Give this author a big round of applause.

His observations are timely and accurate.

This campaign is staggering in it's shallowness. Just when you think there's got to be more to it, what do you know, there's less!

Fueled by a blind will to power, courting the lowest possible ambitions: Stop the boats! Protect our borders!

Budgie smugglers on the telly and designer duds in the Women's Weekly - rampant egos, blatant narcissism - it's not about you, Julia, it's about 20 million people - duh!

This article is a breath of fresh air and at last, somebody's said it as it is

Briar Rose,

And you talk about "shallowness"!

Thanks Justin for your article, you had something worthwhile to say and there were facts to support it. The site administration should be applauded for allowing a longer article where deserved, as in this case.

One area where I would like to see something more from you (an article?) would be on the differences between Australian conservatism and neo-liberalism. It is intriguing that many politicians and political observers appear to confuse the two, yet they are so different as to be opposites.

John Howard for example, was an activist for neo-liberalism and aggressively so, yet he would promote himself as a conservative. JWH's 'conservatism' was, I suspect, aimed more at: obtaining a politically legitimate hard shell (link with RGM); currying favour with the (mainly) Melbourne establishment he always felt uncomfortable with (and they with him); and, his late-felt ambition to win an honour from Britain's Queen (and that was probably at Janette's behest).

It is heartening to see more articles from young men.

I think some of us are missing the point of the issue- forget the right-ward shift (IF) indeed it's what voters want (that in itself would be perfectly fine (as Leigh stated)). However, the issue is that neither the Liberal Party, nor the Labor party actually CARE about what the people think (outside PRETENDING they do to get elected, after which promptly forgetting), or what small business thinks- but what paying lobbyists and their own personal business partners (and future employers) think. Hence why the conservatives went for One Nation for quite a long time, realizing the Libs were just having them on.

Anyway
Ask yourself, if we ever had CIR, and these issues were put to referendum, how would you, and other people vote on each?
-Privatization of Telstra, transport, electricity, water, roads
-Public-private partnerships
-Euthanasia
-Shutting down highly-used hospitals and schools and selling the land
-Population
To list a few. Compare this to what's actually happening and ask yourself if this what you and the rest of Australia actually wants- or what some minority or lobbyist wants?
THAT is the issue. Ignore the author being left or not, he's making a good point.

Advice- if you don't like the above, and you don't like the Greens, check out your local Independent members and see where they stand.

Oh and Amicus, too bad for you- because you proved I was exactly right about you. That's all, step aside.

Sonofgloin, you have made a major blunder in your above post. You infer that you would be a carpetbagger exploiting the naivety of the Oz population if you were offering a bridge for sale. This is no longer true.

You would, most likely, be a legitimate agent of Anna's Queensland government, offering for genuine sale a quite useful piece of tax payer owned, & funded, property.

Get with the times please mate.

Hehe- good one Hasbeen.