Brendon looks like a bit of a drama queen.

TA does recognise gays as equal human beings, he just believes that the definition of marriage that has stood for thousands of years is still valid. He however, has opened the door to his caucus changing the position. But remember that gay marriage is not a shoo in even with a conscience vote as at the last vote nearly half the labor members voted against gay marriage.

TA governs for all Australians because Labor showed that it couldn't. He was given a mandate to govern by the majority at the ballot box, and because he doesn't consult you personally is no reason to throw a hissy fit.

"So no Mr Abbott, you do not govern for me, you only temporarily push me around. And I think you're going to have a bad time trying to do either".

[Deleted for abuse.]

I was silly enough to have the clock radio on the ABC the other morning. I woke up to some lefty twit giving his spiel. He was saying that he was forced to vote for Abbott because of Labor stupidity, but that Abbott had no mandate from him for his boat policy. Just who the hell do these people think they are? What gives us the idea they are so special?

Here we have a bloke, going by his studies, who has aimed at a future in foreign affairs, & is exactly the wrong type to have in the Bureaucracy in any position. Just like Rudd this blokes thinks he's too good for us, another megalomaniac, who would have trouble making it as a street sweeper.

So are you saying for a political party (or was that only Tony Abbott) to “govern in the interests of all Australians,” everyone, the gay community, the left, the right and any whingeing minority group has to get everything that they ask for? Please, if you know who this Leader is that can actually achieve this, please, please, please share this knowledge, as I would happily vote for this miracle worker who can, for example, leave the Marriage Act as it is and yet still achieve “equality” for the gay community. I suspect what you really are is just some spoilt brat sooking because the majority of Australians didn’t put into power who you wanted and all you can do now is stomp your feet and scream “You’re not the boss of me now!” And it’s a little sad… really.

Shadow Minister:

A drama queen I am not. I'm not part of the vitriol that has been unleashed, and I condemn it. However I make no apology for breaking down inconsistencies and inequalities of the man that is now our leader.

And your argument is a fallacy, the only relevant definition you can possibly speak of is a legal definition, one that John Howard amended to meet his view on the issue. And your definition of mandate is also questionable. So far it would appear the Liberal Party has received less of the general vote than Labor, is this really a mandate? I don't think so.

Hissy fit? Be reasonable, this is a critique on his words, character and ideologue- if you want to see a hissy fit go check out some of the anti-Abbott Facebook pages that have popped up.

Hasbeen:

Nice to see you're still around and willing to comment on my posts. And as usual you're crudeness knows no bounds.

Once again you've delivered not only a personal attack on myself, but you have continued your mind-boggling crusade against higher education. You do know that higher education is what delivers you the professionals that make up our society, do you not? Doctors, Nurses, Lawyers, Accountants, Engineers, Policy experts, Journalists, IT&Technology, Business management, Geologists, Historians, Anthropologists, Psychologists, they all go to university.

I'm not sure why you're so caught up on what I may or may not do in the future- your comments on this are a reflection of earlier posts, this proves a severe lack of imagination on your part.

Next time you comment on my work with such a distasteful tone, be a man and put your real name to it.

Interested_party:

I think you've misunderstood/misread this article. If you notice in the first paragraph I state that the line of "governing for all Australians" is nothing new - I never claimed any other party or leader to be capable of this. What I did venture into is how some individuals (such as those from the gay community etc) might be particularly frustrated by such a line, made more pointed by his particularly polarising policies.

I could however put forward the argument that a single party could govern in the interests of all Australia* collectively, but it'd involve some pretty strict definitions of right and wrong- and that's best left for another time.

"I suspect what you really are is just some spoilt brat " - Oh my, here we go again. It's funny how people are so quick to get personal, and I see this from both sides. It's quite pathetic really, since I don't stoop to such lows. In fact I'm quite appalled by the level of vitriol coming from Anti-Abbott Facebook pages towards citizens such as yourself. I've actually spoken out against such base criticisms and been attacked for it, so here I am, stuck in the middle of you people that can think of nothing but attacking the person rather than the ideas. Your "criticisms"(aka insults) are a bit sad, really.

Hi Brenton,

I find it curious that most of the commentators, hate peddlers and Hasbeen’s “sour brigade” make derogatory comments about somebody they don’t actually know.

I suspect most of us don’t know Tony Abbott well enough, close enough or personally enough to answer the most stupid question ever asked, which is “who would make better PM”, when TA has never actually been PM?

So one has to ask from where the nasty brigade gets their angry opinions from. Is it something political that he represents, is it the policies he stands for, is it envy of his education or the stable, community minded family man he appears to represent?

What is it about TA that represents a sufficient threat to generate such adolescent anger and abuse?

So many times we hear him accused of “slashing aid and torturing refugees” and being accused as a “small minded, narrow minded bigoted racist”. This from people who have absolutely no idea who or what the real TA is.

What in our society has caused these social aberrations to form such dysfunctional perceptions? How do they go about their normal lives as balanced and contributing members of our society?

I think the cause is a sad and dangerous combination of very poor education, total lack of social skills, the embrace of victimhood, the vulnerability of those need to adopt someone else’s opinion, those who are incapable of forming their own perspectives and those who cannot separate ideological spin from reality.

In the end I doubt TA, his administration or his policies, regardless of how well he performs, will have any positive impact on this generation. They are not actually angry at TA, they are angry within themselves because they simply do not fit into our 21st century society and they know it.

They are victims of the Twitter, Facebook and Google. More importantly, they are victims of the progressive media (and Brenton) who are likewise angry and have directed the anger and frustration of the dysfunctional at what they see as a threat to their ideology.

God help these generational misfits.

'All we know is that in Abbott's world Abbott believes what Abbott believes '

and all we know from this pathetic piece is that in Brenton's world Brenton believes what Brenton believes. Thankfully its Tony who gained the trust of the majority with Brenton's dogmas sent packing.

Spindoc:

Your comment is a breath of fresh air and I'm very happy to read your comment. I'm quite interested in your take on the anger aspect. I'm actually thinking of writing on this subject, which I'm sure the "sour brigade" will enjoy (but for all the wrong reasons). Can you elaborate on your comment about not fitting into the 21st century? You've got my interest.

Brenton,

To put this in context, I am an atheist and personally support gay marriage. What I object to is fantastical and overly emotive language aka "hissy fit" in the stead of rational argument. "Would Abbott finally recognize gay people as human beings?" is a prime example. The Howard government did more than anyone to redefine the rights of people gay or otherwise in de facto partnerships, to the point that the rights they enjoy differ little from married couples.

The Coalition got more than 45% of the vote and more than 53% of the 2pp, and as such represent more than anyone else. As such are the duly elected representatives of the people and do govern for all the people, which similar to parents does not mean that they do everything that everyone wants.

I voted for the coalition, not because I agreed with their stand on gay marriage, or even the parental leave package, but because labor have shown themselves to be wildly incompetent, and I am looking for a stable government that will provide competent and prudent management of the economy and social issues.

Well where to begin,
Tony Abbott's mandate extends as far as the parliament voted in allows him. It would appear that voters based on the current system of preferences have created a fairly fractured senate. His mandate gives him a majority in the lower house, but this does not in anyway mean that the members of the senate should just waive through his policies at the expense of their own principles.

For example if the majority of the senate believe an Emissions Trading Scheme is the best course of action to tackle climate change then they shouldn't bow to Tony Abbott's wishes. The parties who lost the election still need to represent the voters who voted for them and stick to the policies they took to the election. If labor or greens went along with coalition policy then they would not be serving those individuals who voted for them.

The statement of Governing for all is mere rhetoric and meaningless. Given such confusing ideas in society of right and wrong today it is impossible for someone to govern for all, especially if they do not consider all people equal.

Voters who disagree with Tony Abbott should show him the same level of respect as he did the former government. Which means they are well within their rights to be degrading and disrespectful towards him as he and his supporters were. Statements such as "ditch the witch" and "Bob Browns Bitch" show the level of maturity some members of our society have. Personal attacks are often revealing of a lack of substance and facts supporting a particular argument.

On the issue of Gay Marriage, Research is suggesting that Homosexuality is a genetic trait that people are born with and not a lifestyle choice. Therefore if you oppose the idea of Same sex marriage, I am sure you would also be comfortable with forbidding blacks, Asians, short people, people with blonde hair etc from also being married. Or do you think a government legislating against this would be wrong and unjust...

Brendon BSc Mech. Eng. & I paid for mine, full dollar.

I was during the moratorium marches, when people like you, in their make believe disciplines were wasting every ones time being noisy.

If you don't want tough criticism, try producing articles with a bit more thought. This one was a shout of a spoilt brat, & I treated it as same.

A bit of growing up may, but only may help you. You sound a bit far gone to ever come back.

Hi Brenton,

I do hope your enquiry is sincere but until such times as I discover to the contrary I will treat it as such.

It is hard to deny that we have a generation, or at the very least, a part generation of angry people within our society. It serves little purpose to interrogate the existence or effects of the “angry ones” because we are confronted by them every day.

I don’t hold them entirely responsible for their anger because I am sure they are a product of the 21st century. That said I’m reminded of the historical comments recorded that:

"The children now love luxury; they have bad manners, contempt for
authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place
of exercise. Children are now tyrants, not the servants of their
households. They no longer rise when elders enter the room. They
contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble up dainties
at the table, cross their legs, and tyrannize their teachers."

Socrates/Plato: Complaining of the Youth.

The big difference today is that they have a global platform to express these values, a commentariat that reinforces them and a ready supply of other peoples opinions upon which to base their adopted values.

This places them at conflict with the wider society that not only disagrees with them, but a society that creates the wealth that sustains them. Thus they have become schizophrenic, confused and angry. They cannot even begin to understand why they are angry because we have denied them the social, educational and value based skills they need to survive the 21st century.

We have systematically “socialized” every significant educational topic, they have “believed” it, they have researched it (from Google and blogs), they have become educated customers of global bulltish and we wonder why they don’t fit, can’t understand why they don’t fit and have consequently become very angry and abusive.

We have sold them the bulltish they now grasp as a defence against reality and it is failing them.

I don’t know what it will take to recover this generation of the lost.

Brenton,

I don't know why you are so put off by some of the comments.

Your article appears based entirely on negative assumptions about Abbott, nothing more than a mere rant.

If Brenton Luxton is any example of what our Universities produce then I demand a referendum to not supporting our state-run universities for one minute longer. [Deleted for abuse.]

[Deleted for abuse.]

DG,

There is a world of difference between original thought or clinging to concepts that have long been discarded by rational thinkers.

David G, ouch! You had me reaching for the Aloe Vera Gel with that one.

Generalisations and assumptions do neither truth make… nor convincing argument to change my opinion.

Don’t just tell me I’m wrong, tell me why I’m wrong, give me something to think about and a reason to change my opinion, and yes, I can and I have as I’m neither a fool, nor zealot.

You could possibly start with why this statement, “So no Mr Abbott, you do not govern for me, you only temporarily push me around. And I think you're going to have a bad time trying to do either.” does not equate to a spoilt brat’s rant of “You’re not the boss of me now!”

Like most Australians I didn’t vote for either Labor or Liberal. But the critical question - in what order – I put the Liberals last and Labor somewhere in the middle. The reason was Global Financial Heist and the lucky stars I’d thanked for being in about the only country with a government working its butts off for us, rather than against us for those who conducted the Heist as in Europe and America. Throughout the time of the Heist everything worked – pensions and super payments were paid, public services continued, none of the public’s property was flogged off to corporate mates, and we ended up with triple-A ratings. From the Liberals opposing all this with constant hostility I could guess that they’d have worked against us and we’d have ended like Greece and Spain.

If only the whole population could have been magically transported to live the life of Britain, Ireland and Europe or America for a few months and then back to Australia to re-acclimatise and vote, we would have seen an election campaign in which the contenders' minds were challenged, and a vastly different result. Instead we rejected those who worked so hard defending us - and you can bet the next Global Financial Heist is already being prepared for launch, with our shield stripped away. Expect many of the rednecks who voted for the Libs to blame the most disadvantaged for the consequences.

I voted FOR the Secular Party. They caught my attention in the ads in On Line Opinion and I found their website at and was totally sold. Imagine reading a political manifesto which speaks to the reader rather than at him. Thoughtful and respectful common sense from go to woe.

I notice today that both Abbott and Rudd plan to tie us to a Yank war crime. Again. Don't blame me, as I didn't vote for either.

Mr. Anderson I believe in giving everyone exactly what they have earned, & therefore deserve.

I most definitely gave Gillard & Rudd exactly the respect they had earned. It is no one's fault but their own that was not much.

I can assure you Billy McMahon got exactly the same degree of respect from me, & Abbott will get what he earns also.

Actually Abbott will have to do better to earn my respect. I voted for him so I have some ego invested in his performance. If he proves my judgment wrong, I will be much more savage on him, than I would be on someone I did not help elect

Ok, sorry for not responding sooner but I'm currently on holiday. I'm very fatigued but I'll try to respond to all. I have to merge replies given the post limitations within a 24 hour period.

Shadow Minister: “I am an atheist and personally support gay marriage” I’m not sure what you’re expecting of me here, are you trying one up me by stating common ground as though it makes your perspective more valid? Point is, gay people (of which I know many) feel marginalised and believe they’re being treated as sub-human – that is a fact. So your appeal to me that you are progressive in these social areas means nothing.

As for the “coalition” vote, I reiterate my point, Labor received more votes than “Liberal”, * “Liberal” *. Given Abbott’s complete disregard for minority governments he seems to find himself at the helm of one and still speaks of mandates.

And Labor “wildly incompetent”? Ok ‘LNP mouthpiece’, well done on parroting coalition drivel.

Hasbeen: Ok, I understand now, you have a superiority complex about your engineering degree and at the same time pat yourself on the back for having paid for it outright. Well done~

“make believe disciplines” – please, write a paper on this, put your NAME to it, and I’ll give it the appropriate response. Until then, I won’t entertain your nonsense.

And you need to seriously check your definition of “tough criticism”. The only thing you’ve proven yourself capable of is petty personal insults and outlandish remarks. The fact that you tell me I need to grow up is superbly ironic given you resort to primitive mudslinging. I do believe your comments are also in breach of online opinion's user conduct outlined in the legal section, as such I will be pointing out your comments to the moderator for examination. Also, Brendon is not my name. As for “spoilt brat”, I think even Tony Abbott would distance him for such comments, as I’m simply stating my political opinion (which by the way is unrelated to my degree focus), and standing up for what I believe in

spindoc: My inquiry was indeed sincere. I have to disagree with your reflection though. Whilst you may be correct in assuming the “angry ones” are a product of their time (21st century), I think simply tagging them as angry isn’t fair or accurate. There’s one thing you should understand in this, (assuming you are an older citizen) these “angry ones” are the future and you are the past. Changes in social construct have always been tumultuous, and it has always been the older generation looking bitterly at the younger generation, it is nothing knew. Personally I try to treat all people with respect, regardless of age, gender, etc. I’ve spent some time in societies that still place heavy emphasis on these values you hold dear, and I can’t say it doesn’t have its drawbacks. It becomes all about age and little about merit. At the end of the day though, manners are important, but I think there’s a lot of old citizens that just grumble because they don’t understand that times change, and these were probably the gents that were all for seeing some upper thigh at the beach.

Thanks,

Chris Lewis: I’m put off by insults, as I am not so low as to serve them out myself (not to mention as I've stated, it is agains the user conduct of this site). As for my article, it is based off assumptions the majority of the progressive movement has collected off the back of Abbott’s comments and policies. Your dismissal is nothing more than a partisan reflection, one seemingly discourteous towards alternate points of view

Individual: I did not go to a public university. Yes all universities receive some public funding, however my particular faculty receives little in comparison to others (and that’s not a complaint). And I’m not sure why yourself and Hasbeen are caught up on my education. I did not study political science, so how you think my political views exhibited in this paper somehow directly relate to my education is beyond me. Whether I am in the service of the government or not means nothing to this paper, as my personal views are not relevant to how I go about my professional career.

“Isn't there any way we could have some pest control for intellectual vermin?” – You’ve tread dangerously here my friend. Your personal insults and threats are not welcomed, and are against the user conduct outlined in the ‘Legal’ section here: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/display.asp?page=legal I will be notifying a moderator to have your posts examined according to these conduct guidelines.
________

David G: I agree there is a lot of black and white thought going on here.
______
Interested_party: “Generalisations and assumptions do neither truth make… nor convincing argument to change my opinion.

Don’t just tell me I’m wrong, tell me why I’m wrong, give me something to think about and a reason to change my opinion, and yes, I can and I have as I’m neither a fool, nor zealot. “ - I strongly suggest you reflect on this and take heed of your own advice.

As for my sign off, it was related to the theme that Abbott does not govern for all Australian’s as he declared. A literal examination that was dissected as both literal and intended, you seem to, in a hot-headed rage, charged straight over the entire premise. As for a “you’re not the boss of me now”, that’s a pretty disgusting interpretation, I’m demonstrating my democratic right to continue putting forth my case, beliefs, ideas and the voices that are drowned out.

Brenton,

I don't think we have common ground, but I was differentiating the issue from gay marriage, as you should differentiate your gay friends's "feelings" from the reality on the ground, emotion from fact.

The liberal party probably did more for gay couples than anyone else, so the claim that Abbott does not recognize gays as equal human beings is hysterical hyperbole.

P.S. the LNP and country liberals are actually different branches of the same party, so the liberal first preference was greater than 42%, way more than Labor, and as the Nationals campaign directly with the libs, the coalition vote is >46% FP and 53.4% 2pp, and with 91/150 seats the claim that this is a minority government is massive self delusion.

You claim that " I’m neither a fool, nor zealot." well it doesn't look like it from here.

Hi, I've had a complaint about some of the comments on this thread and I'm going to edit a few above, but before I do that can I ask you all to be polite to each other. Name calling is not acceptable behaviour.