How hypocritical of you Poirot, to complain about what you unjustifiably perceive as lies, when you do not hesitate to lie, yourself. Abbott never used the term “died of shame”, and, in fact, condemned its use by Jones. Abbott is accused of breaking promises. There is no basis for accusing him of lying.
Despite being one who practices lying, you have failed to grasp the concept.

579 is no better, seeing value in making baseless allegations against Abbott, of lying, while he lies himself about a non-existent promise of a double dissolution

Well it is clear that Abbott was right, the labor government did eventually die of shame.

Really Leo? Abbott never used the term "died of shame"?

What's this all about then?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpv_AA4T16U

If you have dementia, that would be forgivable (and explain a lot). If it's some form of Liberal amnesia, then I don't think there's much hope.

You obviously have attention deficit, Bugsy, otherwise you would know that the discussion refers to the death of Gillard’s father. Abbott condemned the application of the phrase to the death of Gillard’s father and did not use it in that context himself, which is the scurrilous assertion in Steele’s post. Poirot is referring to Abbott’s application of the phrase to the Labor government, which they disingenuously attempted to link to the death of Gillard’s father, and as Poirot has attempted to do in her post

Both before and after Jones' comment, Abbott asserted that the Labor Party should have died of shame, as. of course, it should.

Here is an extract from Hansard of Abbott's address to Julia Gillard made just before her famous misogyny speech, the one which he denies was referencing obliquely or otherwise the death of her father.

It reeks of thoroughly evil intent and clinical execution. First he primes it with references to the Prime Minister and her 'loss'.

“I know that the Prime Minister is in a
difficult position today. She has already lost
her caucus chairman, she is fighting to avoid
losing her Speaker and what she is frightened
of ultimately losing is also the support of her
caucus. Just as she has lost the caucus
chairman, she will lose her Speaker—and I
suspect she will shortly lose the caucus,”

Note; difficult position, lost her, losing her, ultimately losing, she has lost, she will lose, she will shortly lose.

Now he strikes;

“because what this Prime Minister has done is
shame this parliament. Should she now rise
in this place to try to defend the Speaker, to
say that she retains confidence in the
Speaker, she will shame this parliament
again. And every day the Prime Minister
stands in this parliament to defend this
Speaker will be another day of shame for this
parliament and another day of shame for a
government which should have already died
of shame.

Note; shame, she will shame, day of shame, another day of shame, already died of shame.

He continued;

“… the bonds between them will be closer. This
Prime Minister should be ashamed of herself,
she should be ashamed of her choice, she
should be ashamed of her judgement and she
should be ashamed of the fact that she is now
having to defend the indefensible. This
Speaker should be gone, and he should be
gone today.”

Note; ashamed of herself, she should be ashamed, she should be ashamed, she should be ashamed.

But the one he probably thought was the most clever was; “the bonds between them will be closer”.

Cont..

Cont..

None but the most jaundiced supporter would deny he knew exactly what her was doing. What a calculated, evil piece of political savagery this was. Nine times in this short reply was the word shame or ashamed used. This was a bastard act by a person so desperate for power he would stoop to any depths to get it.

In my time on this planet I have made some enemies, there have been some I could even say I hated, but there is no way in the world I could contemplate doing what he did to that woman. It was just so many levels below what a normal human being would countenance.

And I am sure in his mind it was just the normal sledging done in the rough and tumble of politics, but that only makes it worse as it speaks to both his judgement and his empathy.

People try to say Tony Abbott is not a misogynist, perhaps rather a little sexist and old fashion. This is demonstrably untrue. He absolutely loathes women in power, particularly having power over him. If it wasn't putting his fist through the wall near a woman's head it was conniving to put them in prison, or to keep them out of his cabinet.

This is why this man will never be redeemed in my eyes and why I consider him unfit to be the leader of my country. But I understand how politics can blind supporters who will defend this man to the hilt, who will deny he uttered certain words, who will make excuses for him, laud his every move.

I however am coming to the belief that he is showing signs of borderline psychopathy.

Please note what he does with his eyes in the included clip when he tells us he had forgotten Alan Jones' remarks; http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/died-of-shame-focus-on-abbotts-use-of-controversial-phrase-20121010-27cgd.html

What a shameful man he is.