Hi FOXY...

In one of your posts you mentioned the current LNP Government were destined for defeat at the next federal election. Indeed that are, and as an ultra conservative myself, I'm glad to see it as they deserve nothing more then to be consigned to the depths of political infamy.

After that treacherous individual Malcolm TURNBULL aka 'TURNCOAT', shafted a sitting PM in the back, they deserve nothing more than to be banished into the abyss of all quislings. It doesn't matter how bad or how good Mr ABBOTT is/was, the electorate put him there, and only the electorate should remove him. I have nothing but utter contempt for everything Mr TURNBULL stands for. The mere mention of his name is nauseating.

Interestingly, subsequent to the LNP's loss at the next federal election, their leader Mr TURNBULL will simply retire with his millions to his Point Piper mansion. While the rest of us will need to assimilate to a big spending Wm. SHORTIN government.

I do not support the Greens in anyway. However, despite the fact that my politics and the politics espoused by PAUL1405 are diametrically opposite. I've always found him to be refreshingly candid with his beliefs, affiliations, and opinions. More than could ever be said of that, that; 'person' Mr TURNBULL!

Dear O Sung Wu.,

You are not alone in your strong feelings
about our Prime Minister. However many of
my family and relatives still see no other
alternative. Mr Shorten is even less popular
with them.

I personally feel that the Liberal Party chose
to oust out Mr Abbott. I don't blame Mr Turnbull
for that. He simply took the opportunity that
was available. I guess that's politics.

However, don't stress - much can happen before the
next election. We've got interesting times ahead.

leoj,

Your description of Larissa Waters as a
"superficial self-entitled showboat"
is not something that I agree with.

I found the Senator to be a whip-smart
policy brain who has proven to be an effective
campaigner on so many issues.

She succeeded as a young politician from a
crucial growth state where the Greens have
traditionally struggled. Senator Waters had
all the hallmarks of a future leader and her
loss is a grave blow for her party.

I only recently found out more details about
her dual citizenship. It seems that she left
Canada as a baby (11 months old). She was
born to Australian parents studying and working
briefly in Canada before they returned home to
Australia.

Naturally the Senator lived her life thinking that
as a baby she was Naturalised to be Australian and
only Australian that that's what she thought she was.

However she's now found out that she was born
one week after Canada's 'Citizenship Act 1976'
came into force. That Act repealed earlier
provisions for involuntary loss of Canadian
Citizenship after naturalisation overseas.

Which of course meant that unbeknowns to her she did
have dual citizenship. Despite the fact that
she was an Australian Citizen of
Australian parents who just happened to be born in
Canada and left Canada as a baby of 11 months.

To me her case simply does not make sense.

I wonder where she'd be if she'd been
born on a Italian, German, British or American luxury liner?

Foxy,

You are beginning to look like an apologist for the greens. It takes a single visit or even just a letter to either the Canadian embassy or the NZ embassy to verify citizenship status. Given that prospective MPs are briefed on the citizenship requirements and both LW and SL knew they were born overseas, there is no reasonable excuse, and to fail their party for such a trivial error is gross incompetence.

That the Constitution is old is a feeble argument, as nearly all Aus Law is founded on principles that far outdate the Constitution going back as far as Roman times. That most countries in the world don't allow dual citizens to run for senior office would imply that the concept is not out of date with today's expectations.

As for the two senators, in spite of you singing their praises, I have yet to see from either of them a single policy of substance rather a wish list of populist agendas (if you can show one that contradicts me please do so). While I believe all politicians are show boats, these two are the most superficial.

Foxy, Your description of Larissa Waters as a "superficial self-entitled showboat"
is not something that I agree with"

To repeat the bleeding obvious,

Yet there are longstanding issues affecting almost all women, but fat lot the always-entitled Larissa, or Greens, might care. Foxy, you obviously need a reminder too. See here,

CHERFUL, Saturday, 22 July 2017 10:58:19 PM
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=19173&page=0#340825

Larissa's stunts in the Senate chamber and elsewhere were about Larissa. She and other strutting, self-entitled celebrities who are as fortunate as she is, but some not as well placed as she was to do anything about it, are riding on the backs of millions of women. Women they are constantly letting down.

Got to wonder if Larissa or any of those other women celebrities who claim to represent women, the womyns commentariat on The Box for instance, have ever graced shopping centre infants change rooms in their Gucci pumps and designer essentials. Yet the planet could be saved from global warming if only their endless gassing about women could be directed into electricity generation.

Dear Shadow Minister,

I have no control over your interpretation of
how I sound to you. The same as you have no
control over how you Sir sound to me on this
issue. Lets leave it at that.

leoj,

You have a history of consistently attacking
the Greens with insults, name calling, ad-hominems
and other childish tactics. Therefore your
current attacks on Larissa Waters and Scott Ludlum
doesn't hold much credibility. Your past
record unfortunately speaks for itself and as you're
proceeding in the same predictable style - to tell
you the truth I don't read most of what you write.
You never have anything new to say.