@Steeleredux

The part about you being <<a shag on a rock>> I agree with –but the rest of your post is just baloney. No one who has followed your posts would pick you as an economic conservative or any other kind of conservative.

And here’s an interesting observation about you standards of proof. I seem to recall your vigorously defending a certain individual who was charged with traffic offenses (and, not for the first time). In seeking to get off the charges this individual had made some demonstrably false (and malicious) charges against a police officer. Yet you stood by her because there was in your mind still some shadow of doubt.

Funny that you do not give Tony Abbot the same benefit of the doubt, eh!

Shadow of a doubt about what. The enormous amount of lies the Australian public were fed without a cringe, and then go to an election on that mantle of lies. The election was fraudulent and will never be forgotten.

By covering Abbott's tracks you are saying it's ok all is forgiven. That is not in the best interests of Australia.

@ Comrade 579

Cease & desist OLO posting.
Policy change:
AGW crap
Gonski bad
Budget good
Collect next 3 weeks of party corrected posts from Shorty @ Sussex Street.

From:ALP party HQ

Poirot sneaks in another scurrilous untruth. Her assertion that the comment is “lowest”, can only be on the basis that it links to the comment by Jones. Abbott applied the term to the ALP both before and after the Jones’ comment, and the assertion that it links to the Jones comment through any intention of Abbott is mischievous and untrue. Abbott condemned the remark by Jones. There were many who said that if Gillard’s father did not die of shame, he ought to have, but Abbott was not one of them

As to the non-existent promise to call a double dissolution, Poirot refers to an article where Abbott promises to get rid of the carbon tax. There is no promise of a double dissolution. She should be familiar with the format of a promise. Something along the lines of “There will be no carbon tax under a government that I lead.”..Abbott will call a double dissolution if it will achieve his promise to repeal the tax, and not otherwise. He has to wait for the dunces to put themselves in the situation which will make a double dissolution effective.

We're referencing one of the lowest comments ever made by a public figure in this country
Poirot,
As per its norm, conveniently neglets to add that the comments were also for the lowest integrity public figure.
When that female apologises to Australians for what she did to Australia then I shall cease to decribe her by then character.

Leo Abbott said that repeated times in parliament [ question time ]
He said died of shame: Not refereng to Gillards father. But where ever it fitted, and everybody knew what he was refering to.

It is not a matter of he may call a DD if the repeal doesn't get through . It is what he promised the AU people.

The ball is in Abbott's court, will he finally keep a promise or will he reneg again. Abbott has been subject to lying since before the last election. That is well documented. Even Hockey said you should not have to tell lies to win an election.

There was no Carbon Tax, as you like to put it. If it was a tax everybody would be paying it.

The excise on petrol is a tax, abbott even told deliberate lies as to where that extra tax was going to be spent on.

Can not help himself, and the way things are going we are going to end up in depression. Consumer confidence is at it's lowest sinse 1990, and that is dangerous.