I can think of plenty more I just didn’t feel you were deserving of something with a higher sneer content.

>> Actually thinking about politics and policies is, at heart, patently un-Australian. All that we want is a good bloke who can skull a tinny and be seen at the footy - someone who understands the people.

There is your slight on the Australian public. And your pretence. that this is somehow the same as saying that “people might prefer straight-talking battlers to represent them in Parliament”, is both obvious and snide. And you can’t accuse me of being snobbish in that respect as they are two of my favorite pastimes.

I will forgive you for being both thick and lazy for not seeing that your world weary cynicism is intellectually indefensible and a motive force behind the Pauline Hanson campaign. She traded on the lack of respect for politicians that the soft left has made so thoroughly PC. It is such accepted part of folklore now that it doesn't occur to the more reactionary among us that perhaps there really is more to our politicians than their supposed never-ending gravy train.

>> f you look at it more carefully, you may actually discern a level of cause and effect operating here.

I think on the contrary that the ridiculous notion that all our politicians are cheats and liars, along with the plague upon our society that is political correctness, leads to the one dimensional politics that we see today. This one dimensional quality is what leads people to react as they did to Pauline Hanson, who if not very smart, at least appeared to be a real person.

Whilst you are correct in suggesting that “a mixed bag“is not a particularly enlightening phrase to describe our politicians I can bet you that it is 100% correct. The same cannot be said for your contention that they are all the same.

These every day reminders you get of our politicians venality, they wouldn’t be courtesy of “a current affair” would they?

Ad hominems are weak, Col Rouge. This is from the discussion page:

"Former CIA Officer Victor Marchetti had revealed in early 1975 that the CIA had funded both opposition parties since the 1960s. At the beginning of November 1975 it was revealed in the press that a former CIA officer, Richard Lee Stallings, had been channelling funds to Doug Anthony, leader of the Country Party.

It was also revealed at the time that the US bases in the hinterland were CIA creations, and that Stallings had been the first head of much of the operations. This coverage spurred Whitlam to investigate the facilities, as well as demanding a full list of CIA operatives in Australia. This spurred the Australian military intelligence community and the CIA into a flurry of activity, which also involved Kerr in several meetings. Whitlam was due to make an announcement on the US Bases and CIA activity on the afternoon of November 11."

Gibo. So...what was wrong with Pauline Hanson?

Nothing really, except she was a serious threat to the two major parties and they colluded to bring her down. The wins of ON in the Queensland election scared the pants off them.

She gained admiration because she spoke about issues that were only talked about privately and other politicians were too p**s weak to raise. Issues like Immigration, multiculturalism, the demise of our manufacturing industries and the sell off of our national assets like Qantas and the Commonwealth Bank. No one had ever asked the public about these issues and in fact the major parties had an agreement not to talk about immigration publicly. The reason 'It is too complex for the public to grasp'. No wonder she was seen by many to be a breath of fresh air and had guts.

Her, and One Nation, policies are middle of the road but opposite to those of the major parties. She even backed the unions with her Fair trade, not Free trade policy and advocated democracy with the Citizens Initated Referenda policy. She wanted a new Commonwealth Bank to keep other banks in check.

If she is seen as dumb for putting her finger on issues the public thought important, it doesn't say much for the abilities of the politians in the major parties who have massive resourses and highly payed advisers, supposedly to keep a tab on public interests.

Despite denigrating her in every way possible and jailing her on trumped up charges, she remained popular. The major parties then instructed the media to send her to Coventry and not give her oxygen. That brought about the end.

Lessons learned. Any small or fledgling party is OK if they remain that way. But if they get too large and pose a threat the major arties will collude to bring you down, by any possible means.

I'm not condoning how she was attacked but i will say that what defeated her in my opinion was her and her supporters overt and uniform racism against black and brown people (whether it was a media creation or not, i'm not so sure). Yes, many of them don't care about Australian culture or traditions, but neither do many white immigrants, such as mediterranean or eastern european whites. But there are some immigrants who are better people than many Australians and I would welcome first.

Banjo, you make some succinct and quite good points there (though I disagree Hanson would have been a good MP) but I can't help but feel you're overlooking her many, many shortcomings.

I'd also disagree when you say the 'government told the media' to be harsh on her.

This whole 'government runs the media' conspiracy gets quite a workout at OLO, when in actuality, the media run with whatever grabs attention, regardless of what the government thinks.

Well Banjo lad, you once referred to me as stupid;- am I stupid now to agree with your post?

It accurately describes exactly how I feel about Hanson.

I admired her. And I am a Socialist!! (with a bit of luck a couple of poster just had fatal heart attacks!)

What that woman did in almost literally coming out from behind the counter of her chip shop, was to walk into Parlie and make a maiden speech that jolted the lawyer/exec/and smarmie git fraternity awake!

I like that.

many may not have liked her message. Parts of it I didn't, BUT she metaphorically kicked the .hit out of the complacent sods all around her. AND she made sure she knew what was happening in the House at any one time, unlike many of them, who snoozed through most of it.

I like that.

What chilled me was the way ALL political parties set out to get her. She was undoubtedly seen as a threat to them.
The behaviour of the rabble;-those who embrace FoS,compassion,tolerance.......??,towards those who attended her meetings was a bloody disgrace.

I saw the defeat and destruction of Hanson as a defeat of democracy.