"He is the first of the modern crop of Australian prime ministers to have a physical presence and sporting capabilities. In a world where sport plays a major role in the lives of most Australian children and adults, Whitlams, Frasers, Hawkes, Keatings, Howards, Rudds and Gillards proved relatively incapable."

That would have to be the most bizarre recommendation of political worth I have ever seen. If you are looking for a role model, I would have thought that John Howard's brisk morning walks had far more of an impact than Abbotts' self-indulgent look-at-me sporting activities and photo opportunities. Why should a politician have to exercise in public at all? Malcolm Turnbull looks as fit as a flea, apparently without benefit of a media contingent tracking his exercise regime.

As to Tony Abbot speaking slowly, it's not the speed it's the simplistic words and phrases he uses. Why does he address people as though they finished their education at primary school? He has speech writers and spin doctors - someone should be putting smarter words in his mouth. His Ministers don't speak down to their audience the same way. So why does he do it? It's very curious.

Abbott's diplomatic efforts have been largely successful, in fact far more so than any other PM in 7 years.

Yes watching it I could only wonder, how come the left wing are so full of hatred and bitterness?

Candide's post is a good example of the ilk. Hating Abbott for exercise, baselessly imputing bad faith and character defects at him for playing sport, reviling him for a simplicity when talking, when she would revile him for anything anyway.

That's when they're pretending to moderation. Their preferred refrain is "Kill Abbott".

These are the ones who think they should be telling everyone else how to make the perfect society - by way of the force and intimidation of the state of course, what else?

The point is, there is no reasoning with these people, and it is state funding that breeds them: their taxpayer-funded education in leftoid resentment, their feeling of entitlement to live at others' expense, their creeds of fake victimhood, their blind worship of state power.

It's quite nauseating and the only way to get rid of this cancer is to cut, and cut, and cut the state-funded parasite industries where they feed.

Plowing in to the population that are the most vulnerable with a "bulldozer" equipped with a "ripper blade" and "tree spear" is hardly "statesman like" all he has to do is pull levers, wink and giggle.

And given exactly the very same logic, not necessarily a good or just barely adequate one either.
I mean, given the accompanying entourage, a drovers dog would likely do as well, or even better?
Rhrosty.

Yes JKJ, and the biggest state funded parasites, are those comparatively wealthy folks, talking most of it.
Our welfare budget for the genuinely needy, is around 50 billion per.
Family trusts, cost the budget bottom line around 32 billions per.
Negative gearing, costs the budget bottom line, 5 annual billions.
We give more state funded charity, as tax breaks on wealthy super, another 30 billions and rising above 50 billion inside a decade.
How's that for parasitical blood sucking on a monumental scale?
And the government, could have clawed back the welfare it gives to private health recipients, by simply cancelling the 3 annual billions used to subsidize private health cover; and then ensured, that publicly funded health, for those on the lowest rungs of the socioeconomic ladder, was protected, by means testing all public health and education!
Look, those who claim entitlements, that should be earmarked for the genuinely needy, are no better than commercial operators, stealing donated salable merchandise, from life line bins, or charity funds from the poor box!
Welfare for the genuinely needy, 50 billions annually.
Contrast that with welfare for the rich, as outlined above, 70 billion per, and rapidly rising!
Yes JKJ, you make an excellent case for eliminating entirely unearned and therefore undeserved, parasitical predatoration on the budget bottom line.
Who can honestly mount a cogent case, for giving the fattest cats even more cream, while our elderly, most who have paid taxes, and for all of their working lives, and at seriously higher rates than those in vogue today, shiver all winter, because their exponentially shrinking budgets have been squeezed to the point, where that sort of thing is now an unaffordable luxury.
As for pensioners, pissing their benefit up against the wall etc!
No genuine pensioner can afford to behave like this, or indeed, live in multi-million dollar mansions, on acreage estates!
And once again JKJ, there's even more common agreement, on limiting the professional parasitical predation, as represented by those claiming benefits, they're clearly not entitled to, on simple (total) financial grounds!
Rhrosty.

yep we heard Oakshotts self serving speach, Gillards moving forward and Rudd's mandarin as they squandered Australia's wealth and left us with a huge debt. The left still can't accept their miserable performance and hatred for the man they constantly said was unelectable. Egg all over their faces just makes them more hysterical and their Abbotphobia fits just increase. I am sure its part of the selection criteria if they want a job with the ABC or a spot on Q&A.

"Prime Minister Tony Abbott may not be a good public orator or rhetorician but that does not make him a poor statesman."

Pathological lying does though. It sure made poor statesmen of the primaeval grunting George W Bush and loquaciously babbling Tony Blair.

Abbott's signature public expression is his smirking wink over a housewife driven to prostitution by his policies of impoverishing the already poor.

It is indeed interesting to read that one speaker is reproved for "hating" Abbott and then to read that Rudd/ Gillard/ Rudd 'squandered' Australia's wealth without that speaker being reproved.
I don't think our current Prime Minister is up to the job and I ask him to resign. Every time he opens his mouth overseas and talks internal politics he proves that he is NOT a statesman and never will be.
His tally of lies is monumental and increasing daily. The LNP will need to replace him as Prime Minister if they are retain government but the problem is that only one of his Cabinet has the intellect to handle the position and Malcolm is loathed by a majority of the Liberal Party room.
Interesting times!

Brian of Buderim,
Let us know when your twelfth birthday comes up !

I sympathise with your despair over hatred and bitterness, JardineKJardine - it must be hard to be confronted by it every time you look in the mirror. Seriously - read your post compared with mine, and tell me who is consumed by hatred.

BoB,

No one was reproved for hating Abbott. There was only one egotistical sociopath whose comments were deleted and banned for some time for abusing other users, and who when returning then posted comments saying deleted for being too intelligent or hating abbott etc.

Rhostry
You're contradicting yourself over and over.

If it's wrong for government to give handouts, then why are you advocating it?

If government is incompetent in administering gifts of other people's money, then why are you advocating it?

Your entire political philosophy is nothing but advocating forced redistributions on the assumption that government knows best, but then when you see that they redistribute wealth *upwards*, you don't reflect back on your original wrong assumption. But of course, if you're right, and according to you, the government does presumptively know best, then you have no grounds to complain, do you?

According to you, if people keep more of their own income, that is "predation". That is just confused, just garble. You've got it back the front. People, by engaging in productive activity, are not attacking or exploiting anyone. But your political belief system consists of nothing but the alleged desirability of attacking or intimidating people to fund political handouts which disprove your own arguments several times over.

Candide
You despise Abbott for not using spin doctors when you would despise him for using them. Stop trying to squirm out of the fact you are motivated by blind hatred by blaming me.

JardineKJArdine - you know absolutely nothing about me or my motivation, but I have far better things to do with my life than indulge in 'blind hatred' of anyone. My dislike of Tony Abbott (and some others on both sides of politics) is based on their public behaviour and my response to it. You, on the other hand, frequently make unfounded assumptions and hurl nasty accusations at other people on this forum, about whom you know nothing, apparently because they don't share your world view or political opinions. Which is a pity, because on other occasions you make interesting comments on articles.

Hi Jardine,

Going on Candide's post history I think you got pretty close to the mark.