Yuri. By way of a 'fair go', would that include her fair go for MrThompson,
A fair go for Mr Slippe, a fair go for ms Crossing, a fair go for numerous skilled and experienced aboriginal politicians?

The PM has all the morality of 'the Prince' as described by Machiavelli.

Peter Lange nails it with her enforced conversion to Gaiaism.

Whilst not wishing to appear as 'direct' as Hasbeen, this really is quite a naval gazing exercise. It is, however, a bit of fluffy light relief from the usual fare of climate and suchlike debate. I am more used to the cut, thrust and parry of the likes of Rhrosty, Poirot, Warmair et al. C'mon guys, give this some oomph. ;)

What are Christian values?
Do we take them from the old testament or the new testament?
Where in the new testament does it say it is okay to kill others or to send soldiers to kill others?

I see little difference in the way that different prime ministers have treated those who are less fortunate than Australian citizens.

Interesting to have this pointed out, but I'd suggest the appeal to christianity in Australian politics is rather more expedient.

I base this mainly on my view that John Howard didn't actually believe in anything except social research showing the polls' projected reaction to certain policy decisions. What he did was that he played the numbers game for the length of his political career, and in so doing espoused any belief/position/system of ethics that he thought would prove to be the most popular amongst voters. It took Australia 12 years to cotton onto the fact that he was nothing but an empty vessel and turf him out, but by that time he had comprehensively transformed the way that politics is done in Australia.

Kevin Rudd may have seemed like a blessed antidote to this automative way of thinking, but under the prevailing conditions the vaguaries of his personality proved too destabilising and he didn't last, quite predictably in hindsight..

Julia Gillard has subsequently re-adopted the Howard methodology, hence her "lies" about the carbon tax, but has also shown her extraordinary moral fortitude to work behind the scenes to achieve the passing of some very useful measures such as the NDIS - measures which Australians realise are sorely needed, both for utilitarian purposes and to revitalise the focus on those areas of life that are more important than the economy. Unfortunately though the polling shows she simply can't even have a hope of sinning by taking this approach in a consistent way, an so instead of striking out and being the leader she could have been she has bottled it in key areas like her position on asylum seeker - and as a result will likely cause those foolish swinging voters to bring in an Abbott government.

And then we'll find out just how bad religious politics can be.

Er, here we see a rare example of the freudian slip in written form - that should say "winning"n not "sinning";-)

If you call killing people indirectly by John Howard in Iraq his Christian values are no different to Julia Gillards Atheism killing people in Afghanistan, all these so called leaders are no different from one to the other. John Howard should be up on War Crimes for his involvement in Iraq.

I think the healthy Australian voter tradition of cynicism about politicians is far preferable to any expectation that politicians should be guided by consistent humanist or religeous platforms.

Basically its better for us voters (as against academics) to judge political decisions on a case by case basis.

In a nutshell vote them out when they become too corrupt, complacent and full of themselves

- in order to keep the bastards honest.