Tapp “not bothered with the initial questions you are really not interested in debate.”

Asked and answered, repetition is not a good trait for anyone who expects to impress an audience of electors.

“I see the manifesto of the liberal party is what they used from the previous election.”

Generally published prior to a general election, I would have thought someone who expects to stand would have realized that already – you do need to brush up on your “process”.

“I am not scared of your tactics or any other party.”

I speak as a private individual, not a political party. Actually, whilst my voting preference is Liberal, I am not a member. Maybe I should join, swell the numbers of the rank and file.

I have declared my tactics. I am feeling rather smug about one of them too.

“My support of free speech is based on the truth: that idiots declare themselves through their own words.”

Is certainly shaping up to be a winner.

“As I have said i will be running at the next federal election.”

As is your right and I full expect you will loose your deposit

“I stand for all who are disgruntled and see that they dont get a fair go.”

Maybe that would be a catchier name “The Fair Go party for the stout hearted under-trodden“

or better still “the disgruntled party”

eftfnc “Study any company and apply enmass.
Any comments?”

Couple of points

People pay for shares,

I pay taxes others do not pay the same amount as me. Some seem to think the shares they own are something which they just have to put their hand out for, instead of working.

Some share holders prefer to exercise thrift, saving their dividends for reinvestment, others just blow every dollar they can.

My point, companies hold a common objective. Electorates don’t.
The success of Democracy is to govern but not to impose a common objective on everyone. Leaving everyone to decide how thrifty or how profligate they want to be and the electorate to bear the consequences of their own decisions.

The success of Democracy is to govern but not to impose a common objective on everyone.

Well we can see that the liberal party is not democratic as trying to impose anti abortian and religion on everyone.
Then Iraq imposing democracy interesting or to govern.

Another thing you say where is my platform but then the coalition does not have one but you give an excuse of the previous election.

At the rate the liberal and labor party are going why dont they just change to the in god we trust party and kiss the US a bit more.

As at the rate the liberals are doing this australia will not be an nation but a state of america.

At least i am not here to whin but to try for change, you also need to instill a bit more heart into your bullying. So still not scared of your pathetic liberal tactics to attempt to disrupt what i am doing.

As a matter of fact the more people like you try the stronger this party gets and makes me more determined to succeed.

So you see whether i win or lose i have already won by my achievements, and that you or anyone else can take.

Whether you like it or not Col i couldnt care so keep going with you bullying tactics thats ok, seen worse.

I am standing up for something that i believe in and you or nobody can take that away.

Tapp,

You are still making some very wild statements. You a say that the “liberal (sic) party is not democratic as to imposing anti-abortian (sic) and religion on everyone”.

Absolute rubbish, and if you don’t know that, you have one hell of a cheek suggesting that the Australian Peoples’ Party (I think you call it) has anything to offer.

Even if your ridiculous claims were true, you still have the democratic right to vote for something more to your liking.

Your ravings are becoming more and more absurd, and the more sensible people try to argue with you, the sillier your responses become, and the wilder and less coherent you English expression is.

You are making a fool of yourself, Tapp. Try taking up something you can do with your hands.

from Col The success of Democracy is to govern but not to impose a common objective on everyone.

Well we can see that the liberal party is not democratic as trying to impose anti abortion and religion on everyone.
Then Iraq imposing democracy interesting or to govern.

So people yes can vote but when government kneels to those and use what was it 51 million dollars to reduce abortions one would have to say this money would be better spent on schools than the whims of a bible basher.

State and religion do not belong together as you end up with a stupid waste of tax payers money.

leigh
Even if your ridiculous claims were true, you still have the democratic right to vote for something more to your liking.
You are making a fool of yourself, Tapp. Try taking up something you can do with your hands.

I cannot open your eyes but maybe you should ask around
A fool would be those that take the people for granted re question time as Col said its only recess/playtime.
It seems that the more determined i become the more viscious you will.
Ill dont need to take something up my line is already drawn just like my cards, it is you clutching for excuses.

I am not here for excuses like you but solutions to real problems that need fixing not just bandaids.

I have neglected to check this discussion for a little while, but have found it hasnt progressed any further than a few days ago.

We do have a democracy, just not the text-book definition of. The fewer political changes (read parties winning government) that we have, the more stable our country is. Yes, it does mean that we then tend to vote on a lesser of two evils basis. However, the last few elections that we have had, there have been umpteen numbers of candiates and obscure parties vying for votes. Anyone can vote for these if they so desire. I assume, given the results, that this is not what people desire! Educate people to vote fully rather than giving away preferences, and you will further enhance the democratic process. I always vote below the line for the upper house, so that I get MY say in who gets elected.

The growing number of independents indicates that democracy is alive, even if its got a head-cold. "Mavericks" like Joyce are also a breath of fresh air, even if he will toe the party-line eventually.

The libs and nationals usually do not compete, because where-ever one party holds the seat, the other is unlikely to get in anyway. And so what - they might as well be one and the same most of the time.

Actually the party-line thing serves as great amusement, when watching someone like Peter Garrett get interviewed over party policies that conflict with his own views. Now thats comedy!

Well said, Country Gal. Fitting comments to finish off what would have been finished earlier had not Tapp been such a goose. He is the only one who could possibly find anything else to say.

We should, I suppose, be thankful that there is only one like him. We should also be thankful that we have what we do have, and not what he thinks we should have - whatever that is. I don't know what he is blathering about.