Is it possible that the reason for there being "...no debate about the fact that Labor has made a mess of things under Rudd and Gillard and it is reasonable to assume that things would have to be better under the conservatives" due to the following?

1. The 6 years of Labor government have not resulted in a mess. They are characterised by low government expenditure, expressed as a percentage of GDP, remarkable economic performance by comparison with the remainder of the western world, low unemployment and more. The assumption that there is a mess is both incorrect and incorrect.

2. Any assumption that things will be better under conservatives is based on dreams, not fact. Only when the current Opposition's policies are laid out in detail will informed comment be possible.

3. Claims that it is "reasonable to assume" anything must be based on reasonable (that word again!) data. None have been presented by the author, who is thus seen to be merely offering empty platitudes, somewhat akin to the Federal Leader of The Opposition.

Forum: Some sort of editorial policy is needed, in order to weed out such weak tripe. You know what is needed - why not just do it?

PS. Anybody who claims that The Little Rodent is or was a hero must provide evidence to justify that assertion. Hero Howard? What a sick joke! The man contributed mightily to the current shambles which is the tax system and which he repeatedly tweaked in favour of his rich mates.

Pity about the workers - he gave them only Work No Choices and an opportunity to fight in a choice of costly military misadventures.

Since when do heros repeatedly lie to those whose trust they seek? (eg Truth Overboard)?

Not all PM's are heros, and some only earn the appelation after their period as PM. For example, I class Malcolm Fraser, now fighting for international causes, as coming close to hero status in his post-Liberal era. When he was PM I certainly didn't feel this way.

Please reserve the word "hero" to denote something special, a man of distinguished courage or ability, admired for his brave deeds and noble qualities.

This means more than doing a good job as a member of a team.

" Some sort of editorial policy is needed, in order to weed out such weak tripe"

Excellent! a media review could eliminate all the views you disagree with.

Should you have found Mr Colless' views 'offensive', you could, with the passage of Roxtons latest Legislation, have him charged for his offensive views.

John Howerd "The little rodent". Charming. Commentary of the left up to the usual standard I see. Time to move out of the year 9 playground don't you think?

JohnBennetts,
you sound suspiciously like a Qld bureaucrat who worries about being on Campbell Newman's shooting list. Also, you have the meaning of economic management all ar$e about if you think Labor did not create a mess.

Malcolm if Bob Hawke & Gough Whitlam are what you get if you want heroes, I hope we can send the species extinct long before we get another.

In fact you can keep all your heroes, what I want in a PM is a very booring manager. The very best would be so booring as not to be noticed. Only someone doing a great job becomes invisible, & that's what we need.

Please allow me to set a few things straight:

1. Bob Hawke is not a hero - Labor lost its way after Gough Whitlam.
2. Hasbeen can't spell. Remedial education appears to be needed. Booring (twice)?
3. "Individual" has a strange idea as to what good economic management looks like. I side with the international opinion, which is that Australia's current Treasurer is the top of the pile. What "Individual"'s credentials are in this regard are anybody's guess.

BTW: (a) I don't hail from Qld. (b) I am not a true Leftie. I do, though, have some qualifications in the matters I debate, and I do care about the truth. Pity about the others. What's yours, Prompete? Individual?