I thought the Howard Govt fell because it was tainted with doctrine, and was subsequently smashed at an election in which the Prime Minister lost his own seat.

Regardless of this past result, the remnants of the Howard Govt led by Tony Abbott with a new knock and block policy instead of the old one, of just blocking the Govt and bumbling or arguing over policy, now plan to introduce the bits we liked about Workchoices.

The problem is (from a workers point of view), I cant remember any of the bits I liked about Workchoices. In fact I can remember thinking the whole idea was an abrogation of both human and civil rights.

Good luck Tony in selling that one!. However, the new raving looney version of the Liberal party is a might scary and very tricky, prompting my entry into the party political end of discussions.

As for the Rudd Govt, an average to reasonable performance all things considered, but changes like the enforced filtering of information on the Internet, with an unpublished or secret list of blocked sites is also an abrogation of rights. Planned changes in criminal law reversing to the onus of proof from the accuser to the accused are a mistake and would prevent me from voting for them again. I regard both of the above changes as instruments for future totalitarian inclined Govt's to control as opposed to just govern. Attractions for the corrupt to seek office.

Is it fair to suggest that the Rudd Govt is also suffering from doctrine, from it's own raving looney version, that it's naivety is evidence of it's sheltered churchy upbringing.

As a declared civil libertarian and atheist there is no choice for me offered at the next election from major parties. The Govt we have doesn't represent my view and the opposition scares the daylights out of me. The Greens?.

I will receive a verbal kicking for this but you are quite right.
This Abbott lead party is performing better, but using miss information and fear to do so.
It will still be beaten and Abbott will still leave politics without achieving anything.
Remember, look deeper into the actions that high jacked conservatives.
See its root sin the very right of NSW it has grown like a wart on Liberalism for a long time.
Look too at the revolting spokes people for this party you will find no true Liberals out in front.
Foolish people contend all politicians do not serve us well, rubbish but I challenge them to say this is wrong.
Australia will continue for generations to be governed by middle of the road partys.
Labor holds much ground conservatives once held.
Rather than being the alternative government Liberalism has been stampeded buy a few ultra conservatives further right.
If I had twenty years to live I would see a return to Liberalism, and government by the new direction people that will retake the party.
I would see those same people look back at late ;last year from within the Liberal party, and rightly, vilify those who stole the party, no election wins for this lost Right wing mob.

miss information ?
belly, is she one of the left ?
I agree that the conservatives do not display an ideal party picture. If I had my way I'd simply expel Malcolm Turnbull. He is a sad loser & now has turned silly enough to cause major damage.
I also feel that Tony Abbott will go through the same humiliating leftist media portrayal as did John Howard but, just as Howard did, Tony Abbott too will jump these disgusting hurdles & be a future PM.

So T2, be honnest here, were you directly effected by WC, if so, how?

And, assuming you are still working, are you now better off under the new modernised award system?

Are you also aware that many small businesses may close, either altogether, or do less hours due to the imposition of penilty rates for weekends.

My brother owns restaurants and the day the new award came in he saw $100,000 per annum comming off his bottom line simply due to penilty rates.

He now shuts weekday lunches which has put 10 part timers out of work.

How smart is that!

These workers were quite happy with the arrangements they had, now they are certainly worse off.

Just face it, Rudd is a dud!

Thankfully the lies, misinformation, deceit and mythology espoused by Ms Wong and Mr Rudd in regard to global warming is now well documented. Even Mr Osama (as our beloved QLD Premier calls him) is going nuke knowing that his previous lies have been exposed as he digs himself out of the snow. Abbott might be a loony but is certainly a lot more honest than Mr Rudd and Ms Wong. You could also add Mr Garret to that list.

This conundrum has been the same ole, same ole for as long as I can remember.

Vote for me, I'm starting the AAP (Australian Anarchy party). Most of the country is already living that way anyway, so we couldn't do much worse than the bozo's currently trying.
The only policy we need is the current ALP's one: Do nothing and stuff up everything we say we're gunna do. It won't even take a full term, which just shows how incompetent they really are :)

The Rt. Hon. Malcolm Fraser - former Prime
Minister of Australia (LIB) 1975 - 1983.
said the following at a lecture given at
the University of Melbourne:

"I remember the party I joined, the party of Menzies,
of liberal and progressive ideas, a forward-looking
party, willing to make experiments, as Menzies himself
put it, a party that believes fervently in the Rule of
Law, in higher education accessible to all able
students, in a government accepting national obligations
and a vision for the future ... a party of hope and of
vision.

The departures from the principles underlying that Liberal
Party are substantial and serious.

The Party has become a party of fear and reaction. It is
conservative and not liberal. It has not led in positive
directions. It has allowed and some would say promoted race
and religion to be part of today's agenda. I find it
unrecognisable as liberal..."

That speech was made on the 29th November 2005. It was
part of The Chancellor's Human Rights Lecture.

It is even more relevant today.

Unless the Liberal Party makes the required changes prior
to the next election - it hasn't a chance of surviving.
People will not re-elect repeat offenders.

Foxy writes

'People will not re-elect repeat offenders.'

Well they voted for JW 4 times. Your comment will certainly be disproved if Mr Rudd gets re elected.

I tried to highlight view such as these foxy did.
I wanted to say the very right has taken conservatives away from its voters.
However the Christian fundamentalist right, did it for me.
rechtub, asked a question he will not see or hear the answer to, and will not give the truthful answer any value.
work choices a few of its crimes.
It took over time on Sunday rates away from children in that hamburger palace.
took money and conditions from sales women and gave 1 cent an hour rise.
It traded away sick leave over time, bought in weekend work at normal rates.
It saw 5 year contracts without any wage rises, it sent people to work 10 hour shift sat normal time.
It in Abbott's words yesterday went too far.
ten telephone books can be written on why work choices hurt us rechtub and his like just do not want to know.

rehctub,

It seems to me the problem comes about in there discussions when people confuse opinion, often emotional,self interested to the point of myopia, no facts/objectivity required, and factual arguments that have a chance of compromise and or resolution.

Might I humbly suggest your brother is not telling you *all* the facts.
He's loading it because it suits him to do so. he entitled to his perspective but is it proof ? not by the proverbial country mile.

Personally I smell hypocrisy and rampant self interest, rearing it's ugly heads.

Supply and demand allegedly dictates you either provide a service at a price which the public is prepared to pay or you don't. There is no mention in that that the government(public) owes him a living or a business to his preference. Capitalism is harsh but that's the system we have.

The argument of lost jobs is baloney hes there to make money period.
If he was there for people he'd reduce his profit pay staff more.

I love it when those on the left get angry at my party, the Liberal Party. I love it when they feel the urge to predict dire consequences as a result of some action of the Liberal Party. The left-wingers all loved Turnbull, and I HATED him!
Abbot was always my choice and Liberal voters know he is on the right track. The Rudd Govt. is all about spin. Krudd has no substance :-) Swan hated him when they were together at school, and I bet he still hates him.
The more you lefties hate Abbott and the more mud you fling at Barnaby Joyce, the more confident I get that the Libs are on the right track.
C'mon the ELECTION

Geoffrey Kelley

Dear runner,

The voters threw out the Howard Government in a
landslide. Not only that - they tossed him out
of his own Electorate. He'll end up just a footnote
in history - if that.

Abbott is unelectable.
To elect him as leader of the Liberal Party is to
step back in time.

As Malcolm Fraser pointed out - the current frontbench
of the Libs are from the shallow end of the gene pool.
On the right track? They don't even know where the
track is!

No I haven't been affected yet by the WC, as you say rehctub. But interestingly I worked in the restaurant industry for 20 yrs or so as an entertainer and had one residency for over 10 yrs in which the venue tripled in size. But that was when there was a restaurant industry.

Luckily I'm adaptable rehctub and although still a musician, I now do things I'm not as good at for a living. But for those less provided with skills and/or adaptability, we still need some sort of basic set of principals to ensure that we extend the benefits of a society to all, if not the majority. Workchoices disturbed this principal, this basic tenant.

If the populace are not rewarded sufficiently for working, who is it that spends their money in these restaurants of your friends, the select few that are rewarded handsomely for the time they spend working.? Other laws affecting restaurants such as tax benefit changes killed the restaurant industry years ago unfortunately anyway rehctub.

And as for duds the Howard Govt for me certainly was that. The economy inherited from Keating was a gem. All they had to do was sit on their hands, ride the crest of the mining boom, sell our profitable assets, Telstra etc, to people. And like Tom Thumb said "what a good boy am I". Oh.. And they massively reduced their financial obligations to the States by introducing a GST.

Had they not distributed the bulk of tax cuts to wealthier people during the Howard era, had they not dipped so deeply into the pork barrel, had they not drawn the race card with children overboard etc, there may have been some excuse for trashing peoples rights in the workplace.

Even as we speak Tony Abbott and friends are drawing the race card by claiming the Govt's policy is attracting boat people rehctub. It's a disgrace really. I fear that the rights of all will be eroded further, by pressing these buttons as the Liberal right seek support for their agenda.

And Belly let them kick me! cheers

T2; No I haven't been affected yet by the WC, as you say rehctub

Thank you for being honnest. Just goes to prove what I have said many times. Some people just can't help but concern themselves with other peoples business.

As i have said before, we are all provided with an equal opportunity to fail.

With the amount of support available for people to enhance their skill levels, excluding those with learning disabillities, there is simply little excuse for being under skilled in todays world.

The fact that the low skilled are paid so high means that in many cases the 'higher skilled' don't get paid what they deserve.

Eg. person holding a 'stop go sign' on $24 per hour, while many having done trades get paid less. Now that's a joke!

Geoff Kelly, that indeed is a child like post.
Are you aware your self interest has blinded you.
Did you read examinator post about what lays under some posts.
Are you not aware Labor can not honesty be branded left?
It is your party's abandoned ground we hold.
Come the election?
Is your understanding so very bad you fail to know it is no joy for you.
Read my post history I AM LABOR.
But never far away from the center, those such as you ,Abbott, a host of others rammed American right Republicanism down your party's throat.
Not caring that your back bone, middle of the road voters are repelled by that push.
Rechtub, often I thought you to be a good bloke but miss informed, your dad was a better man.
Do you for a second? think we should leave ^the failures to starve^

Thinker 2 you make some good points.

Rehctub why is it that you think people should mind their own business when it comes to WC? Just because anyone of us might be doing okay or be unaffected by WC does not mean that we should turn our backs on those who were truly affected with a reduction in incomes.

My daughter, an older student, experienced a real loss in income with her employer's decision not to pay penalty rates. They also had no breaks during working hours. She was just one of many and the staff in the restaurant she was working were told they were not 'allowed' to discuss their pays with each other. This happens all the time - little mini-dictatorships.

Do we turn our backs on poverty and homeless just because we are not poor or homeless?

I don't get your point, but if I have misunderstood please explain what you mean.

Belly, every bone in my body is screaming and tells me to ignore you, but I cannot. I am bored.
Belly, it is not my self-interest that spawned my comments, it is my philosophy. To quote Winston Churchill on socialism, "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Of course you are a Labor voter and a socialist! I could see that. And you are an atheist.
What I really enjoy is your strident attack on the Liberal Party! You really care, don't you. You cannot believe that Abbot and his supporters, Nick Minchin, Andrew Robb, Joe Hockey and Barnaby Joyce are actually getting traction against the lies and double-talk spruiked by your leader, Krudd. Surely his Great Big New Tax on Everything is in trouble as the IPCC unravels and dissolves into oblivion? Do you really believe in AGW? If so, why? Why does Rudd have to lie about everything, including the socialist agenda to form a world government that can tax and fine Australia and Australians?
Remember that we are not on the same page Belly, you are a socialist and I believe in capitalism. Why do you socialists have to lie about AGW and GW? It is your problem Belly, not mine, but Australians are beginning to wake up!
I just wish you could explain your party' agenda so that I could understand why they are in favour of a GREAT BIG NEW TAX ON EVERYTHING!
Geoffrey Kelley

I wonder how many working Australians actually care about Work Choices? It does not affect me. I am a small business owner and have six employees. WC does not affect them either. I believe that the unions are screaming about WC because they are the big losers, and they used their massive resources to finance the ALP in the last election. I suspect the Labor Voters might be guilty of "believing their own bulls..t."
In the meantime Australians are waking up to Krudd and his maniacal belief in AGW, whilst the wheels are falling off the IPCC every day. Only today we see that the president of the UNFCCC, Mr Yvo de Boer, has resigned following the failure of the Copenhagen Conference. Krudd ridiculed Lord Christopher Monckton for spreading a mad right-wing scare campaign that the UN wanted a world govt. No, it was not the right-wingers but the socialists. Have a look at page 18 of the UNFCC draft proposal, September 2009, for the details of the socialist world govt. the IPCC and the UN wanted to ratify, but failed.
Then ask Krudd what his views are on the UNFCCC Draft Proposal, September 2009.
Geoffrey Kelley

geoffreykelly I'm wondering how many Australian small businesses today, were founded upon the idea of a Workchoices style of Industrial System. How many small businesses intend (in their business plan) to pay their staff as little as humanly and legally possible as part of their success formula?.

It is an economic fact "that if a wage package does not at least include an annual increase built in at the rate of inflation" then the employee's living standard is eroding annually automatically. Wage Indexation should be, and was the standard in this country not so long ago. Keeps everybody honest and encourages appreciation, loyalty and co-operation between business operators and their staff. It is also anti inflationary.

If there has been an increase in small businesses that are dependant upon the principal of operating in the way described by pelican, then these businesses should adjust their business plan and be encouraged to seek the best staff instead of the least expensive to achieve their own goals.

As for Workchoices and caring geoffrey, there was bucketloads of people at the anti WC rally that I attended in Melbourne that cared enough and not just Unionists but whole lots of people.

The WC legislation was also illegal in terms of International Human and Civil Rights agreements that Australia was signatory to: and was doctrine that the Howard Govt had no mandate for, and had no real right to impose it upon it's citizens .

GK you should have ignored me.
Your frantic unstable post makes me proud to be opposed to you.
I have seen many like you come flame and go.
SOCIALIST?
Can you not understand as the list you drew up for me paddles your ship further right LABOR takes the ground you surrendered.
Are you aware, please Goggle him, of your party's founder, Sir Robert Menzies the one man Howard admired most?
Do you understand [please Goggle] he supported unions and workers rights.
That once your party was the voice of the middle class and those who wanted to become middle class.
Shout, scream , but have you no understanding?
Labor polls and all, has already won the next election, with great help from the dysfunctional people you proudly trot out As HERO'S.
WC is dead it divided this country stole wages and conditions and only a mug could think it was ok.

T2, there are many problems associated with the way wages are determined, for small business esspecially and, you could not be further from the truth in thinking that SB owners want to slash peoples wages at every chance, as, good workers are well worth looking after, problem is, unions don't like it when one person is paid more than another.

You see, people come to expect a pay rise even if the business made less profit than last year. Also, the currect system pays people for how long it takes to do a job, rather than how well they did the job, i.e. hourly rates.

Many workplaces keep pay rates secrete as they don't want the poorer workers to find out how much the better workers earn, otherwise the unions become involved and cry fowl.

WC gave many companies the chance to get rid of some 'dead wood' that was created from UFD laws. Another labor brainstorm.

And belly, I have asked that you refrain from referring to my late father, which of cause you can't resit, therefore I wish to have nothing more to do with you.

T2, I can't talk for all small business but I can talk for most. Most of us value our employees. I want my girls to be proud to work for me. It is good advertising. I want my girls to eat meat, wear nice clothes and have an edge on their friends. My girls like me, and our workplace is very happy. The last thing small business wants is a high turnover of staff, for reasons that are self-evident.
One of the most revealing things about the last "almost" recession was that we had not had one for twenty years. I am old enouh to remember recessions every 8 or 9 years since 1960 and Menzies credit squeeze. One of the reasons we did not have a recession in 1998/9 when the Asian economies melted down was that Costello and Howard protected us and it went unnoticed.
This time few managers under the age of 45 knew how to cope.
At the beginning of 2009, before the nadir of the depression, I called the girls to a staff meeting and asked them if they were nervous about their jobs. They all looked nervous and believed the axe was about to fall. I am 64 years of age and have seen many depressions and recessions and know how useful and good they are to the economy. I told the girls of the opportunities afforded by a good recession. I increased their wages by 5% just to let them know their jobs were safe. I had a ball in the recession and came out a lot better off. I bought ANZ shares for $12.00! Westpac for $18.00 and NAB for $17.00. I wish I had bought BHP at $20.00, but I spent all my money on other great buys and I am overweight on BHP! (continued in next post)
Geoffrey Kelley

(Continued ) Two of the six girls that work for me bought new houses (are building new houses) and are laughing all the way to the bank. All my girls get their 17.5% loading when they take holidays and for Christmas I predicted that the Boxing Day sales would be sensational and gave them all $500.00 bonus to be spent on Boxing Day. They bought shoes and girly things like make-up and had a ball at half price.
Don't talk to me about WC as it does not involve me. I am outside the system.
And I still love Abbott and Joyce and Minchin and Robb and Hockey and Pine because they stand for the values I applaud.
And, they tell the truth and don't need to lie!
Geoffrey Kelley

Dear Geoffrey,

Unfortunately, not every employer
however is like you - and that's why Work Choices had
to go! Take the tragedy and disaster of the
Beaconsfield Mining incident. That was not a freak
accident, but a result of the sacrificing of worker's
safety to corporate profits. There had been 144 deaths
in the mining industry in Australia prior to the
incident.

Howard's Work Choices removed workers right to strike
if they believed a work site to be unsafe. And
Beaconsfield was a disaster waiting to happen. Work Choices
took away from workers the right to complain - for fear
of losing their jobs. Anyway, don't take my word for it -
do your own research on Beaconsfield - and be horrifed
by what you learn. I was! A person's life - is not
worth corporate profits!

The same went for the New Industrial Relations Laws that
Howard's government put in place - and their repressive
crackdowns on the rights of workers/victims/families - to
campaign for compensation with incidents like the Hardie
asbestos cases. The new laws made it much more
difficult in the future for victims to lodge any claims
in the future - crippling fines, damages and
prosecution was the order of their day.

The voters had the good sense to throw out the Howard
Government in a landslide, including in his own Electorate.
Now you're advocating to elect Tony Abbott and his
frontbench - as leaders - that to me is to step back
in time.

Why on earth would anyone want to bring back the type of
Government that has a philosophy that's so difficult to
swallow and is certain to cause this country a good deal
of harm. Why would anyone with a bit of sense take any
of them seriously? Theirs is the politics of money and
power. It's the ideology of greed,
which leaves no room for social equity, compassion or
the idea of an egalitarian society.

I don't know how old you are - but you'd better be
concerned if these guys get into office.

Obviously geoffreykelly we seek the same outcomes.

I'm not suggesting that all, or the majority of business people seek to exploit their employee's, in fact the majority do understand the value of their staff and as you say this is self evident.

But I am saying the majority of business people don't need confrontational politics as part of their relationships with staff either. When extremism is generated by Govt's or Union officials we all lose. WC is, and was driven by faulty doctrine alone and is a classic case of bad creating worse. Regardless of you seeing yourself outside of the system, people are still affected by business operators who are not capable of providing the leadership that you can yourself geoffrey, and these people do seek to exploit and were encouraged by WC.

When you mention the Liberal team you omit Phillip Ruddick, Kevin Andrews, Bronwyn Bishop, Julie Bishop, Hunt and Morrison. Do these people represent your views as well geoffrey?.

A classic case of exploitation by big business was recently defended by Greg Hunt when a corporation was threatening to move operations to China based upon an impending E.T.S.

Hunt said it was self defeating to allow them to go to China where they could continue to pollute more.This is based on the insulting assumption that the Chinese would be happy to receive polluters rejected by Australia. It is self defeating to acquiesce to the behaviour of this corporation as is failing to deal with the environment now.

Exploitation does exist geoffrey. It is an effluent born of self interest. History is riddled with instances of exploitation by business and therefore, I question the wisdom of allowing businesses to continue making decisions for us until I see our leaders providing some leadership.

Future survival far outweighs the need for the sanctity of business today geoffrey

cheers T

As you see i have done some homework so the facts tell the story so foxy why is it again the unions didnt take the workers out on strike.

See one should only need to believe the truth and not stories told by labor or the unions.

Quote

h) action by an employee if:
(i) the action was based on a reasonable concern by the employee about an imminent risk to his or her health or safety

end quote

WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (WORK CHOICES) ACT 2005 - SCHEDULE 1
Division 4 -- Industrial action
503 Additional effect of Act-- industrial action
Without affecting its operation apart from this section, Part VC also has the effect it would have if:

(1) For the purposes of this Act (other than Part XA ) , industrial action means any action of the following kind:
(a) the performance of work by an employee in a manner different from that in which it is customarily performed, or the adoption of a practice in relation to work by an employee, the result of which is a restriction or limitation on, or a delay in, the performance of the work;
but does not include the following:
(e) action that is not agreement related (as defined by subsection (3));
(f) action by employees that is authorised or agreed to by the employer of the employees;
(g) action by an employer that is authorised or agreed to by or on behalf of employees of the employer;
h) action by an employee if:
(i) the action was based on a reasonable concern by the employee about an imminent risk to his or her health or safety

Dear Mr Tapp,

If you want to stand as an Independent candidate
in the next election - as you say you do
then Sir - you are supposed to at
least appear to be non-biased - and present
an alternative to voters from the established
major parties. That was my assumption of what an
Independent candidate did.

Your constant attacks on Labor - indicates - that
you are anything but objective in your views.

Having said that however, I have already explained
the Beaconsfield Mining Disaster to you on your own
thread - but as you insist on wanting further
clarification - here are a few websites that may
enlighten you:

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2006/667/6702

http://news.smh.com.au/national/mine-put-money-before-safety-20080725-3kni.html

And you may also be interested in this one on Peter Garrett:

http://www.crikey.com.au/2010/02/19/peter-garrett-and-the-perpetual-present-of-politics/

As a political candidate - you should be open to a variety of
opinions - and you should look at not only both sides of the
coin so to speak - but around the edges as well, in order to
glean an informed opinion - and not simply push the one-eyed
narrow agenda that you're doing.

You lose credibility by your current behaviour - every time
you express your biased opinion.

You do have the right to remain silent!

Foxy, the Beaconsfield Mining disaster is a good example of the sort of mess unions can orchestrate if they are recalcitrant. The union must accept as much blame as the mine operators as they were a part of the problem. I don’t know where you got your data from, but can you validate your claim that there had only been 144 deaths in the mining industry in Australia?
I am 64 years old and studied first year physics at the Univ. of Melbourne in 1964. The old SEC had land on French Island ear-marked for a nuclear power plant but it was abandoned due to public pressure not wanting a nuclear power plant, but more importantly, because nuclear energy was more expensive than brown coal. We were taught that about 260 deaths a year were attributed to the burning of coal in Australia and that nuclear energy was clean and safe. The socialist and the ALP have steadfastly opposed the use of nuclear energy. That means that we have supervised the deaths of over 10,000 Australians because you lefties don’t like nuclear energy! Don’t tell me that,” A person's life - is not worth corporate profits!” You and your ilk have killed thousands of Australians because you can’t comprehend the nature of the nuclear debate.

T2, the unions must accept part of the blame. You cannot blame it all on bad employers. You asked, “When you mention the Liberal team you omit Phillip Ruddick, Kevin Andrews, Bronwyn Bishop, Julie Bishop, Hunt and Morrison. Do these people represent your views as well geoffrey?”

With the exception of Morrison who does not come to mind, I welcome all of the above, especially Phil Ruddock. The ALP and in particular Sens Cook and Faulkner crucified him over the children overboard incident when he was in fact blameless. And I suppose Krudd is doing a great job? A boat a day?

Tapp is on the money! What else can I add to his argument! But I know I will never make any headway with you rusted-on socialist lefties and your ALP machine.

Geoffrey Kelley

foxy Gday, you will get no place with GK the thought you are a lefty is about as childish as you can get.
Well except the nothing short of stupid claim unions killed miners by refusing to go nuclear.
My support, a true left of center person for nuclear power is shared by many, how does GK handle that.
No intention to get involved but you waste your time with another contributor too.
Look at the post history of that person.
Understand some posters sadly, are not in command of their thoughts.
History and some understanding, has firmly told me involvement with some is unwise.
GK in all the years I have contributed to these pages I have seen many come and go much like you.
Look at my post history and you may find ,for an ALP activist, true admiration for some past conservatives.
You will find too truly held concerns at the blindness that folk like you have to recent events, beginning in Howard second term, that defame and cripple your party.
In time ,having been retaken by true Liberals, your party will return to power, surely even you know it may take two more terms of the ALP, and without change on your side? 4 at least.

Well said geoffrey

Now foxy i came here to have a look but since you brought up beaconsfield i thus had to respond.

So labor and the unions lied to the workers
Lied to the people
lied to the media
that it was liberals fault that these workers where in the mine.

Well as i have proven it was labor and the unions and i should point out the workers pay the unions to represent them so why were these workers not on strike and i quote again,

Quote

h) action by an employee if:
(i) the action was based on a reasonable concern by the employee about an imminent risk to his or her health or safety

end quote

WORKPLACE RELATIONS AMENDMENT (WORK CHOICES) ACT 2005 - SCHEDULE 1
Division 4 -- Industrial action
503 Additional effect of Act-- industrial action
Without affecting its operation apart from this section, Part VC also has the effect it would have if:

(1) For the purposes of this Act (other than Part XA ) , industrial action means any action of the following kind:
(a) the performance of work by an employee in a manner different from that in which it is customarily performed, or the adoption of a practice in relation to work by an employee, the result of which is a restriction or limitation on, or a delay in, the performance of the work;
but does not include the following:
(e) action that is not agreement related (as defined by subsection (3));
(f) action by employees that is authorised or agreed to by the employer of the employees;
(g) action by an employer that is authorised or agreed to by or on behalf of employees of the employer;
h) action by an employee if:
(i) the action was based on a reasonable concern by the employee about an imminent risk to his or her health or safetyPosted by tapp, Saturday, 20 February 2010 12:25:07 PM

The workers should not have been in that mine.

Dear Geoffrey,

Me a rusted-on leftie?

Actually dear chap - I come from an extremely
conservative side of politics - except that I
prefer to vote for policies that make sense -
I don't have any allegiance to any particular
party. My rational is based on my experience.
I have lived in Victoria under Mr Jeff Kennett,
and saw the damage that he and his party did.

I also can't help but wonder - why is it that
you conservatives - always do the name-tagging
and labelling? I've never heard it the other way
around. Perhaps the tag of conservative carries
a greater insult - and people are hesitant to use it.
Hmmmmm.

Dear Mr Tapp,

Unions don't always get it right. But in Beaconsfield -
they did. They warned the corporate owners of the safety
risks - time and time again. Why did the workers not
go on strike? Because contrary to what you may have
heard about unions - they don't force workers to do
what they don't want to do - and in this case their jobs
were at risk. Workers were threatened if they went on
strike because of safety concerns - they would lose their
jobs. Coporate profits mattered more - than the workers
safety. Blaming unions in this case is an outright lie !

However, I can see that this is futile arguing with people
who don't see the full picture - but only view things
through a very narrow lens. Neither one of you are Liberal
thinkers - in the way The Rt. Hon. Malcolm Fraser would
describe - nor for that matter would Sir Robert Menzies.

Both men had vision and hope for the future of the country.
The current mob aren't Liberals at all. They're conservatives
who are not capable of leading the country in a positive
direction. They only have one agenda - fear and reaction.
And for that reason alone - they won't get in!
Because the voters will get it right in the end!

The workers had safety concerns

You mead the unions lied to the workers that their jobs could be lost even though industrial action for safety was covered in workchoices.

That right the unions didnt tell them that.

The unions are paid by the workers and as you said you cannot get the workers out on strike but then for labor and the unions to blame the liberal government that this occured was an outright lie.

The workers didnt want to go out on strike
or the unions told them because of workchoices they couldnt.

Either way the unions and labor have lied to the people
to the workers
to the media

as these workers could and should have gone out on strike.

All we get is excuses , excuses but not facts.

Cool name for the article. Now we just need another cartoon.

I agree that the Rudd team has done an average to reasonable performance all things considered....

If there was something of substance to comment on regarding the Liberal party then there might be something to add however, I think you got it in one. " Abbott and the Raving Looney Party", Gads, now bless Australia!

The thing I dislike the most about the Liberals is the strategy to oppose everything for the sake of opposing. Citizens are not the focus here, nor is the future of Australia. I would prefer some common ground with government, at least in token a "Do by example approach". We learn nothing from the Abbott team except that "bully tactics" and "soft porn" as a political strategy works. Attractions alright, more for the corrupt mind spinners who seek office, so even less gets done.

The sad part is that so many take them seriously.

http://www.miacat.com/

Belly and foxy, you are both rusted-on ALP supporters. You can buy a cat, name it “Butch”, give it a spiky collar and walk down the street introducing all your friends to your new dog, but they know it is a bloody cat! Wake up!
You can mount an ad hominem argument against me and say you will get no place with GK, and you are, for once, correct!
All foxy has to do to destroy my argument is tell me his reference for the 144 deaths, but I know he won’t because that is the way you lefty dills argue.
Belly, you can call me stupid for claiming the socialists are responsible for more than 10,000 Australian deaths, but you cannot fight the facts! The ALP and the socialists don’t want a nuclear solution.
I have nothing to do with WC. Try and get that through your thick bolshy skulls.
I do blame you stupid socialists for 10,000 dead Australians over the last 45 years. You can call me mad, call me stupid, but you cannot argue the science! Or, can you? Please have a go.
Please tell me that nuclear power is the most dangerous and dirty fuel you can think of and back it up with science, not rhetorical bulls..t!
T2, you said, “Hunt said it was self defeating to allow them to go to China………..” Why? You know that China is building 48 new coal-powered generators a year. You know that Brumby has asked for expressions of interest to transport our brown coal to China! How many little black balloons will hit your kitchen ceiling transporting the world’s crappiest energy source to China! Why not save the little black balloons and burn the brown coal here? Why, because it is a socialist conspiracy to hurt Australia economically. Do you really think the ALP is interested in clean green power?
Geoffrey Kelley

geoffreykelley I don't think the Labor Party or the Liberal Party/National Party are interested in clean energy.

In my first post I asked "Greens?". For me their platform is driven by secular interest groups such as the Gay Lobby and therefore do not represent the majority view. The Greens will still see an increase in their vote this time simply because there is no alternative. I find their social policies unpalatable but at least the environment gets a guernsey

As for socialist conspiracy theories geoffrey I thought they were the domain of the extreme right, not seemingly balanced people such as yourself.

It's the intellectual limitations of our politicians,(particularly those beholden to religious belief) that bother me most and the rest seem to be agents of vested interests.

Opposition senators in the current parliament are fixed on blocking the Govt no matter what they propose.This is the history of the Liberal National Party in opposition and has been since Joh changed the balance of power by taking advantage of the death of a Labor Senator and inserting his own ring-in Senator Fields who voted against the Govt on every occasion, even denying supply. Democracy was not important to these born to rule-ites and they felt a god given right to enforce their view upon us through trickery, stealth and the subversion of the balance of power.

Its not unlike the situation today and Abbott and Co (like Joh) will commit virtuality any dishonesty or dirty trick to gain power and that is both obvious and concerning.

Paul Keating called senators "unrepresentative swill" . Aint that the truth.

Finally geoffrey, you still omit the frontbenchers I mentioned,(probably because they scare you as much as they do me) and you also advocate acquiescence to corporate blackmail.

Do you deny my proposition that exploitation exists?. The people of the Niger Delta are aware of it as we speak.

Someone has to do something to reverse the effects of human pollution regardless of our political partisanships, Abbott and such people put us further away from real solutions than the Rudd Govt does for mine.

T2, allow me to comment on your last post. I agree that neither of the big parties is interested in clean energy. But the Rudd Govt. is campaigning on CO2 and AGW.

The greens are too yellow to be red!

Lord Monckton labelled the Copenhagen conference a socialist conspiracy and he was correct. Rudd ridiculed Monckton claiming his accusations were nonsense and actually a right-wing conspiracy, but in that he LIED!
You will know that the Copenhagen Conference was to ratify the latest UNFCCC proposal (see the FCCC/AWGLCA/2009/INF.1) in which it states quite plainly on page 18 that an objective was to form a world government with the power to tax developed nations and fine individuals within these countries for the purposes of raising revenue. You see, this conspiracy theory applies to the socialists, not the extreme right. This where Rudd lied by blaming the extreme right. He must have been aware of this document. Sometimes I wonder if Rudd really does his homework and it is entirely possible that he was not aware of the contents of this resolution he was hell-bent on ratifying. I think he is a verbose fool.

The religious beliefs of our politicians do not worry me. I prefer a man of faith to an atheist or agnostic.

I don’t think you understand the role of the senate any more than Keating did, a man that I despise. It is a house of revue. You ought to study the reasons our founding fathers’ set it up this way.

I did not omit to address your question about the other Liberal MPs. See my answer dated 20Feb3:43:46PM

Of course exploitation exists, especially in all those crappy African Socialist/Communist govts. you quoted. In Australia it ought to be the function of the unions to prevent exploitation.

I agree with you on pollution, but to single out CO2 is mindless nonsense. That is why the FCC is crumbling and dissolving, not that you would know it from the reaction of our pro-Labor press.

Geoffrey Kelley

Dear Geoffrey,

I'm not a "he."

I'm actually a female.
Born in Australia, - of Lithuanian ancestry.
My parents came to this country in 1949 - fleeing
communism. They were displaced people, refugees -
who worked hard, raised their children - (all
university educated), and made their home here.

The reasons I cannot support the current Liberal Party
are many, but basically the words of the former Liberal
PM - The Rt. Hon. Malcolm Fraser sums up the situation
rather well:

" I remember the Party I joined, the Party of Menzies,
of liberal and progressive ideas, a forward-looking Party,
willing to make experiments, as Menzies himself put it,
a Party that believed fervently in the Rule of Law, in
higher education accessible to all able students, in a
Government accepting national obligations and a vision for
the future ... a Party of hope and of vision ...

The departures from the principles underlying that Liberal
Party today - are substantial and serious.

The Liberal Party has become a Party of fear and reaction.

It is conservative and not liberal. It has allowed and
some would say promoted race and religion to be part of today's
agenda. I find it unrecognisable as Liberal..."

As I wrote in a post to your friend Mr Tapp,
what you or he, or I think, doesn't make an ounce of
difference to the broader picture. The voters
will decide who they want running this country.
And, as Peter Costello believed - the voters get
it right in the end.

See you on another thread!

Foxy, I must apologise for getting your gender wrong. But I don’t think I got your politics wrong. Only the most naïve people believe that the Liberal Party is truly liberal in the sense you use, the socialist sense. That does not mean that the Liberal Party is not progressive. It is conservative and I believe in conservative govt. I also detest socialism. I also despise communism.

As Winston Churchill said “Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” He fought socialism all his life. He fought Hitler, a socialist, and Lenin, a communist. Your family fled communism and came top Australia, a democratic constitutional monarchy. Why? Can I guess that you are a republican?

I know you are a socialist because of your socialist arguments. You quote socialist (or communist) references including GreenLeft, the SMH and crikey.com. None of them are friends of the Liberal Party.

And true to form you refuse to give a reference for your silly statement about deaths in Australian mines, 144 to date! I bet you hate nuclear power, the safest and cleanest of all power sources. But brown coal is still the cheapest, and Howard would not beggar the Australian economy by destroying our God-given advantages to satisfy the socialists.

By the way, I also feel sorry for Fraser. He failed as a PM despite having the greatest mandate of all time, and he supported Mugabe.

Dear Geoffrey,

I actually don't consider myself
as being either right or left -
socialist or conservative. More of
a centrist.

I find that the tag "socialist"
is bandied around too often. The word is
normally used in a hostile sense with a
sub-text of not very flattering connotations.

In actuality - there are very divergent forms
of socialism in the modern world - those
practiced in authoritarian communist-ruled
societies (like those that used to exist in
Eastern Europe and Asia), and those practiced
in democratic, pluralist societies, mostly in
Western Europe. These versions differ or differed
markedly in their degree of centralized control of
the economy, and in the liberties their citizens enjoy.

Many of the countries of Western Europe, such as
Denmark, or Austria, practice one form or another
of democratic socialism, a political and economic
system that aims to preserve individual freedom in the
context of social equality achieved through a
centrally planned economy.

I tend to select websites for my posts - on the
basis of their content - not their political
affiliation.

I gave several websites - including the Sydney Morning
Herald - and I quoted Malcolm Fraser - because he's a
man that I do admire - as is John Hewson.

Anyway, for me this discussion has run its course.
I don't think I have anything more to add.

As I've stated previously - it should be an interesting
year ahead of us.

Miacat; I agree that the Rudd team has done an average to reasonable performance all things considered....

Tell me you're kidding!

Appart from wasting billions of dollars, money that was 'in the bank' they have not done anything that they havn't completely stuffed up, have they?

The whole point is that if someone doesn't take the cheque book away from these incompitent ecconomy managers, there will simply be no ecconomy to manage.

All they can say is that Australia faired better than most. Of cause we did, we had money in the bank!

Normally one would have to be in office for decades to stuff so many projects up, but this clown and his minders have succedded in a little more than two years. Not even one full term.

Solar, insulation, copenhagen, boat people, stimulis...... where is it going to stop?

Foxy, as you are so hell bent on supporting the unions and the labor party, do you feel that Peter Garrets 'inaction' has contributed to the financial heartbreak of the industry and the deaths of one or more young lives?

Simply Yes, or No!

If yes, should he be sacked for his inaction?

Now, if he were a company director, or a CEO of a public company, would you expect him to be sacked?

Foxy, you can describe yourself any way you like, centrist, socialist, liberal, who cares. You are what you are and you will be judged as such. For instance, I have described myself as a capitalist and I despise socialism. I bet most contributors on this forum have an inkling of my politics.

On the other hand, you have described yourself as a university graduate. Therefore, before you retreat, could you please give me a reference for the statistics you quoted earlier, that in the history of Australia only 144 people have died in mining accidents, and one more death was added in Tasmania.

As I told you, Melbourne University taught in 1964 that we as a community were directly killing 260 Australians a year in mining fossil fuels. That is 2,600 a decade and more than four decades have passed. This nation has supervised the deaths of more than 10,000 citizens employed in the coal industry because the socialists won’t even discuss nuclear power, recognised for over fifty years as the cleanest and safest fuel.

That is the legacy of ALP supporters. If you have voted for Labor, you are one of the guilty ones.

Please have the decency to quote your source for the 144 deaths.

As I said at the outset, I love it when you socialists scream advice at my side of politics and give us the benefit of your sage advice. It means that you are running scared. And I LOVE it.

Geoffrey Kelley

Miacat agree's with my original proposition. Get over it rehctub. And you certainly have a knack for concentrating on the small picture.

You continue with common myth that Liberals manage the economy better. Modern history proves that this is a false notion because the big economic decisions were made by Keating.

If you mean allowing business to charge what it likes for goods and services whilst making workers scrabble for what they can get, they certainly did that. It is the policies of the previous Govt that are responsible for utility,communication and power prices rising way beyond inflation without rhyme or reason today. Rudd has failed by not reversing the damage, but the Govt has had a lot on it's plate.

Let's have a poll to see who thinks that "the Rudd Govt has done a reasonable job all things considered". Lets ask that question using those words and you may get an idea just how much traction Abbott and Co are getting with their knock and block campaign.

The electors won't allow a majority in both houses however because the Howard Govt stuffed that for all time when it revealed it's true character by introducing Workchoices in a rush of blood to a swollen head.

The "money in the bank" to which you refer was acquired through the sale of taxpayers valuable profitable assets. It is identical to selling the house you own and then renting it off the person you sold it too. Very clever economics.

They then shamelessly used the taxpayers money to pork barrel in marginal electorates and were criticised by treasury for tax cuts and against the judgement of their own treasurer Costello.

By standing down Costello shows that he is a principled man. As does Malcolm Turnbull by crossing the floor. Your heroes are wearing the black hat rehctub.

GK are you a shadow minister?
I see the same need to rant and rave in you as many who are pirating the Liberal party.
A commitment to scream but not do anything.
To use fear but not truth.
To insult and even put words in our mouths, have no doubt this forum knows I am a labor voter.
Yet I have started many threads condemning them.
That will never be seen here from you.
Are you even in part aware your every word convicts you as not worth reading?
You however have a constituency, followers, those who seconds after Howard went took to following American Republicanism, giving up the need for Australian policy's and directions.
Now before your impending fall, conservatives must ignore such as you, retreat back to the ground they walked away from, the socialist left in your terms land that both put Howard in office and once he forgot took his seat.
That [funny stuff GK] socialist land is Labor land today, the only land voters want watch this space.

Dear Geoffrey,

The only way in which a country can work properly
is for management and labour to co-operate with
one another, nor condemn one another.

But the sad truth is that condemnation is the only
language your mob seems to undertand. Take the quote
from Peko-Wallsend boss - Charles Copeman:

"It isn't a matter for conciliation, it's a matter
for arbitration. We are not prepared to conciliate!"

Obviously the inevitable expansion of capital with its
attendant social inequality and natural destruction brooks
no interference and allows no moral judgements.

What a great pity that the glorious mess of money and guns
that makes up part of the world we see on television every
night is the vision of your Party come true. Mr Abbott and
his colleagues should not be encouraged to allow it to
come any closer to home.

And as for my having the "decency" to give you the source of
the 144 deaths. Well, if you had the "decency" to read the
websites that I gave in my earlier post - you'd realize that
the source has already been given. Kindly go back and re-read!
And by the way - I am not "retreating," from this discussion.
I simply feel that continuing further discussions would serve
no constructive purpose

cont'd ...

You might be a Liberal if ...

1) You think "proletariat" is a type of cheese.

2) You've named your kids -
"Deduction One" and "Deduction Two."

3) You're a pro-lifer, but support the
death penalty.

4) When people say "Marx" you think "Groucho."

5) You've ever said, "Clean air?"
"Looks clean to me!"

6) You've ever urged someone to pull themselves up
by their bootstraps, when they don't even have shoes.

7) You've ever called education a luxury.

8) You believe that the world is divided into
two categories: "Them" and "Us."

9) Life is only tolerable when you can look down on
someone else.

10) You are pro the Monarchy, pro big business,
pro development, pro nuclear weapons.

11) You are anti-conservation, anti-union,
anti multiculturalism and anti government.

12) You refer to people as "rusted-on socialists/lefties."

Dear Foxy,

Thank you for clarifying your reference, but I really suggest that you go back and read it yourself. I quote from your source, GreenLeft, "Australian Workers Union national vice-president Paul Howes explained to Green Left Weekly........ He explained that in the past nine years there had been 144 deaths in the mining industry in Australia. No amount of gold is worth a worker’s life, he said.” You said, "There had been 144 deaths in the mining industry in Australia prior to the incident." You ought to learn to quote correctly.

Howes was on the Canberra Press Club Luncheon broadcast last week, and let me tell you, he has about as much regard for my side of politics as I have for his. He is very confrontational. It is not all one-sided.

I remember the Copeman statement and I was on his side.

By the way, what was the point of your list of twelve characteristics describing a liberal? Are you suggesting any of those characteristics’, with the exception of the last, applies to me?

Once again I repeat that I am delighted with all the gratuitous advice offered from your rusted-on socialists.

Lastly, ponder the real wage increases under 13 years of Hawke/Keating and their accord with the unions, and then contrast the increases that occurred under 11 years of Howard who also reduced taxes by more than a third. The average working family was better off under Howard and no Great Big New Tax!

Geoffrey Kelley

Paul Howe's will follow a bloke called Bill Shorten and one day become Prime minister of this county.
OUR GK will have however to watch as his party faces yet another leadership challenge after the impending defeat.
Such talent to burn in the ALP so so much rubbish badly needing the flames in our Republican party, oh then after it merges with the cow cockys we may get a new name?
Country Labor going bush, Nationals? just going.

Dear Geoffrey,

You said, "You ought to learn to quote correctly."

Actually Geoffrey - I wasn't giving a direct quote
regarding the 144 deaths in the mining industry in
Australia. I was merely paraphrasing what Paul Howes
had said. You need to read the actual post to which
you're responding. And, as you yourself quoted -
Paul Howes did confirm:

"He explained that in the PAST NINE YEARS there had
been 144 deaths in the mining industry in Australia."

So I don't understand what your problem is.

You then state that families under Howard were well off.
The voters apparently thought differently. They kicked his
Government out in a landslide - including Howard in his own
Electorate.

You asked me why I posted that list about Liberals?

Simply as a bit of light relief. You keep throwing labels
around - I merely was giving you a taste of your own medicine.
Especially as you keep saying how much you LOVE being attacked
by "Socialists." I wanted to humour you.

But all jokes aside - Geoffrey, we both know that in politics,
it's always one-sided. Labor has always been perceived to
more likely favour the underdog, while Liberal - as the party
more closely tied to business interests.

Today, however, I feel that there is a breakdown of traditional
loyalties in favour of a more fluid party system, in which
people pick and choose among personalities and positions
with little regard for party labels.

Certainly, this trend towards a dealignment of party loyalties
would not be unexpected in a postindustrial society whose
hallmarks are individualism and choice.

Anyway, Thank You for a robust discussion. It has been
most informative. Constructive debating is an art.
And many of us still haven't learnt to avoid using
emotionally charged words or personal attacks on
someone we perceive to be an opponent. (That's an
admission of intellectual bankruptcy).

However, as I've stated previously, the months ahead should
prove interesting.

Do try to treat people as individuals.
They just may surprise you.
That's the wonder of life - even the worst
kind of people can surprise!

Sorry geoffrey but I found Foxy's post entertaining as well and her follow up post a spot synopsis.Apologies to both for interrupting but I am now one of the fluid types that foxy refers too.

Dear Foxy, yes, you really ought to learn to quote correctly. When you quote quantitative statistics it pays to quote them accurately. Especially when you fail to comment on my statistics about nuclear energy and the 10,000 deaths that people like you have inflicted on workers in the Australian fossil fuel industry.

Under the Hawke/Keating govts. the real wage increased about 13% in 13 years, and tax was reduced a little, but not by much. We all remember Keating’s tax laws promises. Remember foxy, it pays to watch the facts and not paraphrase them. Under the Howard Govt. we saw real wages rise by about 45% and tax drop by about a third. In 1994 under Keating, my girls at work were paying between 25% and 30 % income tax.

Today, a girl on $1000.00 a week pays $195.00 tax, or 19.5%. The Howard Govt. increased real wages far more than the Hawke/Keating govt. and brought taxes down.

Somehow the ALP managed to twist the facts and claim that today’s young people were paying a much higher percentage of their income in home loans. Of course they were! I would be really angry with my son if he was not spending over 30% of his take home pay on his mortgage!

Now I will make a comment that leaves me really vulnerable. I cannot believe the Australian people threw out the best govt. I can remember. I am at a complete loss.

GK, the people threw out the previous government for two reasons.

1. Because the unions spent around $10 million (of members money) to mount a clever scare camp over workchoices which, in fact, effected very few workers on the grand scale of thing. But the voters bought it, hook, line and sinker.

2. The other voters, for reasons only they can explain decided it was time for a change.

Many voters had never seen better times. They had great high paying jobs, great homes, cars, boats etc, yet, they decided on a change.

They are now 'lost soles', as the party they voted for is a lie and, the party the voted out has gone.

Dear Geoffrey,

" Every person takes the limb
of their own field of vision
for the limits of the world."
(German philosopher - Arthur Schopenhauer).

Foxy keep the humor coming I loved it.
You however will never out do rechtub and GK, their last posts here got me ROFL.
We face a year that you and I should not fear.
Dirty pool, unfocused lies, fear and all.
Yet Abbott with zero chance of winning is running his last race in the Parliament.
We will win, think of the the devisions in this country if we did not.
My fears however are real and intense, the impending fall of the very right in conservatives will lead to a stronger more flexible conservatives.
They will return to office, in about 2020.
Talk about humor poor old rechtub thinks only those who vote his way get it right, and GK?
Well who cares what GK thinks best government ever!
Chuckling all the way to work.

How someone like belly can find this ammusing baffles me.

Here we have a situation whereby our financial future, for generations to come, is at stake and, these incompitent fools may well get back in simply because those oppossing, in the eyes of the voters, may not be up for the task.

It is typicle of 'one eyed unionists' to have the 'win at any cost' attitude, however, the real issue at stake here is the financial future of our great nation.

I just hope that the voters can see that Krudd and his crew are duds and that any alternative would be worth a shot.

Polotics in this country is once again lowering the bar!

I really am almost starting to feel sorry for Belly.

He finds things funny that affect the people in a bad way, but since he has no interest in the people this really does not worry him.

He is labor and doesnt matter how much he says he disagrees with them he will still vote for them no matter what they do.

The are destroying this country and the people and workers but they dont care.

They make policy that kills people, and whilst this is going on they even manage to terrorise them as well.

Yes we have a terrorist problem and its called the labor party.
All those people trying to sleep in their homes wondering if its their turn for their insulation to catch fire and kill them.

Its all about labor,labor,labor.

As the verbal graffiti has arrived I leave the thread.
Not as a coward but knowing debate is not the task some set.
I will not help some one who is not in control of their thoughts lower the forums standards.
A test can/should be conducted, if I read the last two posts well both think Australia is about to change government.
I stand proudly to be judged on who knows better about that.
And while I have crossed verbal swords with many fine posters who disagree with me.
It is unwise to do so with those who while only here to push a wheel barrow fail to understand it is both upside down and has wheels on the other side.
OLO should be seen as a home of free speech, it is ,but some turn it or any platform into the tower of Babel.

Belly talks of free speech

Why was it those newcastle labor members were thrown out.

Was it not because they were making a stand .

Oh thats right free speech is not in the labor parties interest.

Now you may blab and talk about lies, in fact it is the truth you do not like.

And just like beaconsfield you lot will spin your deciet and lies to those who are to believe you.

As a matter of fact belly i havnt seen any defamation claims as to what i have said and until i do your blabing is nothing but spin and lies.

Labor party and union hear say/gossip.

Do as we say not as we do

Dear Belly,

You're wise to walk away from certain posters
who are inebriated with the exuberance of their
own verbosity and gifted with an egotistical imagination!

Just a classic case of mistaken - non-entity!

How anyone can take my last post and come to the conclusion that I think we are in for a change of government baffles me.

I hope and prey we get a change, but in no way do I say we will.

I have always maintained that the only way we will have a change is if labor screws up badly enough. Mind you, they are doing a pretty good job thus far!