DISCLOSURE "I am a 'bible basher'/Christian"

Nick, while you make very pertinant observations about Labor, there are some very pointed observations needing to be made about the Coalition (and all parties).

1/ ECONOMY How long can you run on legs which are continually getting shorter ? in short, "When its gone, its GONE"

(We rave and froth about a bubbling economy, which seems for the most part to be based on what we dig out of the ground, and sell to China so they can add value to it and return it to us with prices which send our manufacturers bankrupt)- yes, I know this is a long debate, not the place to go into it all here.

2/ NATIONAL REPENTANCE
Why does the coalition not bring federal pornography laws into line with State laws, preventing the sale of xxx rated material ? Why is it that the ACT allows the mail order of degrading, filthy, disgusting objectifying pornography to every other state in Australia ? Grand parades and Mardis Gras glorifying sodomy, this is our glory ?

3/ IMMIGRATION. When will the coalition wake up to the realities of the world and stop importing socially, culturally and politically incompatable people to our shores ? (I don't care what color they are, I just care that they fit and are 'with' us rather than 'against' us)

4/ "MENE MENE TEKEL, UPHARSIN" Hebrew/Aramaic words from which we derive the saying "The writing is on the wall" and "Your days are numbered" (Daniel 5)

King Belshazar of Babylon gave a great banquet for 1000 of his nobles and concubines. They gloried in their own grandure and economic/political/military success.....

Mene Mene 'Your days are numbered, and will be brought to an end.

Tekel 'You have been measured..and found wanting'

Upharsin 'Your kingdom will be divided to the Persians'

That very night the king was killed by a surprise attack from the Persians/Medes.

No government or society has survived it's own degeneracy, blindness or short sightedness -we are unlikely to be the first.

"The dream that Labor must govern for the battlers is not shared by most who vote, never will be."

To the contrary, I think the idea that Labor SHOULD govern for the 'battlers' is shared by most of Labor's voters. It's only the layer of middle class swingers who are less likely to support a redistributive agenda. And even then research shows there is support for a universalistic welfare in whose benefits the middle class shares.

Tristan

I agree that Labor must govern for all Australians not just "the battlers" but they don't even seem to have represented their traditional core constituency very well over the past decades.

Australia has changed but the battler still needs someone to bat for them... with the shift to the right Labor has abandoned them. I was in business when Hawke came to power and at that time business were terrified...

Business people not long after that used to say "This is the best Liberal Govt we have had" because he managed to keep business stimulated whilst also helping workers. He led a Govt of balance.

As Keating's ambitions grew pressure was brought to bear on Hawke and slowly the old Labor infighting started. I mean they replaced their most successful PM in history with Keating.... How out of touch was that? Even though interest rates were high so were the rest of the worlds. Today our interest rates are higher generally than our trading partners with National Debt & Household Debt again spiralling.

Labor don't get it... They need a new face who doesn't have radical ideas... who doesn't write books about their own personal theories but actually wants to govern for all Aussies.

That is why Kimbo must go and the Gillard/Rudd team should take over so that they can prove themselves to the Australian people from all works of life over a longer period.

Why do politicians in the leaders job allow their egos to override their political judgement? A leader who leaves the top position because it is in the best interest of the country... not just the party can leave with their heads held high.

Beazley has that opportunity now... and should resign. Not for the sake of the party... but for the sake of all Australians whatever their station in life. His day has been and gone!

I think it is very hard, if not impossible to separate the current manifestation of "The Labour Party" from it's origins.

It was founded on 'Them/Us'. (shearers/cockies?) I suggest that this mentality is so ingrained in the history and traditions, in the factions, in the families, where men and woman have died having given their lives in the persuit of such a cause.

Under these conditions, it seems more like getting Rev Ian Paisley to see the enlightened aspects of Catholicism and the Pope.

Such is probably the case in the hyperfundamentalist economic rationalist Liberal circles.

Labor, and the Coalition for that matter, both need to look at divesting themselves from the them/us approach.
The reason I outlined such ideas as 'National Repentance' was not just because it sounds nice to my evangelical ears, but because only new people make new societies.

The level of social decay and 'New Morality' surrounding us now, seems very similar to the "Old Immorality" of the days preceeding the great evangelical awakening of 1904.

The whole point of the prophets railing against the excesses of the kings of Israel, was that "justice might flow like a river".

They cried out against the economic looters, the greedy, the rich and powerful who took the poor to court just to foreclose on their land etc...

The remuneration of CEO's? disgusting. We only get monkeys when we pay peanuts because they are very GREEDY monkeys who do not see leadership of a large corporation as a service, but as an opportunity for self advancement and the accumulation of personal wealth.
Steve Jobs of Apple sets a good example, doing all he does for ONE DOLLAR a year and he sure ain't no chimp nor a chump.

National repentance and humility crosses party lines, ethnic lines, and economic status lines.

Being right with the Almighty, will result in us being 'alright' with our fellow man. Without the first, we won't have the second though we will have some sentimental and foundationless altruism, but by and large it will be me me and more of and for....me.

There is also a "Faction too much fiction" in the Liberal party as well. Strange how noone ever refers to Liberal infighting as factionalism.

Just imagine Petro Georgiou actually had the audacity to question the Govts immigration policies and the dentention of refugees and now he is being attacked by the conservatives in the party.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2006/s1598492.htm

I thought Liberalism was always portayed as encouraging people to question policies on social, economic and moral grounds.

Malcolm Turnbull keeps putting up opposing ideas on tax reform will he be challenged by one of the factions in the Liberal Party for lack of solidarty or worse still "doing his job".

Let's face it both the major parties are made up of factions and they ban together like bully boys to get their own way.

So How do you fix the Labor party should be extended to how do you stop presure groups getting too much say in all parties. But these factions are more than just pressure groups they can actually maniplulate the way people vote.

Minister Downer said words to the effect "You know, he's got to make his own decisions about his own life. I'm not making decisions for him or urging him. It's just a matter for him and it's not appropriate for me to get involved in the preselections in Victoria".

Sounds very familiar doesn't it? If you are a Liberal voter can't see that this is very similar to the faction battles of the Labor Party? The Liberals have factions too! Parties & Factionism oppress free speech... It should be outlawed!

Petro Georgiou on immigration issues at least is a refreshing face in the Liberal Party and for diversity of opinion alone deserves to be kept in the party.

Opinionated2: Downer is not the leader of the Liberal Party and he was talking about the challenger not the incumbent in Kooyong. That makes the comments you recited very different from the position taken by Beazley. Beazley should have been leaning on Conroy not to try to take out Crean in the first place. If Beazley had any decent level of skill and authority, that battle would never have happened.

No-one with any level of political knowledge would suggest abolition of factions. Even if it was desirable, it is not achievable. The point I was trying to make (apparently without the necessary clarity) is that a leader must have the capacity to impose his will on factions. If he lacks that political capital, he is destined to take orders. If he is destined to take orders, he is not a leader.

Equally, no-one is trying to suggest that the Liberal Party lacks factions. It lacks the formal structures that Labor has. That lack of formalism means that factional alliances are much blurrier than in the Liberal Party.

I guess my ultimate point is that running around the countryside holding workshops and "listening" is the stuff with which losing political parties consume themselves. In almost every case, each such party is waiting for a sufficiently strong and able leader to take control and lead. There is no substitute for that.