You miss the point, Ammonite.

>>Just denigrate the Greens for working towards a cooperative, sustainable technology future.<<

Nobody, as far as I can see, is denigrating the Greens for "working towards a cooperative, sustainable technology future". Because that is purely aspirational motherhood, and everybody wants to live a long, happy and healthy life.

It is the manner in which they approach it that I have serious difficulties with. The underlying theme appears to be i) destroy everything that creates wealth and ii) replace it with... ummm, errr... something else. Oh, and iii) wear a sanctimonious smirk as you do so.

It isn't a matter of loving the two-party system. It is the fundamental absence of a credible alternative that leaves us in the policy-sludge that we presently experience. Yours is the "anything must be better than this" argument, which in this instance, I cannot accept.

Pericles

Not claiming the Greens are perfect, but they are streets ahead of the DLP, or other more narrow viewed political groups, National Socialist for example.

You prefer that we only have a 2 party system? A choice that is mostly right-wing or even more right-wing?

You claim that the Greens policies are uncosted, neither are the Liberals, go take a look on their website.

You don't get the point, having lost sight of what a democracy is about.

My question is answered by? questions.
Who cares if it is true more Australians distrust or dislike the Greens than vote for them.
Who is concerned our current system, put Wilkie in the house after he finished third on first preferences.
Who cares that he and Xenophon [sorry about the spelling] sit as single issue road blocks.
Who is concerned at the Triumphalism of the lower house green who rode in on Liberal preferences.
And who understands and equally is concerned, that ALP preferences put our mortal and forever enemy a DLP Senator in the house.
Who is telling me, who shares my concerns? that the ALP/LIBERAL COALITION can trust its fate to voters but Greens and small party's would be unfairly/undemocratically treated if we got rid of preference voting.
No answers will come to me, so to this list my answer is ME I am concerned, see true insult to majority's wishes in greens
I think Tony Abbott is trading, protected maybe more,by Murdock press.
But too riding on the back of both these truths, Australians are for now, being use but repelled by greens.
Look truly at the so called policy's see the very real impacts, question, yes do so, why my questions get no answers.
I will stay in exile from general comments for a time, but remember it is only on line greens out number realists

Wen the rats take over what you do -cal the exterminator cal a election.
get the lying b...from the office save Australia.
Women in high management position are usual's very observant and responsive this b...is inclined to destroy our economy and our likelihoods. Se ling our country to our competador chasing the farmer from the land and macing us to pay trough the nose for farmers product.

I used to employ that argument when I was seven, Ammonite.

>>You claim that the Greens policies are uncosted, neither are the Liberals, go take a look on their website.<<

That sounds remarkably like "I know I shouldn't tied a tin on kitty's tail, but my brother did too"

What makes uncosted Green policies more acceptable than Liberal uncosted policies? They are both highly-polished fictions, designed only to confuse and mislead the public.

>>You prefer that we only have a 2 party system? A choice that is mostly right-wing or even more right-wing?<<

No, I don't. But the lack of talent, intellect and practical nous in the current pair does not automatically make a third stream attractive. They need to be in some way demonstrably more capable than the other two. Surely that isn't too much to ask?

In fact, surely it should be embarrassingly easy to achieve.

>>Not claiming the Greens are perfect, but they are streets ahead of the DLP, or other more narrow viewed political groups, National Socialist for example.<<

There you have it. The Greens are better than the National Socialists. What higher accolade could they possibly aspire to, I wonder.

>>You don't get the point, having lost sight of what a democracy is about.<<

Two Winston Churchill quotes spring to mind. The first is that old chestnut:

"Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time"

He said that in Parliament. In a less guarded moment, he also said:

"The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter"

When all there is on offer as "policies" is a handful of soundbites, catchphrases and motherhood statements of the bleedin' obvious, designed simply to attract the attention of that average voter, we trash the democratic system to oblivion.

And on the topic of Churchill quotes, here's one of his that perfectly describes the current attraction of The Greens to the bemused electorate.

"When the eagles are silent, the parrots begin to jabber."

Parties like the Greens have been around for a couple of hundred years at least...

Activists and Activism are the pursuits of fools and the gullible bt being a gullible fool is not an offence, nor is casting a vote for Foolish Activism.

Of course the left has been the breeding ground of such follishness....

Marx foresaw his revolution happening in UK (and not in backward Russia), possibly lead by Charterists formenting a mass uprising...


Just as it is true that half the population are below average intelligence, so too some of those folk who are intellectually challenged will become the gullible supporters of cynical Green and other "Watermelon" politicians.

The danger occurs if ever they get real power... then lunacy follows and decades of dissent and oppression follow -

in the name of the "Greens" or "Bolsheviks" or fellow travellers omnipotent right to press a jackboot into the windpipe of democracy