Susan here is the undoing of your credibilty.

You say the Refugee Council believes Australia should take 20,000 refugees annually.

I shout and clap and cheer in agreement, do you? ... Christ wouldn't ... but would you take the twenty thousandth and first refugee that illegally landed back to sea?

What do you propose for that person?

I think King Hazza is right there.

Seems that most of our fellow citizens supported Howard until their backpockets were being hit via WorkChoices.

Everyone, as in the Howard battlers-from just above the dole to about $800k p.a., loved the wars, and hated the boaties, and fear dole bludgers, and like handouts for themselves... that's why Rudd is largely the same but has got into trouble trying to differentiate himself from a few aspects, under the nightly influence of Bonhoffer and Mackillop.

Where would this nation be without the Rudd hotline to 'upstairs'?

That may not be too far off Blue Cross- although it's really not possible to say for sure on either single issue (except workchoices), for as voters we simply weigh the Liberals package deal vs the Labor package deal vs the package deal of a minor party (+ chances that your vote to them might jeopardize our chance to ensure the worst of the biggest two is kept out made possible by voting one or the other directly).

And don't forget that no party in Australian history have actually won a genuine majority- simply a minority bigger than any other single minority supporting the other parties- often by a coalition.

Not that I follow that voting mindset myself- but I imagine most people do.

Speaking of twisting words, Ritchie10, no one suggested the innocent should be condemned.
"I never said innocent people are condemned what I said was if you break the law you are subject to the law."
In the example I gave, Jesus defended a woman found guilty of breaking the law of adultery.
Runner, it is interesting that not so long ago, someone who took a moral stance was assumed to be a Christian. Now apparently, if one takes a moral stand one is assumed to be a 'lefty'; even by avowed Christians.
As for tax dollars, I agree. Howard's Pacific solution was an incredible waste of tax dollars. That money could have been used on infrastructure to -initially- support refugees and long term benefit all Australians, instead of "propping up failing island economies".
An even better solution would be to encourage sponsorship programs; spend the tax dollars in rural communities to encourage new comers to settle outside the capital cities, and hopefully reduce these 'hotbeds of racial tension'.
You know, treat them like neighbours.

Keith, I am suggesting to those Christian, family loving, neurotically boat obsessed politicians that they might want to take a few baby steps towards advocating for the world's refugees and the moderate increase suggested by the Refugee Council might be a good place for them to start. The politics that they indulge in makes it very hard to get past the current numbers we take. Great that you also support the increase and I hope you will be advocating strongly. Personally, I think it is disgusting that any human being in need is shut outside of the wealthiest countries around the world, I've said it many times. The UN High Commissioner for Refugees António Guterres said last year, ‘The overwhelming burden of displacement is borne by developing countries…Eighty percent of refugees are in the developing world. Generosity and wealth are not proportional to each other.' What I personally believe we should be doing and what the most resistant amongst us will accept are worlds apart. If the Government offers to increase the program by just one person I will take it.

Rache,

You must have slept through the Howard period. Howard did do the things I said he did, and Rudd ripped them apart. Only TPV's? Not so. Rudd cancelled the 'Pacific Solution', did special deals with queue-jumpers and now allows illegals carte blanche; he is even increasing accomodation on Christmas Island and thereby encouraging more illegals to come here.

The rise (there has been no fall since Rudd's election) does not show any correlation between the huge increase in illegals turning up here and any world situation, including Sri Lanka. That's just a political con job put about by Home Affairs Minister, Brendan O'Connor because his government has really stuffed up on border protection and hasn't got a clue how to fix the mess.

Keep on thinking that everyone else is wrong and you are right, Rache. The chooks will eventually come home to roost, and it seems that it is going to take a population and racial catastrophe for people like you to get the message.