The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Who is going to pay for the damage?

Who is going to pay for the damage?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All
Ludwig, surely you are aware that Labor will sell it's soul for a few votes.

Obviously some bargaining was done with the Muslim communities before the last couple of elections.

Having seen just how a desperate Gillard has no problem with getting lower than any snake to get her desires, you can bet she will never alienate any group that may increase her count by even a single vote.

As long as she believes she gains more votes by a policy, you can bet no judgement on its disastrous results would deter her from that policy. Of course, in public, she will mouth what ever it takes, but it's the "behind closed doors" policies that gain those few votes.

Until the welded on Labor voters change, Labor will continue to abuse us all by buying fringe element votes, no matter what damage it does to all of us.

Belly tells us he did in the NSW election. If all those who did, & there must have been many, scream it from the roof tops, their party may start to reform, to regain their faithful.
Posted by Hasbeen, Saturday, 23 April 2011 10:39:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
csteel while you and I could talk for hours I am repelled more by those who think like you than the red necks who post here.
Refugees is not just an Australian problem, Italy has had more in weeks than we get in three years.
But wait, it will get worse.
All most every one ignores the red necks, they however lack the verbal skills of the bleeding hearts.
ABC radio and TV lefty ALP greens sundry others have the ability to without fear or favor discard the views of the MAJORITY OF AUSTRALIANS.
We the majority are sickened to find those who set that boat on fire are residents in our country.
That rioters from the other fire had been taken to Villawood.
HATE us if you must we are not going to forever except minority's telling us in our country what to do.
You throw[ tactic that fires me up] that child like fear into every subject at me.
No I fear you more than any, but fear is not my prime mover I have concerns for my country do not want Muslim enclaves.
I do hope my party can understand, hear the voice of its roots, not coffee sipping dills, we want our right to say who come here.
Labor has a good minister and if Gillard gets out of the way he may stop the boats and return every rioter.
This is sure refugees world wide are only a seed now,within ten years the world will be confronted with numbers that make todays problem look very small.
My country must not be sacrificed to a United Nations belief we should become one world no matter the pain and suffering or conflict it brings.
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 23 April 2011 11:37:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear King Hazza,

I was indeed reacting more to your last point rather than those that went before. Perhaps red rags are better kept in the pocket on both sides.

Okay.

<<-Nationalize the detention sector>>

Unqualified agreement.

<<-Withdraw our military from these countries and take a neutral foreign policy (as in my opinion they should not have been there to begin with)>>

Agreed but with the qualifier if it deemed that by doing so we create more refugees then we need to reassess. We have helped scramble the egg, what are our responsibilities. Non-military assistance needs to be escalated. The film ‘Charlie Wilson’s War’ spoke to the importance of this.

<<-Ensure no cost-cutting operations are undertaken>>

Fully support.

<<-Process claims quickly and immediately deport those who fail to qualify before they get a chance to riot.>>

Yes but with the qualifier that a review process be in place and be robust and fair.

Are you happy that a maximum period of three months detention be stipulated?
Posted by csteele, Saturday, 23 April 2011 12:53:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Belly,

Why are you bandying around terms like ‘rednecks’? You then say you are a bigot but I have never labelled you that. I think there are a number of Australian’s who have real concerns about issues regarding immigration and asylum seekers (often grouped but in many ways completely separate. They need a government that is prepared to address those concerns particularly in the media where fears tend to be fanned rather than eased.

I think we have been poorly served by both major parties since Howard started chasing Pauline and Beasley started chasing Howard over Tampa.

I mean for Howard’s Australia not to take a single refugee processed by the UNHCR office in Jakarta for three years gave lie to any notion of a queue to jump.

There is a lot I am proud about my country, we were one of the founding nations of the UN, We are a signatory to the refugee convention, we don’t torture, we don’t use cluster bombs, we have a reasonably fair workplace regime, we are prepared to assist other nations and we have a deep sense of a fair go.

There are some I would like to have back on my list like, we are not prone to discriminate against refugees, we take our international obligations seriously, we respect the dignity and humanity of others, especially those seeking our help.

I wish to continue standing tall as an Australian and I wish that for the rest of my countrymen and women.

You know there are times when I miss Howard’s ability to defuse a situation. It was a great skill of his when he wanted to use it. That type of leadership is sorely lacking right now.
Posted by csteele, Saturday, 23 April 2011 12:56:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
csteele

Howard did not so much defuse a situation as side-step it. For example; children overboard, the "republic referendum" (only a single choice on offer), SIEV X (look over there, the boat is no longer in Australian waters), and I can't avoid mention of core and non-core promises - Howard held almost Faustian powers in his abilities to manipulate. He "never, ever" took responsibility and accountability for anything his government did at the detriment of the average person.

As for Labor, they have learned far too much from their Liberal predecessors - very little of it for the good of Australia, just propping up capitalism - in other words: business as usual.
Posted by Ammonite, Saturday, 23 April 2011 1:12:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
csteele,

Howard's abiding talent as Prime Minister was bound up in his cunning. His ability to "defuse" a situation usually entailed either artful seduction of the electorate or blatant dog-whistling.

He was a manipulator extraordinaire, but his style was far from scrupulous or principled.
It's a shame that this is the type of conduct we've come to expect from our elected representatives.
Posted by Poirot, Saturday, 23 April 2011 1:32:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. 9
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy