Dear Peter Hume,

Your post was very good lol. Thank you.

I have been escalated to liar. Wow. All I did was call you funny.

Now just for the record my very amusing chap I have not said smoking should be illegal I have just said it should be taxed commensurate with the harm it causes and the cost to the community. This is exactly what should inform a tax on carbon.

The distinction between the state and the community should be far less in a democracy like ours but you seem to view a substantial chasm. Are you an Ann Rand fan?

By the way your question was indeed answered fully. To expect the answer you would like would have been presumptuous. You got what the question deserved.

Poirot we you, me Lexi want better, yet we know it has always been so.
We should not let the idiotic displays blind us to truth, some great talent can be found on both sides.
It exists.
A proud history of very real Wits exists in our Parliament, in every state one too.
Unfortunately, no play on words fact, some are very much twits.
It is a place for school yard bully's, not unlike any bad day in any boys school.
Yesterday, do not get me wrong Labor is nearly as bad,a very good speaker came close to leaving his job.
I offer both conservatives and others to watch if able today.
Look at Pyne/Bishop/Abbott appear to play silly kids smirking at the teacher.
See time after time both sides act that roll.
But too watch member after member rise to ask questions they under stand no answers exist for yet.
In an effort to sell the big new tax carbon lie.
But see also Abbott skip with every bit of his athleticism any move to pin him down on the costs of his scheme, and the fact it too is a tax on us not business.
Poirot we will never get perfection/best/near it government.
But for those who look gems can be found on both sides in the rubbish bin that is our Parliament.
I look as much for the best of a bad bunch knowing we will find no statesman, other than Rudd on any front bench yet.
Bill Shorten this country waits.

While I agree in principle, it is most likely due to the fact that the government has such a poor record when it comes to implimenting anything, that the opposition has to oppose.

Take plain packaging.

The problems I see.

A customer goes to buy a pack of winfield blue.

First, the assistant has to hope that they were placed in the correct spot, so they have to check every pack. Time costs money.

Now let's say the customer gets the wrong brand.

They then return the cigs but their receipt says they got what they paid for. More wated time and costs.

Now, if a condition of buying cigs was that they must be removed from their packet and placed in a plain bag, do you think this would deter smoking. NO!

Yet another complete waste of time and money. This is why TA opposses it.

Some items revealed from the Garnaut report:

THE Government's top climate change adviser Ross Garnaut has belled the cat on Julia Gillard's false claims that only 1000 companies will be affected by her carbon tax.

Professor Garnaut had the honesty to say what Julia Gillard won't.

He said: "Australian households will ultimately bear the full cost of a carbon price" and that "for households, carbon pricing will raise the price of electricity".

Families across NSW are going to be hit hard by Labor's carbon tax.

Just for starters, a carbon tax at $26 a tonne would raise power bills by $500 a year. It will add 6 1/2c a litre to petrol prices and will raise grocery prices by 5 per cent.

A carbon tax may start between $20 and $30 a tonne but that won't be where it finishes.

you have got a lot of milage from offering
to buy me a pack of smokes..

*[which i declined..
explaining it was a principle..not a shortage of cash]

mate im not including you..as a labrat
but your party machinations..by those who promise one thing
then do the very thing..they said they wouldnt do...

its not about you..
its about them

i cant promise to exclude..use of the apt phrase
and include any elected party minester..with thin skin
[like the meouew..[so called cat noise]wrong penny created as destraction..from yesterday

where the delicate* flower..[lab/ratter]
http://www.openaustralia.org/search/?s=penny+wong
decided to refute a point..
to try to make a bigger point
over reacting to a wisperd exhale

that no doudt destracted..the press yesterday..
from the real issuess..even today

the poor thing
even her funny reply
[glossed over by the media]..
deneying herself to be a woman..!

wasnt noticed..in the destractions that followed
it could be said she needs to grow a pair..getting upset
over..[being excluded]..from tha catty mob..the poor thing

so delicate
she shouldnt be in politicks

now what was the topic..*here again
who knows..its about ignoring what others think
making others look like beggers..
while ourselves looking like victims.[pure..*white as driven snow]..

and just getting your own adgenda..
on the news cycle
in a positive light..
with a minimum of detail..
while making their deneyers...

*look childish

making uncalled for promises
or recalling a thing that never happend
going over..the same..im good ..your bad..ground...again and again

lets hear the call
and wake up

Dear Lexi

Agree 100%.

Part of the problem is the adversarial style of debate, which encourages cheap shots.

Pollies should note the Comedy Debates - prefer Paul McDermott over cat-calls.

I guess when a Liberal Pollie disagrees with a male Labor Pollie s/he woofs?