i dont mind if he does. i don't care if he doesn't. which bandit has temporary charge of the government really doesn't matter.

i believe that the only way australia will be directed for the benefit of ordinary australians, is if ordinary australians direct australia.

this can be done, if the cattle get off their knees and demand democracy: a society in which citizen initiated referenda are the fundamental laws of the nation.

this will not happen. australians are raised on their knees and can't imagine being their own masters. the limit of their aspiration is having a kind master. kind masters will arrive at christmas, on the backs of flying pigs.

amuse yourselves with this coffee house chatter, but don't be surprised if the fundamental decisions about state activity remain disconnected from your wishes

A demo, yes to all that, I suppose it comes down to what the media projects as the key electoral issue in the lead up to the ballot.

As Robert Mann has declared "we have a media which for all sorts of reasons hasn’t held the government to account with detailed work and with morally charged work". http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/mediarpt/stories/s1435112.htm

Are we reduced to judging who has the best political adds (no matter whose views they represent) YES.

Do we accept this modality as an acceptable way to participate in democratic life? YES.

Do we have better access to information via internet/ICT's that would ensure we make more informed political decisions? YES Do we use this to inform our voting behaviour? NO

The problem with the media, and particularly political journalism is that stands for nothing - it isn't pro-anything much these days. It’s all politically charged but ideologically benign.

My point is that the apathy you speak of is sometimes imagined more greats heaps of nothing much at all. Beaten to death by a feather duster..

John Howard (Prime Minister of Australia) goes to school to teach how to weasel word.

Prime Minister Howard was visiting a primary school and he
popped into one of the classes. They were in the middle of a discussion
related to words and their meanings.

The teacher asked the Prime Minister if he would like to lead
the discussion on the word "tragedy". So our illustrious leader asked the
class for an example of a "tragedy".

One little boy stood up and offered: "If my best friend, who
lives on a farm, is playing in the field and a tractor runs over him and
kills him, which would be a tragedy".

"No," said Howard, "that would be an accident."

A little girl raised her hand: "If a school bus carrying fifty
children drove over a cliff, killing everyone inside, that would be a
tragedy."

"I'm afraid not," explained the Prime Minister "That's what we
would call a great loss."

The room went silent. No other children volunteered. John Howard
searched the room. "Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of
tragedy?"

Finally, at the back of the room, a small boy raised his
hand...In a quiet voice he said: "If the plane carrying you and your husband
was struck by a "friendly fire" missile and blown to smithereens, that would
be a tragedy.

"Fantastic!" exclaimed John Howard. "That's right. And can you tell me
why that would be a tragedy?"

"Well," says the boy "It has to be a tragedy, because it
certainly wouldn't be a great loss. and it probably wouldn't be a bloody
accident either."

The last few months have seen the Howard Government become increasingly vunerable on a number of critical issues such as the economy and climate change. For the first time in years, the ALP has a real chance to firmly position itself as a credible alternative before the next election. The nation's prosperity is more fragile than it has ever been. Not even tricksy Howard can mask Australia's alarmingly high susceptibility to a downturn in world commodity prices, rising global interest rates, and the looming spectre of climate change. Some economists are even predicting a looming recession. An ALP victory is therefore still within grasp. However, the ALP needs to muster some courage and reshuffle its maladroit frontbench if it wishes to capitalise on this opportunity.

Any informed and compassionate Australian should be both sickened and alarmed at the prospect that such a government as John Howard's could possibly stand any chance of being re-elected in 2007.

This article implies that even if Australians were made to properly understand the truth of the AWB scandal and the almost innumerable other crimes of the Howard Government against the public interest, the poor, workers, the environment, future generations, world peace, democracy, accountability, honesty, etc, they would, nevertheless, still vote for the Howard Government if they thought they stood to gain a few more dollars as a consequence.

In any case, it is rubbish to suggest that this Government is managing the economy well as Steve Maddern (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5032#59584) and I (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5032#59582) have shown. What few crumbs Howard may choose to throw their way in order to cross the line in 2007, will quickly be lost again as we all reap the further terrible consequences of their mismanagement in coming years.

In all, I found the tone of this article to be offensive. No doubt the author would have us see this as dispassionate analysis, but I suspect it more to be wishful thinking on his part.

Why John Howard will win next year's federal election?

Did you forsee the Rudd-Gillard combo on the horizon...there's a couple of flies in the ointment.

I think it should now read "Why Rudd will win next year's federal election". That's a no brainer. Because the public are fed up with the squeeze of the intolerant hard right...and associated sycophants.