FrankGol

'Let's start to listen to Indigenous people before we tell them yet again what's best for them.

Now which one of the tribes are we going to listen to? Some plots of land have up to nine tribes claiming the same block. Or should we listen to Noel Pearson who tells us that the socialist welfare policies have led to more despair than any other thing for the aborigines. Or do we just listen to the brigade who are so racist that they blame the whites for every evil on the planet. We need leadership not feel good symbols.

HO HUM said: (in typical leftoid fashion.. doing the very thing he accuses Bolt of)

"He also tells blatant lies"

and you then proceeded to not proceed with any shred of evidence or example.

tut tut... naughty boy(girl).

Boaz David. I hope you have a heart, as by your postings it indicates otherwise.

You believe in your invisible person, but does he/she believe in you!

Well said FrankGol. Steel yourself Leigh there is going to be a lot more of this, particularly when Hicks is released and the results of the investigation into the Dept. of Immigration are made public.
Perhaps you might like to offer your talents to John and Janet as they struggle to settle into the US, out of the reach of Australian law (with a little help from their friends).
Bruce Haigh

runner

You don’t give up on trying tired old debating tricks, do you?

Trick number 4: Propose that you can’t consult with people because they have divided opinions among themselves. “Now which one of the tribes are we going to listen to?”

I suppose you wouldn’t want the Australian Government to consult with the Australian people on, say the republic issue or a change to education funding rules, because there are so many factions and so many different opinions. We wouldn’t know who to listen to, would we? Too hard, so the Government should just decide what’s best for us, eh?

Trick number 5: Attack people’s reputations so as to deflect attention from the issue: “the brigade who are so racist that they blame the whites for every evil on the planet”.

Then return to debating trick number 2, the false dichotomy: “We need leadership not feel good symbols”. Why, even Hitler saw the value of having both at the same time (though the quality of both left a lot to be desired).

Now, runner, what were you saying about ‘decades of Labor Governments’ giving rise to child abuse? Have you any evidence to provide in the face of the facts of history as to who was in government in the past decades?

Yep, Leigh must be deliriously unhappy if he wants to have “deep and meaningfuls” with those he describes as morons, simpletons and idiots that come up with crap – you can understand my reluctance.

Leigh only wants to engage with people of his ilk and vilifies anyone that has a different point of view – the author of this article for example.

Leigh comes across as a person who “thinks” he is always right and has a complete disregard for reasoned and logical argument by anyone that doesn’t agree with him.

To get his “warm and fuzzies,” Leigh would be better off booking a motel room with Liberty and the rest of his mutual admiration society.

TRTL makes a valid point, it really should not be about you/me, them/us, left/right, etc – this is a very simplistic last-century method of argument. Yet this method of attack still seems to be adhered to by extreme fundamentalists and neo-cons alike – exemplified by the fear and negative Liberal campaign of the recent election … caught on camera delivering those damn flyers in Lyndsay!

We should be prepared to engage with people with different points of view, but why would we when we are treated with disrespect and vilification. Leigh just wants to attack the person; he does not play the ball.