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 > Lacking vision or principles > Comments

Lacking vision or principles : Comments

By Geoff Davies, published 2/9/2010

Voters’ alienation is symptomatic of sick political parties which exhibit a lack of principles and systemic corruption.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
Geoff ,
Have you ever wonder why both the major parties are thus? It is all about corporate power in the form of donations.Both the major parties are slaves to this corrupt system.

Labor have just sold what principles they had to retain power with the Greens,who'd like to see a communist totalitarian state instead of a corporate one.

Real democracy is running a poor second no matter who we vote for.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 2 September 2010 11:59:00 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
A wolf in sheep's clothing.
Posted by Dallas, Friday, 3 September 2010 3:04:58 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 Commonwealth is a corporate government:By S 64 Judiciary Act 1903 has made itself into the same at law as an individual. It is now liable, to the victim, Mr Spencer, and must supply complete restitution for breach of contract, and in tort, for the wrong it has inflicted upon not only Peter Spencer but every farmer affected by summary judgment by a single Judge, an alien concept introduced to New South Wales in 1970.

On Wednesday 1st September 2010, Peter Spencer, the Tower of Hope survivor won in the High Court. The Commonwealth, from the beginning attempted to pervert the course of justice in respect of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth, by using S 31A Federal Court of Australia Act 1976. This has now been held illegal. By reference to S 43 Crimes Act 1914 which makes attempting to pervert the course of justice in respect of the Judicial Power of the Commonwealth and other parts of that Act granting a daily penalty, the penalty is $165,000 a day, since the first claim was filed, on the 12th June 2007, and the first attempt to pervert was made by the Commonwealth by filing a motion to summarily dismiss the proceedings, on the 27th July 2007, the penalty meter has been ticking for 1,131 days. By simple mathematics, Spencer is now absolutely entitled, to recover the sum of $165,000 set for a corporate offender, which the Commonwealth is, per day, for that whole time. That adds up to $186,615,000 due and payable immediately. He was made homeless by the misuse of judicial power by the Commonwealth. It should pay in every case of such conduct.

The Commonwealth is supposed to be a Model Litigant, but currently is more like Abe Saffron, than Mother Teresa. It is neither humble nor honest, and its law firm, the Australian Government Solicitor is no different to any other big city rip off merchant. If the Australian Government Solicitor had some well educated individuals, who understood Hardcastle on Statutes ( 1901) and how penal actions work, honesty and integrity would be the norm
Posted by Peter the Believer, Friday, 3 September 2010 3:22:06 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
"Voters’ alienation is symptomatic of sick political parties which exhibit a lack of principles and systemic corruption."

Only some voters, maybe the 11.5% of the vote the greens got is the usual 10% of any population who are idiots and a few (1.5%) protest voting.

Ever considered that?

All the people I saw interviewed who were going to vote green, had no idea why, most said it was because they didn't want to vote ALP or coalition - if I was in the greens, I would not be happy with that, certainly it is not a stable voting base is it?

People were voting for a brand, not for policies, not for the people in the green party, they were voting for "green" and nothing to do with the actual goals - so just as easily, they could vote for something else, since they seem to be totally unprincipled people .. or idiots.
Posted by Amicus, Friday, 3 September 2010 9:39:53 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
Wouldn't it be nice if people on OLO could agree to politely disagree.
Instead of the patronising, sarcasm, abuse, etc:
"What a pathetic piece of propaganda."
"Did it ever pass your mind ..."
"Ever considered that?"
"Tell us what you really think and stop holding back." (Though perhaps that's a compliment?)

Wouldn't it be nice if one could criticise something, anything about the current economic/political regime without being taken for a communist:
"the usual leftist watermelon rubbish"
"your own extreme left desires"
"The leftists ..."
"the Greens,who'd like to see a communist totalitarian state ..."

Wouldn't it be nice if you could express an Opinion without being gratuitously labelled :
"clearly hate the Liberal Party with a passion"
"authoritarianism ... would have suited a global warming alarmist"

I do not hold to socialist views, which is what "leftist" actually means.
I believe in democracy and persuasion, which is why I put my Opinions here, rather than running around with a rifle.
Those who object to any criticism apparently want the world to remain exactly as it is, with all its imperfections.

If some of you read what I actually wrote, instead of reacting on the basis of your own hypersensitive emotional triggers, there'd be more constructive dialogue here, instead of a lot of shouting. See Ho Hum's comment "Right-wingers seem to know a lot about hate".

I know the web and anonymity remove most social constraints and unleash the rudeness of those who carry it around inside themselves. But on top of that there are those who cultivate rudeness (Andrew Bolt) and those who don't know it when they or their fans do it (Graham Young?), so some sites have a lot more of it than others. It's a shame OLO is so contaminated in this way, it diminishes the very useful role it can play.

Thanks to those who liked my article.
"Great article! Tells it as it is."
"A good article appropriately criticising both parties"
"a well reasoned balanced essay."
"Anyway, a good article Mr Davies"
"A most impressive article"
Posted by Geoff Davies, Friday, 3 September 2010 5:05:44 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
As Geoff tallies up his flame bait responses and moves off for another well deserved weekend, in full knowledge that there are many Australians who disagree with him, and eventually he'll flush them all out.
Posted by rpg, Friday, 3 September 2010 7:03:51 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. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

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