma Sutra except for one thing! Work Choices. Yes, that was Phoney and Little John's only claim to fame: setting up a system that screwed the workers and advantaged the rich and powerful.

But Phoney went further. While Health Minister, he also took billions out of the health system which, during a mining boom, was a brave, visionary move.

Hopefully, on Saturday, Phoney will get the result he deserves: political oblivion
Posted by David G, Thursday, 19 August 2010 3:07:59 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ozandy

I'd suggest that people who cannot handle criticism have the runaway egos. Those women who insist that men must lose every argument to prove that we aren't controlling need to put their ego back in its box.
Posted by benk, Thursday, 19 August 2010 3:47:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ozandy "Anti-abortionists yada yada also seem to be more prone to abuse of children too"

Wow, nice smear ozandy .. where did you get that, or is it just made up, like your version of climate science is, never let unsupported data get in the way of slagging off at someone, eh?

"Yep, I'd say the anti-abortion stance is about ignorance"

Yep, you'd know about a stance being based on ignorance, you're the local expert, without peer.
Posted by Amicus, Thursday, 19 August 2010 4:05:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41VJISBGi9E is my response to those people who would say "Why would you vote for abbott"
Posted by Angry Oak, Thursday, 19 August 2010 4:42:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The major parties have been very cautious about making personal smears against opponents because polls showed they could easily rebound, detracting from the offender's credibility and good standing. They are right of course to avoid the sort of scurrilous personal attacks that have been common in previous elections.

It has been a refreshing change that hopefully will become more widespread, if only through journalists and other commentators realising that attitudes generalise and the public might similarly reject their opinion pieces too should they resort to personal attacks in lieu of facts.

Oh well, Rome wasn't built in a day, but most of us have a vested interest in demanding frank, fair and independent comment from those who would presume to influence us.
Posted by Cornflower, Thursday, 19 August 2010 5:00:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Angry Oak and Amicus
I am disappointed no one has taken up my challenge on Catholic morality of my summary in the second post re economic matters as handled by conservatives such as Tony Abbott.
There have however been several comments on abortion. Years ago my comment which follows was the lead item in the SMH letters on this subject.
The average mother in the developed word gives live birth to less than three children in her lifetime. With the depletion of our resources that is more than enough. In effect about 300 eggs in the menstrual cycles of each woman's potential childbearing years are destroyed along with millions of her partner’s sperm.
It is strange that many of those who oppose abortion are the philosophical descendants of the people who murdered so called witches (many of whom were only affected by rye flour poisoning) and who condemned Galileo for supporting the thesis that the earth went around the sun.
The sensible limit to abortion is that no one has the right to inflict pain or disadvantage on a conscious personality. The foetus in the first few months is not a conscious personality.
We need to get our priorities right.
All pro-lifers should ask themselves what is their personal priority between unborn foetuses and the 30000 children who die each day because we do not feed or house them adequately or did not provide adequate birth control measures to their parents.
Posted by Foyle, Thursday, 19 August 2010 5:05:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"GetUp - an independent, grass-roots community advocacy organisation that doesn’t back any particular party"

Given their latest adverts calling on voters not to vote for Tony
Abbott, (which pre dated this thread) would appear to be a bit of a lie on Kellie's part.

At least she hasn't tried to claim any unbiased status.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 19 August 2010 5:26:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Kellie,We cannot trust any of our pollies.They are all lying conmen.Our political system is now almost corrupted beyond redemption.

We live in a oligarchy in which large corporate interests control our political system.Not even the Greens are honest and pure.

Large Corporate interests love big spending socialist Govts since they get the bulk of the taxes born out of Govt waste and corruption.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 19 August 2010 6:56:35 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Abbott the Joker at the Head of the Tea Party. Agree Abbott is a risk. No joke when it comes to the Liberals being as far right as Sarah Palin. [Freaky].

His association with Pell, is alarming. Pell is an embarrassment to Australia. Wonder what the Pope would say if he knew of his comment toward the Greens. Terrible script from this sector. offensive to most other Church groups. I hope they deal hard with Pell.Reflects directly why we don't need religion anywhere near politics..... Australia. It only takes one!

http://www.miacat.com/
Posted by miacat, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:25:19 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
now let me see. Abbot association with Pell and Browns association with Singer. One believes in the sanctity of life while the other sees no harm in bestiality. I wonder which one has extreme views? Gillard is often more comfortable with Brown/Singer than Abbot/Pell.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 19 August 2010 11:31:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I share the author's worries about Tony Abbott's well known, archaic views on ironing, women, feminism, abortion and female virginity.

I can't imagine how a man, who was actually training to be a priest, would now suddenly change all his old-fashioned, deeply ingrained views.

The fact that he EVER praised a politician like Sarah Palin only serves to further alert me to his obviously still fervently held religious convictions.

I agree that a leopard never changes his spots.
Posted by suzeonline, Friday, 20 August 2010 12:42:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
More Tranter socialist/green tantrums.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Friday, 20 August 2010 8:42:53 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'We are all influenced by a value system that we hold, but in the end, every decision that a politician makes is, or at least should, in our society be based on the normal sorts of considerations. It's got to be publicly justifiable; not only justifiable in accordance with a private view; a private belief.'
Posted by Clownfish, Friday, 20 August 2010 8:49:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner
You have repeated your previous misrepresentations of Peter Singer views.

As I recall, Singer has never advocated aggressive sexual acts by humans being perpetrated on animals. Yet you have repeatedly stated he has advocated such acts by labelling his views as advocating bestiality

I have made this point previously in response to your comments.
You appear never to let facts get in the way of your dogmatic views.

Christian morality has to face the problems arising from the barbarous behaviour claimed by the prophets of the old testament to have been approved, even mandated, by their god.

Even some of the moral proposals attributed to Christ are at best doubtful, such as hating your relatives to follow him.
Posted by Foyle, Friday, 20 August 2010 9:20:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suzeol "I agree that a leopard never changes his spots"

I can see that you, like many others are keen for a committed socialist to be our leader, as none of you can see that she could possibly change from what she has been most of her life.

Interesting that you see benefits for Australia being led by a socialist .. what are those benefits and where have worked before?

China, Russia ..?
Posted by Amicus, Friday, 20 August 2010 9:35:52 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foyle you defend your High Priest with this

'As I recall, Singer has never advocated aggressive sexual acts by humans being perpetrated on animals'

Singer clearly indicated his endorsement for consensual sex with animals. With a morality base formed from the evolution faith it really is no surprise. Stop being so deceitful and misrepresenting your hero.
Posted by runner, Friday, 20 August 2010 10:57:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner,
You again misrepresent what Singer has said on the subject. He in effect said that if a pet licks a human the pet is being sexual. He did also say that it did not matter what part of the anatomy the pet licked as, so long as the human was a passive participant, it was irrelevant to deciding if a criminal act had been committed.
I see that as nothing evil compared to paedophilia or cover up of such abuse of children.
I think that that is a fair assessment.
Posted by Foyle, Friday, 20 August 2010 12:41:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If Tony Abbott wins on Saturday, I hope he thanks the anti-Catholic bigots and trendy lefties whose clichaic, shallow and smug self-righteousness helped him consolidate his vote. The principle is “The enemy of my enemy makes my enemy look not so bad after all.”
Posted by Chris C, Friday, 20 August 2010 1:16:39 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think it's relevant to this conversation that Rhodes Scholarships weren't even available to women until 1977.
Posted by Irmin, Friday, 20 August 2010 3:48:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
What absolute twaddle.

She is much prettier, & even with that twang, she is better spoken, makes a better speech, & is more fun.

Wonder what she looks like on a bike, in lycra?
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 20 August 2010 4:37:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
@ Hasbeen - Wonder what she looks like on a bike, in lycra?

Dunno, but here's how Sarah looks in a miniskirt:

http://blogs.smarter.com/blogs/guests/sarah%20palin%20formal.jpg
Posted by Irmin, Friday, 20 August 2010 4:52:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Gratuitously criticising GetUp - an independent, grass-roots community advocacy organisation that doesn’t back any particular party" - Oh yes that's really obvious.

Did anyone else see The Chasers version of a GetUp add on Yes We Can-berra?

"how does Abbott explain away his entire blog dedicated to “The hypocrisy of the women’s movement”."

There is plenty of hypocrisy in the women's movement as there is in most movements. It's those who refuse to admit that the movements they support are not perfect or who get all insulted by those who point out the failings who are the real risk. I've not read Tony's blob on the topic so I have no way of knowing if I think that the criticisms are fair or not.

R0bert
Posted by R0bert, Friday, 20 August 2010 5:02:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foyle you know as well as anyone who watched Q& A that Singer spoke of a dog giving a woman oral sex. No amount of twisting his words can change that. Most of the audience found it amusing especially the host. I personally found it repulsive along with any others with any sort of decent moral base. Your mate Bob Brown as humanist of the years is good friends with Singer. Why can't you be simply honest?
Posted by runner, Friday, 20 August 2010 5:47:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The libs should have used this ad, it says it all

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41VJISBGi9E
Posted by Angry Oak, Friday, 20 August 2010 5:53:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks Irmin. That's one for Abbott.

Sarah has no chance of smuggling budgies. With those clothes they would escape in seconds. In fact, they appear to be having enough trouble just keeping her in.
Posted by Hasbeen, Friday, 20 August 2010 6:58:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Amicus, I never said I wanted Julia to win tomorrow- socialist or not.

It will amuse me if Labor wins though, as I can almost see all the conservatives choking on their evening meals with that outcome!

The two parties are much of a muchness, except for a Holy Abbott at the pulpit of one party.

I will be voting for the greens.
Posted by suzeonline, Friday, 20 August 2010 10:06:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Further to my previous post:
Tony Abbott has almost won – and may scrape in if the cross-benchers go his way. I hope the author of this article has made him aware of it so he can thank her for her unintended efforts on his behalf.
Posted by Chris C, Sunday, 22 August 2010 9:10:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Woman brought in as a figure head to rescue a flagging campaign.

Sounds more like Julia Gillard to me.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 23 August 2010 10:50:32 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We will always have people who appear intelligent,and yet live their lives based on superstition.That they attain high office is not surprising as there is plenty of them.When they insist, as they will, that their moral view is the right and only view, then they must be challenged. Advocates of physical pain and denial, as a way of life, have to be exposed and their ideas tested.The superstition of "original sin" is so deeply ingrained in the consciousness of Tony Abbott that he has no choice but to "believe". He is a product of propaganda.That he insists on others conducting their lives along his prescription is arrogance.That he pursues power in order to coerce people into his way of life is corrupt.So what we have is an intelligent, superstitious,arrogant,corrupt,power hungry person.A perfect combination for high office.
Posted by ocm, Monday, 23 August 2010 1:45:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Abbott and Palin they both believe or pretend to believe to gain the gullible religious vote (you don't know for sure if they really believe this nonsense do any of you) in talking snakes and the other fairies in the garden of Eden and a 6000 year old planet Earth created by a supernatural force in six days of completely(insane)fantasy myths, just like the Islamic suicide bombers and the Taliban do! These people believe in the same myths, they are interchangeable Christian Taliban, Islamic Taliban!
History shows all religions are capable of atrocities, first they demand you believe absurdities than they demand you commit atrocities.
You people commenting on the Nazi's just remember Hitler and all his European allies were all right wing fascist Catholics, Mussolini created the Vatican State in 1929, Franco, (The Japanese religious fanatic fascist had a God Emperor) the Nazi storm troopers had (Gott Mitt Uns) "God With Us" on their belt buckles! What a pedigree the modern religious fascist far right has?
Posted by HFR, Monday, 23 August 2010 8:52:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HFR,

Hitler was not a Catholic by the time he ruled Germany. He abhorred the Catholic Church and simply postponed destroying it because of the problems trying this would have caused him during the war. The only successful resistance to Hitler within Germany came from the Catholic Church via Bishop Galens whose public protest stopped the murder of the disabled for a time by the Nazis. Read Richard J. Evans’s series on the Third Reich for details.
Posted by Chris C, Monday, 23 August 2010 10:29:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Chris C, Read Mein Kampf, Hitler was and always was a catholic, he felt Jesus next to him protecting him always, he taxed catholic Germans directly for the Vatican, every German soldier had Gott Mitt Uns "God With Us" on their belt buckles, Hitler used religion like every right winger in history has, he was a religious fanatic, he gassed and burnt 5 million Jews for Jesus! Every Nazi war criminal escaped Europe with Vatican passports, from the Vatican State, the evil catholic fascist Mussolini created in 1929. Remember what the catholic church, Mussolini, Franco and Hitler together did to democracy in Spain, they murdered it?
When fascism comes to your country it will have a flag in one hand and a bible in the other. Patriotism and religion is the last refuge of a scoundrel.
Posted by HFR, Thursday, 26 August 2010 7:39:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HFR,

“Hitler’s hostility to Christianity reached new heights, or depths, during the war. It was a frequent theme of his mealtime monologues. After the war was over and victory assured, he said in 1942, the Concordat he had signed with the Catholic Church in 1933 would be formally abrogated and the Church would be dealt with like any other non-Nazi voluntary association [i.e,. liquidated]…Priests, he said, were ‘black bugs’, ‘abortions in cassocks ‘. …Science, he declared, would easily destroy the last remaining vestiges of superstition…’Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of human failure’…Christianity is a prototype of Bolshevism: the mobilization by the Jew of the masses of slaves with the object of undermining society.’…’National socialism and religion will no longer be able to exist together.’” (The Third Reich in Power, Richard J. Evans, p. 547)

Hitler had nothing to do with German soldiers having “God with us” on their belt buckles. This had been the situation for the regular army since before the First World War, and Hitler’s own army, the Waffen SS, had “My honour is loyalty” on theirs.

My study of Nazi Germany has not produced any reference to Hitler’s reason for the holocaust being “for Jesus”. Do you have any?

I’m not expecting fascism to come to my country.
Posted by Chris C, Friday, 27 August 2010 4:42:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Chris C,CatholicArrogance.Org/Catholic/Hitlersfaith.html.
Posted by HFR, Saturday, 28 August 2010 8:14:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
An incisive and amusing article about Palin in yesterday's Opposition Organ:

<< Palin presents mediocrity as an American virtue

SARAH Palin was once a contender: a no-nonsense mum and a serious politician. Now she's just a greedy celebrity.

Palin's ignorance and inarticulacy are so constantly on display that she can't just be simulating them to strengthen her popular appeal. They are also attributes in which she takes pride. As Jacob Weisberg writes in the introduction to his new anthology, Palinisms: The Accidental Wit and Wisdom of Sarah Palin: "Palin's exuberant incoherence testifies to an unusually wide gulf between confidence and ability. She is proud of what she doesn't know and contemptuous of those 'experts' and 'elitists' who are too knowledgeable to be trusted." >>

http://tiny.cc/rhdf5

Abbott is no Palin - he has the benefit of an education and a functioning brain. Pauline Hanson would be the closest equivalent, and look what happened to her.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Sunday, 29 August 2010 9:04:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HFR,

The link does not take me where you implied it does, but I found what I take your intended site to be anyway, at http://liberalslikechrist.org/Catholic/Hitlersfaith.html

It does not show that Hitler was a Catholic at the time of the War. It says, “Hitler understood how much it would hurt his cause if the 66% of the German population who were Protestants and the 33% who were fellow Catholics were to learn how anti-Christian he and his Nazi ring leaders actually were in their hearts.” That is my point. He was a Catholic in name only, and he pretended to support Christianity when political expediency required it, but there was nothing Christian (Catholic or Protestant) about him, and his long-term intention was to destroy all the churches, the Catholic one included.

The other aspect of the site is to condemn the Catholic Church for its approach to the Nazis, something which I have not disputed.
Posted by Chris C, Tuesday, 31 August 2010 2:13:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 9
  7. 10
  8. 11
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy