Mr Terpstra has clearly placed his thumb on his preferred side of the scale whilst assembling this rant.

Despite Tony Abbott's clear and continuing verbal violence against women, some of which was listed by the PM when she spoke in the House on this subject, only the message that he loves the women in his life is mentioned.

That Terpstra's list has to go back to the irrelevant past of the Hawke era to match the PM's list of some of one man's actions during the life of this parliament says much.

Perspective is an amazing concept. Without it, we are doomed to focus on the detritus of life, those emotional issues which stick stubbornly in the front of brain.

Unfortunately, this article lacks perspective as it sets out to defend the indefensible by citing other unsavoury incidents. It leads nowhere.

And its purpose? Apparently, only to permit Alan Jones some kind of emotional refuge - a place where the PM cannot get to him.

Alan has no fears on this score. The PM has said that she isn't about to go anywhere near AJ in any case.

On the day that Alan jones has been ordered to learn how to fact check, this author needs to sit in the same classroom.

The author makes two points
1.The PM shouldn't have called out Tony because there are/were sexist in the labour party.
2. You realy realy like Tony and you don't want people to call him names.

The only reason Gillard won't go near Jones is because she'll be asked difficult questions.

What a joke. Jones has to undergo journalistic re-training... fact checking on his opinions.

Why the ABC and Fairfax journalists not going to be required to undergo the same in relation to their political news reports?

Kenny.

Fact check.

R-e-a-l-l-y.

cheers brother

The girl said she was not crying or bullied, why do slobs stick to trivial nonsense.

Marilyn

there you go. You lazy lefties always eventually ooze with the sludge in the gutters of name calling.

I think political commentary and comedy have much in common. There are some obvious commonalities, and there are some that are more subtle. In both cases, I'd suggest that the old truism 'timing is everything' is valid.

I think Mr Terpstra makes some valid points, though they are awash in a sea of invalid points. Sadly, they come perhaps a week too late. Am I the only one who is tired of this 'he said/she said' misogyny/sexism bickering? Those who hang onto it even a day too long begin to reek of bitterness. They appear to be unable to let go and move on, and they bring others down with them.

I'm no fan of Julia Gillard, and I think her speech - though very well-presented - was rather bereft of substance. It shows the power of rhetoric, the power of emotive language and the power of a careful ambush. There's no way she thought of that on her feet, but Abbott walked into in anyway. He walked out with egg on his face. What he and his followers need to do is wipe the egg off, smile and move on.

Juliar should be in the same class with Alan James after such wonderful porkies "there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead", The East Timor solution etc.

Find myself taking no pleasure whatsoever, from being quite literally forced to agree, with Ms Shepard!
And can only add, recycled, revisited, re-echoed, risible, repetitious, ridiculous, repugnant, recidivist, mendacious verisimilitude?
But then, what else can one expect from a group, who'se averaged or combined IQ, is rarely if ever, much higher than average ambient temperatures?
Rhrosty.

But then, what else can one expect from a group, who'se averaged or combined IQ, is rarely if ever, much higher than average ambient temperatures?

And when you leave the average will increase.