OK concede your point RObert but how many seats are in these areas who holds them?
By now, in the real world most are commited to one or the other side.
I am not taunting any one, Tony Abbott is acting badly here, no way he can stay as leader.
Australians have a certain ability to see, well the end product of a male cow.
Gillard is prospering, not on her actions,she is not very good, but on Abbott's.
If today Turnbull lead I fear Labor would be in very deep trouble.
I can not change my mind,I want this country back in the black ASAP, I support the cuts $2 for every levee dollar.
I want us to look at New Zealand's disaster/insurance system.
And I want a forever tax of $2 a week for every one,to fund a scheme forever to fund such as this.
Yes flood levee yes new insurance scheme no to complaining at a time others are suffering,
Come on Aussies Come on.

Dream on Belly,

Your visceral hatred of Abbott is obscuring the reality that Gillard is foundering, and is as effective as a stunned mullet. While she sinks, Abbott is seen as effective, and by comparison, competent.

The electorate is tired of her small minded, Labor typical answer to every budget problem of simply raising taxes and throwing money at the problem.

While I am a tremendous fan of Turnbull, he was too much of a gentleman to stick the knife in KRudd, whilst JG never baulked at playing dirty politics. MT used to sit and take the poison dished out by JG, TA is now feeding it back to her with a shovel.

Don't see anyone complaining about the stimulus package and the plethora of other tax breaks we've been given over the last few years. Baby bonus, first home owners grants yadda yadda.

Stg "Don't see anyone complaining about the stimulus package and the plethora of other tax breaks we've been given over the last few years. Baby bonus, first home owners grants yadda yadda"

You have missed a whole lot of public debate then. There has been a great deal of comment and argument on the size and management if the "stimulus package", home insulation scheme, baby bonus, first home owners grants etc.

They generally tend to be either wastefull and or discriminatory. They often have nasty side effects eg the first home owner grants disadvantaged those of us who did not get them and inflated the market which makes it harder for all.

R0bert

It would appear to have a different view is very near a crime here.
I am very much aware two conservatives are posting here.
But even more there is a great difference between them.
I sense ROberts unhappiness with my views,truly honestly held ones.
Shadow Minister however is a far different case I, others too, have left this forum or considered doing so because SM will not stop twisting truth?
No not so, verbal tennis with such is quite entertaining, and productive.
Seeming support for SM was seen and just maybe we need to debate this here and now.
How can you SM find hatred in my words for Abbott?
Now come tell me?
My intention is clear, I do not like him or respect him, I admire his athleticism, his history of being an Aussie blokes bloke,he however like some on both sides is ego driven, and not to be trusted.
And long before he rose to power was known as the mad monk.
Some views, from all of us, are not well founded, others can judge us.
Here again and again three posters Sm leads the charge, insult me with the idea I am blind to reality and unable to think clearly.
I under stand it this way, they say my views and opinions are not worth while because unlike them, I think differently.
I question the understanding and fairness of any one who thinks only their views are right.
I question any one who tells me I do not have the right to an opinion .
Last I truly do, ask that the mirror gets used in three homes it gentle men is you who refuse to look at every case with unbiased eyes.
Debate,conversations,exploring issues is worth while not agreeing is too, but to both over value your thoughts and under value others is quite silly.

Belly I disagree with some of your views but that's not really unhappyness.

I do see some merit in the idea of a portion of the tax take being set aside to be used for future disasters but I'd want to see some good controls put in place to prevent waste and other forms of misuse.

Perhaps a requirement for 70% of the reps in both houses of parliment agreeing before it's touched (the vote for an initial allocation could be taken remotely to allow for quick response during periods when parliment is not sitting). That needs some fleshing out but the idea is to remove some of the opportunities for the party in power to splurge the savings on pet projects or vote gathering. Make it so that it can't be the personal play thing of any politician or party.

R0bert