For me it started with the No Carbon Tax rally outside of parliament house in March, where posters labelled Julia Gillard as "Bod Brown's bitch" and asked the country to "Ditch the witch". Tony Abbott appeared to endorse the behaviour while at the rally. When pressed he changed his tune and expressed regret, but when he said in the next breath "But I can understand why people feel very passionate" I was left wondering if he was hoping the same thing would happen the next time around. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/story-fn99tjf2-1226093905998

When all but 11% of Australia's economists failed to express enthusiasm for Abbott's direction action plan on CO2 http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/2225478.aspx , Abbott's response wasn't to answer the criticisms. Instead he took a jibe at the entire profession. Judging from articles here on OLO and elsewhere http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12290 , it hasn't gone down too well. But perhaps fair enough, economists are big boys and girls and can take care of themselves.

What isn't fair enough is when the police intervene to prevent carbon tax protesters from harassing each other. From http://www.theaustralian.com.au/story-fn99tjf2-1226093905998 :

"Police stepped in at a forum of Liberal supporters in south-eastern Melbourne after a woman was jeered, booed and followed for two blocks by a man from the audience. ... as [she] left the hall, she was followed by a man who repeatedly ignored requests to leave her alone, saying "it's a free country". The man later left with police."

It seems like this country is forgetting how to have a civil debate and attack the issues rather than each other. It's time to turn the rhetoric down Tony, and show us how it should be done.

Surely that would require a modicum of wise counsel or even statesmanship, rstuart - and it appears, those are qualities we don't presently require in our political leaders.

Dear RS,

I don't like your chances (or anyone else's) to try to get Tony Abbott to tone down his rhetoric. That's all he's got. He and his
business lobby have had a field day, running a well-orchestrated fear campaign that has convinced some voters that the carbon tax will be
bad for the economy. Even though the announcement by the PM on Sunday
showed us all that there is nothing terrifying in what was being planned, did Mr Abbott admit that perhaps he was wrong. No way. He
wants to be PM - no matter what it takes. And what it takes as far
as he can see is to keep up the same rhetoric, slogans, and scare-mongering. He won't rest until he's either replaced as leader or
told by his own party to lighten up. But who's going to be came to
do either?

The immature "rhetoric" comes wholly from the Liberal and National parties.

Why?

Because their private polling tells them that this is what Australians will fall for. This is backed up by the public opinion polls, which prove the tactic is working well.

At the present time, the majority of Australians are not the least bit interested in an intelligent, two way debate. They want to see a "fight". They want to be "entertained".

The last thing they want is to be "informed". That's because they'll then be required to "think". This is why Labor's attempt to explain policy is doomed. The Australian electorate has been successfully dumbed down by coalition hissy fits, coalition theatre, coalition scare tactics and coalition juvenile behaviour.

The Liberal and National parties know this. Their number one priority is to kick the government out, at any cost whatsoever. It's, party first, Australia second. They are bitter, and have never gotten over how close they came to government, and to this day still don't accept the loss. A monkey could have won that election against the Labor Party, but Tony Abbott LOST the election, and the coalition will continue to be bitter till the day they die.

Look at the way the coalition behaves in parliament. They continually scream and yell across the chamber, disrupt parliament at every possible opportunity, get regular suspensions from parliament AND this juvenile behavior works for them. It's what Australians want. They want ENTERTAINMENT.

Australia is getting the opposition it deserves.

The other day I complimented rstuart on the quality of their posts of late, and this one is an excellent example of why. It's well overdue that Abbott and his gang of knockers are brought to account for their role in lowering the level of political discourse in this country. I've been trying to remember a time in my adult life when people have been nastier to their political opponents in Australia, and when an Opposition has contributed less to our good fortunes. So far I can't think of a time when the standard of debate is lower.

Thank goodness for the Greens. No matter what else you say about them, their parliamentary behaviour has always been exemplary. If one compares Abbott's ugly antics with the quiet composure of Bob Brown, it's very easy to see who would be the better PM. The irony is that Brown doesn't want the job and Abbott will never get it.

And thanks again, rstuart.

rstuart, there is a very simply way to end all this, and that is for madam PM to call an election.

Let the people decide!

As long as people respond to Abbott's exposure of Juliar's incompetence and deceit, and it continues to work, why on earth should he stop?

The demand , by one contributor to this discussion , and elsewhere ,for another election , is populist and undesirable . An election costs many millions and disrupts government business . There was an election a year ago . Even though it resulted in a hung parliament , a government is operating effectively .

Governments should run their 3 year term ,unless they lose the support of a majority in Parliament . If there were another election , it might result in another hung parliament . In the term of any worthwhile government , it will have to do unpopular things which will upset some people . To demand another election whenever some people are dissatisfied is inconsistent with representative democracy .

Nationals and Tony Abbott,

Its no secret on this forum i put animal welfare before most things.

I used to vote Libs but Tony has fixed me for life. You should have seen them in parliament screaming send them anyway. It really was/ is sickening. You can see the difference in the two men Tony and Bob Brown. One of them is a decent human being & the other.
Its very disappointing the PM resumed the live trade & by doing so has manged to get both sides cheesed off. But still walts and all leave her and Bob there because the alternative is horrible.

I think hes a horrible person with zero compassion and not as smart as he thinks he is. If he were smart for no other reason he would know there is a lot of votes in a ban live exports policy.

If he were a man with a backbone and the slightest decency he could have made a political miles out of that.
The thought of him ever being PM makes me feel physically ill.

Where is his big policy?

They say is much worse then the PMs. Hes just a big mouth that even talks about his own daughters virginity - how dare he discuss those young girls like that in public.

So thats how much respect he has for his own-- How much do you reckon he would give especially the women of this country.

Dear rehctub,

It may come as a surprise to you and many others - but the people
have decided - we had an election - Tony Abbott LOST. And the next one's due in 2013.

Short memories.

Some might remember the protests outside One Nation events that at times involved physical assaults on those trying to attend.

Some might remember the rhetoric about work choices.

It's not a Liberal/coalition thing, it's unfortunately what opposition pollies seem to need to do to keep the profile up and stay in the media.

It should also be pointed out that Abbott made it very clear that the woman at the rally had a right to have her say, some in the crowd behaved badly, one individual particularly so but does anyone want to wager that turning up at an ALP or Greens event and voicing support for political opponents would not draw a similar response from some in the crowd?

It may be politically expedient to make it about the Libs or Abbott but that's all it is expedient. There is no moral integrity to that stance.

Until we decide that the rhetoric is not Ok for any side don't expect one side to change on it's own.

R0bert

Lexi,

People that voted for Labor voted based on the solemn promise of no carbon tax, otherwise Juliar would have lost.

@Shadow Minister: People that voted for Labor voted based on the solemn promise of no carbon tax, otherwise Juliar would have lost.

Tony Abbott he likes say that Labor is breaking its promises, but then he also likes to point out Labor isn't running the country.

@R0bert: Some might remember the rhetoric about work choices.

It is not the rhetoric. It's the choice of rhetoric. Howard was passionate about the GST, Hansen about immigration. These are issues. I can't recall an Australian political leader lampooning an entire area of science as Abbott did when he called climate science crap, or as he did again when he recently attacked economics.

When he does that he is not directly attacking the issues. He is directly attacking the people who support the issues. From where I sit it seems his supporters have taken his cues and now follow his lead - with his tacit encouragement.

Setting parts of Australia's society against one another like this may be good for Abbott - only time will tell. But it's not good for the country. I've seen what happens in the US when politics gets overly personal. Politicians get shot in the head while doing the family shopping. I don't like it.

Excellent posts rstuart and morganzola.

How many Liberal supports really believe that if the Greens and Independents had formed a government with the Coalition that there would be no compromise on climate change policy. Abbott himself talked about a Carbon Tax as a viable approach to climate change among other options such as an ETS and direct action.

We have not heard much about what sort of direct action the Coaltion are advocating. No matter what one thinks about a Carbon Tax Abbott is all hot air - all spin and no substance.

Julia Gillard formed a government in a hung parliament situation, and while I strongly believe governments should be accountable for promises we are not talking about a clear cut win. I believe Julia Gillard would have kept the promise had the ALP been the clear winner. The Liberals would have had to compromise in a similar situation, in fact they were tossing up all sorts of inducements to win government. Perhaps one could argue that the PM shoud have refused that particular compromise based on an earlier promise - we could go in circles on that one.

However, some of the anti-government rhetoric borders on crowd-whipped up hysteria.

Hello RSTUART
I am with you, I am disgusted with the behaviour of Abbott, he really belongs in a travelling circus. Let me make it quite clear, I respect every persons' right to vote for whomever they like, but Abbott is not showing any signs of being an insightful, forward looking person.
His colleagues really need to gag him, he has destroyed the dignity that the Liberal Party used to display. He may be a Rhodes Scholar, but if you cannot exercise your knowledge in an intelligent way, you are nobody. He needs to reel in his circus act and start showing his talent (if any) as a real Leader (if capable). At least the Gillard Government has made a small step in the right direction of reducing emissions., for that, I applaud her., someone had to do it.

Rabbot will happily drag this country down to third world status in his selfish lust for power. He is a traitor and a liar. His fearmongering is damaging our stockmarket and our retail confidence. Who knows how much investment his scare campaigns have deterred.
Considering our position at the top of the worlds best performing economies his lies and distortions are nothing short of treason.

With you all the way on this post rstuart.

The truth most likely is Shadow Minister, that we may well have had a Labor majority, if Julia Gillard hadn't promised to dispense with a carbon tax prior to the last election. Because most Australians are not climate skeptics.

The Liberal tactic of pattern disruption is certainly grating and lacking both substance and credibility, and clearly not good for Australia.

Sorry to interrupt this Labor glee club,

Juliar has been and is just as strident and pugilistic as Abbott, and in opposition tried to do to Howard exactly what Abbott is doing now.

Juliar had a choice, stand true to her promises upon which people voted for her or compromise her credibility by selling out the electorate, breaking her promises and making a deal to obtain power.

She then compounds it by trying to pretend that she did not break a promise, or that it is not really a carbon "tax". The voters are not stupid enough to swallow that.

Without credibility she cannot sell the tax and sounds like a second hand car dealer. If labor ditches her, they could replace her with someone who did not make the promises or compromises that is eating away like a cancer at labor's support.

SM, she doesn't have to be all that credible, she just has to be more credible than Abbott.

Easy peasey.

Could somebody please tell SM that this thread is about Abbott's debasement of political discourse, not Gillard's perceived failings. He appears to be having a bit of trouble reading today.

If it stops the carbon tax, then the disruption has saved Australia from a stuff up of monumental proportions.

This tax has so much compensation that it is no where near revenue neutral, and the tax payer will be forking out over and above the carbon tax.

If what stops the carbon tax? Abbott's debasement of political discourse?

Bit of a slippery slope there SM...

If it does work, then it will forever be considered a legitimate political tactic.

Thanks, you have now quite convinced me who I should really vote for next election.

No Abbott should be turning up the heat.

Like that girl said last night, Gillard is a proven liar. as blatant as you like, one who will say anything.

Having said that I would not like to see her go. She is our best chance to change from this grossly incompedent mob in power. Hope she hangs in there untill the next election, then the lot get turffed out.

If she gets replaced, the next PM might be better and it would be a shame to miss an opportunity to get rid of the lot, greens and all.

SM,

It seems you're advocating "tactics" over "substance". If Mr Abbott possessed a modicum of the latter, he'd be far more palatable.
I'm a leftie who's not particularly impressed with Labor at the moment, however, I wouldn't dream of voting for a party led by Abbott.

Rstuart, can you remember a whole area of science who so completely lied to the public, to gain favour of the government of the day? We need drastic action to counter drastically immoral behaviour of the sector.

I wouldn't be lampooning them. After the election, I'd be charging them, convicting them with the increasing evidence of their lies, & have them pay back all those grants at a dollar a day in the clink.

I doubt that it would not be possible to include a few vice chancellors with them.

We must make damn sure that we make these servants of the public, just that in future. If it is OK to charge company directors who lie, so is it with academics.

Poirot,

If Juliar had a modicum of substance, it would not be so easy for Abbott to shred her. She has no authority, no gravitas. People listen to Abbott far sooner than Juliar. It virtually does not matter what she says or does, Australia turns to the coalition for the facts.

not particularly impressed with Labor at the moment, however, I wouldn't dream of voting for a party led by Abbott.
Poirot,
that makes you a voter the country can do without. may I suggest you vote informal then, for decency's sake.

@ Hasbeen:

Now you're getting completely ridiculous. It's one thing to deny the science, quite another to demand punishment for those who demonstrate quite conclusively that your increasingly shrill rhetoric is based on wilful ignorance. Your comments used to be conservative, but far more civil and occasionally even informative, witty and perceptive. Now they're just belligerent rants and insults, fed by the latest fabricated factoid to emit from Abbott & Co.

I suspect it's much the same for many who've invested so much credibility in denying the veracity of the science that predicts global warming. You've painted yourself into an intellectual corner, so all you can do is make a lot of angry noise to try and distract from your fundamental error.

Of course, you're not alone. Indeed, the phenomenon has given rise to the neologism "agnotology", which refers to "the study of culturally-induced ignorance or doubt, particularly the publication of inaccurate or misleading scientific data". Abbott's and your rhetoric would appear to be quite amenable to analysis under the rubric of agonotology.

Shadow Minister,
How much respect we have lost for our so-called Leaders. Let us not forget that it wasn't Julia (not Juliar - you mispelled her name or are you so disrespectfull? - She was approached by other Politicians to take over from Rudd, she accepted that challenge, she also inherited the Global Financial Disaster, The Continuing war in the Middle East, not to mention the Queensland, and Western Australia Flooding.
But somehow she did what other Leaders have failed to do.....she at least started to do something about Climate change, rightly or wrongly she took a step forward....the reason the Abbott bunch was against it was the dreadful Protectionism of the already wealthy, in both the private sector and the mining industry. As it happened, many politicians have done a backflip in the past....Tony Abbott only today said on ABC Radio, that he might just change is mind about the Carbon Tax, so why is every one wallowing in the muck because Julia
changed her mind about Carbon Taxes, there wouldn't be one person 'out there' who hasn't changed their minds on big issues, and not necessarily Politicians......if we look past the end of our noses, we would see that future generations need to be able to enjoy the life that we are currently living.
Noisy

Shadow Minister,
Rubbish- in fact it is the opposite. At a meeting of 200 people in QLD last night of undecided votes plenty went her way.
The problem the libs have is Tony Abbott. Its his nasty attack plans that only he cant see are back firing.Of course the best PR for Julie is Malcom the sheep farmer. Tony just today with his scare mongering told a transport company they were up for an extra 300 grand a year because of carbon tax- until one of the workers pointed out they were exempt:) How embarrassing. Above all without a doubt the biggest thing is Tony himself. People tend to forgive a few stuff ups if they like the person. The public mostly vote a PM rather than policy. ( not all I agree but many)
When you have a life time lib voter swing to ALP despite everything because of dislike for the leader thats good PR for any PM.

This would be a dream come true ( or should be) for any other leader of position- and yet.

His nasty attitude and already dirty scare mongering will be Julies best friend.

Horrible man in my opinion

Lexi, if nothing else you are a true blue supporter of you beloved labor party.

For the record, the people did decide, they dumped labor and, if not for the squirming and brown nosing from madam pm she would be a forgotten person by now.

How on earth you can still hold the believe that they won amazes me to say the least.

After all that was said and done, even you can't deny that they lost, just not badly enough.

Got a love ya loyalty!

@RStuart

<<For me it started with the No Carbon Tax rally outside of parliament house in March>>

Really? RStuart, LOL.

If that is when you first noticed that some people were prone to play the person rather than the ball, then it can mean one of two things:
i) Either, you have incredibly poor powers of observation, or
ii) The “R” initial in your name stands for -- Rip Van Winkle?

Such attacks have been common fare for a long time.During the Howard years it was common –and considered good form – to have posters, cartoons or placards depicting him with a Hitler moustache, or worse.Or refer to him as “Little Johnny” or “that mongrel Howard”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfmQyfKFoLk

Poirot, no matter what the right did, I doubt if you would vote
for them. More likely a chardonay green, with many of the comforts.

There is actually a great utube video clip of how I envisage you :)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wEvwxLsNAtI

.

Hello Yabby,

I haven't actually viewed your scintillating clip before posting this. I seem to recall your last effort in that regard with the couple playing backgammon.....now, if you'll excuse me, I just spotted a bottle of chardonnay with my name on it. : )

Poirot

I think its fair to say this is how some envisage him-

http://sheepsociety.blogspot.com/2009_11_01_archive.html

Kerryanne,

If I had a dime every time a labor supporter said that "His nasty attitude and already dirty scare mongering will be Julies best friend"

Others have over the past year said exactly what you have. The problem is that Abbott keeps getting more popular and the PM sinks further.

What on earth makes you think that labor's downward trend is going to suddenly reverse? What has changed? Juliar's deceit hasn't changed.

The nasty lying shrew is getting her come upance.

SM, if you had a dime every time a labor supporter said that "His nasty attitude and already dirty scare mongering will be Julies best friend",

...then you would be American.

And probably broke, as they would probably be more likely to say "Julia".

Shadow Minister
For somebody for uses a name like that you sure are naive.
They are all liars full of themselves with few morals. Sell out to the highest donation despite who it hurts. Look at live exports and our intensive farms.

I am sickened by all the leaders accept Bob Brown in that regards. What I do see however is the worst possible choice for the opposition. Anyway, wont matter what you or I say. Time will tell.
My only interest is I personally prefer not to have to look at him.

If ever he was PM hed be on TV more and he makes my skin crawl.
I still can not believe he raised his daughters private sexual preferences as a public topic. I mean how disrespectful is that. Have you ever know anybody to be that low. Most protect their family and kids. Even this morning he dragged those girls up st 3am to take them to a fish market with a lot of blokes. His buddy was left seen on TV rushing in to interrupt a interview screaming they shave young girls public hairs in other countries. Mate they are just plain sick that lot. Sick in the head dirty old men committed to discussing woman sex young girls.
Not to mention if he were PM abortions would go back to back yard butchers & paying coppers. No man has any right to yell a woman what to do with her body- if shes wants a kid or not.
Hes truly Off in my opinion- horrible man

I'm with you on this one Kerryanne!
I don't care about what else the Liberal Party have to offer, I just couldn't handle having that dreadful, um, excuse for a, ah,
man as the PM! He is an embarrassment. Running around in hardhats and bright vests, with never a drop of sweat in sight.
Bring back Malcolm Turnbull.

Julia won the last election, and Abbott will never get over that.
He will keep on giving us his, ah, bumbling ramblings about the new tax, and how all hell will break loose because of it.

The Liberal tax GST was far worse as far as I can see.

Julia spoke the truth at the time she said they wouldn't bring in the carbon tax, but then was brave enough to admit she was wrong, and brings it in anyway, despite it being so unpopular.

She has gained my vote because of that stance, against all the odds.

suzeonline

Yes shes won me over as a brave and down to earth person. Shes got more guts than all those men & I really didnt like her.
Respect is earned and thats something Tony doesn't get. I think the public see clearly shes had a tough job.Bob chose well to pick her as the better person. Shes got a major problem however with staff.

*The Liberal tax GST was far worse as far as I can see.* Yes MUCH

*She has gained my vote because of that stance, against all the odds.*

Me too but i AM upset live exports was resumed.

That DREADFUL Abbott screaming senem anyway. I utterly detest the person. Cant even call him a man-- not a mans bootlace.

Julies more of a man than he will ever be.

Kerryanne,
your desperation to discredit a decent & rather capable Australian is nothing short of indecent. By all means if you're experiencing a personality clash don't vote for him but don't you think you have a responsibility to all Australians to do everything possible to get this country back on track. This cannot happen under the present party & leadership. Surely you can't be that silly & not see that ? So, if you have an ounce of decency in you do your bit for a good Australia.

rstuart:"When he does that he is not directly attacking the issues. He is directly attacking the people who support the issues. From where I sit it seems his supporters have taken his cues and now follow his lead - with his tacit encouragement."

this is now standard fare in all sorts of area of public discourse. One has only to look at any discussion of Family Law or anything at all to do with gender matters.

There is little effort to make policy based on genuine research in these areas, rather a preference for working out which side has more political clout. Thus, emotive phrasing and appeals to popularity have undermined any effort at proper evidence-based decision-making. It's made even worse when there is deliberate fudging of results.

It seems to me that Abbott is simply following the standard political rulebook as it is in 2011. It's terribly amusing to watch some of those who believe the end justifies the means (as long as it's in their preferred cause, of course) pretending to faux outrage.

"She has gained my vote because of that stance, against all the odds."

Puleeez!

The number of times I have heard that line from rusted on laborites or greens is hilarious. You obviously think everyone else is stupid enough to believe it. The numbers that are abandoning labor would indicate that most Australians aren't stupid enough to swallow that line or other fantasy from Juliar.

Oh puleez - it's called dumbing down the populace.

Tony Abbott is very good at that, as you have so aptly demonstrated.

"He is an embarrassment. Running around in hardhats and bright vests, with never a drop of sweat in sight. " http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4584#118888

Agreed, it's pathetic the way public figures show up in hardhat's and bright vests. Lucky it's only Abbott who does that sort of thing.

Might be a double up or two but there are enough different one's from a few minutes searching that you should get the idea.

http://specials-images.forbes.com/imageserve/00Nldh01TCaNp/350x.jpg

http://images.smh.com.au/2010/07/20/1703957/gillard-200x0.jpg

http://www.4bc.com.au/gillardgallery?selectedImage=1

http://l.yimg.com/ea/img/-/100624/gillard_6-16251te.jpg?x=400&q=80&n=1&sig=zgiaTJhQVzI8Xi8F7I.Q7g--

http://www.singletonargus.com.au/multimedia/12073/photos-of-julia-gillards-visit.aspx

R0bert

RObert ... you mean they ALL do it, really?

Could it be some do it better than others ?-)

Individual

Nothing could be further from the truth. I judge people not groups. Its not a iron man comp. Probably just as well. If it makes u feel better- I closed my & eyes to vote for him last time against Kev 07.

*don't you think you have a responsibility to all Australians to do everything possible to get this country back on track.*

That’s what I told myself when I exposed Wesfarmers years ago- then followed the trail of blood money to AWB- then* watched the libs with the oil for food Saddam THEN exposed that but zippo happened.
Howard said he had no idea who closed the AWB down or why and Costello said there was no funding to continue – hilarious.
The days coming imop when u won’t be able to blog unless u finish each post with praise Allah peace be with.
However I am still sitting here drafting a submission for the inquiry WITH the answer to this countries $ problems.
If you want to save AU vote for me as PM. I will bring in the death penalty for men/ woman who murder 3 year old kids- sell drugs to our young. Rape $ assault our elderly in the streets & their homes. I will put that under budget cuts.
Our young will work or be in the Army Navy or out working for their local councils cleaning digging. Migrants (unskilled) will be given classes for education & a pick and shovel like our grandfathers .
No children born you can’t afford to keep yourself. No public paid $ materiality leave.

*So, if you have an ounce of decency in you do your bit for a good Australia.*
Australia needs a lesson. Its people need to find the word humanity compassion. People just want more, more , more.
In the 1020s the great depression Individual people had nothing but they were kinder. They appreciated every little thing they had.
That is what we need for people to be brought back to earth. Who better to deliver that budget BTW than ALP:)

Kerryanne

More of PM Kerryanne policy's-No jobs for the boys. Agriculture Minister must be off the land * experienced.*

Minister for health must have background in health preferable worked in public hospital Dr etc.

All funding to State Governments for aged home care &* in home care stopped & instead the elderly picking their own providers.

This gives them 23 hours a week help instead of 3!- keeps people in their own homes. That saves big $ & gives them are greater sense of being in control of their own lives. Free pet care & hospital.

Migrants given 2 4 6 years visas- not PR straight out of uni.

Aboriginals given top priority *before foreign aid- speaking of which Kev07 is getting pay back running around doubling the aid every place he stops. We need Julie to sake him again!

Coal exporters to undertake a commitment to AU by building abattoirs & small goods plants- good tax cut for them.

Church based organisations no government funding at *all.

Licenses for having children- before* like driving a car.

Intensive farmers upgraded to free range paid for by government.

AQIS, Austrade, MLA, ACCC, NFF. etc to be abolished and replaced with board made up of public.

ZERO polys having conflicts of interest- such as involvement in live exports.
A public shame list of people like Nichole K living off the earnings of live exports.

Abortion legal in all sates. Slash State and federal staff by half & use that to employ double our police.

Army used to clean the streets up of crime & drunken kids in punch ups.

Each school to have a army run training programe for fitness education.

Schools to have a veggie patch and teach kids how to grow their own and where a egg comes from.

All schools to provide FREE child minding on a Saturday to give working parents especially working Mums a break if required.

Shadow Minister, enough with the 'Juliar' line. It's childish and does you no credit.

I'm not particularly impressed with Gillard's government. I find them lacking in scruples and they show a distinct lack of backbone.

I've actually been quite pleased by the carbon tax, because it at least shows they're willing to stand up for something contentious.

However, you continue to claim that Gillard's government is worse than Abbott's opposition.

My main issues with Abbott have been the ones outlined by rstuart.

If Gillard is, as you claim, worse than Abbott, I would like you to provide some examples:

1) As put forth earlier, Tony Abbott has denigrated the entire realm of climate science. He's been on record as calling climate science 'crap' but at other times he's indicated it's true. When economists pointed out that his direct action scheme was more expensive and less efficient, he simply said that the economists in Australia are of poor quality.

Can you provide any examples of Gillard rejecting an entire profession outright? Has she ever used language like 'crap' to reject the work of an entire profession?

2) Given that Tony Abbott supports action on climate change but has also said that it's 'crap' is it, or is it not, logical to assume that he has flip flopped on this issue, in a similar way to Julia Gillard and her carbon tax?

Given that Abbott has these three things:
1) Being on record saying climate science is 'crap
2) Saying it's real
3) Putting forward a direct action plan that's more expensive than the government.

How can we have any confidence in his alternative policies?

And the real question is, can you actually engage with these points, or are you only capable of denigration, as appears to be the case with Abbott?

I for one, prefer a constructive approach to politics and policy, which is why the current crop of leaders is so disappointing.

Are you capable of being constructive, SM?

Kanne, you forgot to mention that climate advisors should be just that.

TRTL,

Considering all the vitriol directed at Abbott (sour grapes at his successful campaign), and the complete lack of constructive comments coming from the pro tax side, your one sided criticism is taken with a pinch of salt.

Julia Gillard has earned the particularly apt nick name Juliar for her deceit, and it is now widely used, and widely accepted

Dear Rehctub,

Come on you're not serious talking about brown-nosing - and blaming
the PM because the Greens and the Independents chose her instead of
Tony Abbott at the last election. Tony Abbott offered Wilkie over
$1 billion to get his vote - but failed miserably. God knows what
he offered the others. The fact remains as I stated earlier - he did
not get their support - Julia Gillard did!

tlrl..quote.."" Has she ever used language like 'crap'
to reject the work of an entire profession?""

yes try yesterdays press club hard/press
her saying the media publishes[supports?]..crap

for opnce she is being honest
she means like toney says
but i recognise its what she has spun
[the media is very one eyed about getting behind the lies]

the opposing sides have been baned from buildings
ridiculed in govt..pilaried in the press

yes juLIAR..
the press is crapp
taking your half truths as all true

SM-I'll do you the courtesy of actually addressing the points you're making.

I'd appreciate the same courtesy. I put forward queries. You proved unable to answer them. I'd still like those answered.

This is my issue with Tony Abbott as well. Rather than addressing the issues, he dismissed the other side, be they Gillard, climate scientists, or amazingly economists as a profession in its entirety.

1) "Considering all the vitriol directed at Abbott (sour grapes at his successful campaign)"

Your first assertion is correct. There's been a lot of vitriol directed at Tony Abbott. I would argue however, that it's an unfair generalization to say that it's due to sour grapes at his election campaign.

Abbott has put forward erratic policy and demonstrated contempt for those who disagree with his proposals. I'm providing examples, which I'd like to discuss, if you can.

2) "the complete lack of constructive comments coming from the pro tax side" This really depends on what alternatives are being put forward.

Either Abbott does not really believe in climate change at all, and he is misleading the public with his direct action plan.

Alternatively, he does believe in climate change, but the plan he's put forward puts the government at the centre. I prefer market-based solutions rather than relying on government expertise, particularly technology. So do most fiscal conservatives, which Abbott claims to be.

How can you reconcile these things?

3) "your one sided criticism is taken with a pinch of salt."

One sided implies I've only criticized one side. I said I was unimpressed by Gillard and think she's doing a poor job. Therefore, my comment, by definition, can't be one sided. The same cannot be said of you.

4) "Julia Gillard has earned the particularly apt nick name Juliar for her deceit, and it is now widely used, and widely accepted."

Many people called Howard 'the rodent'. That didn't mean it wasn't childish, nor was it 'widely accepted'. Are there any non-anonymous, intelligent commentators using the name 'Juliar'? Can you point to some?

As I asked, would you mind actually engaging my points?

@one under god: yes try yesterdays press club hard/press her saying the media publishes[supports?]..crap

Here is what she actually said:
"If I can put it to you as clearly as I can, I’d say don’t write crap. It can’t be that hard,"

Which turns out to be an excellent example of what I mean. She attacked the issue, not the profession.

@Shadow Minister: The nasty lying shrew is getting her come upance.

Awesome Shadow! I didn't think anybody here would illustrate my point so eloquently.

@Shadow Minster: If Juliar had a modicum of substance, it would not be so easy for Abbott to shred her.

Sadly I tend to agree. She's a lousy politician. But this is about what Abbott is doing, not her. Abbott having poor competition is no excuse for his dragging the standard of debate in this country to the standard you set above.

@TurnRightTurnLeft: As I asked, would you mind actually engaging my points?

I doubt there are any good answers, so Shadow will ignore it.

Abbott also must know there is no answer to the picture you paint. The man isn't stupid. He knows he can't pay out billions to industry to reduce carbon, provide everyone tax cuts, eliminate new revenue streams Labor has created and keep the budget in surplus.

Yet he says it anyway. Abbott is lying. We know he is lying. He knows he is lying. Everyone knows he is lying. Yet despite this example Shadow voraciously attacks Julia as a lying shrew when at worst she went back on a promise when circumstances beyond her control changed. Methinks he doth protest too much. But I digress.

We've been unfortunate enough to see what happens to a country when lead by a politician who thinks it is perfectly OK to lie to both himself and his country to justify going down a path. The same politician claimed cutting taxes to the rich (while as it turned out he increased expenditure) would create so much wealth everyone would be better off and the good times would roll. http://rationalrevolution.net/war/bush_tax.htm Bush unleashed such an epidemic of bulldust ("liar loans" were an accepted vernacular for pete's sake) and economic misery that China has now been reduced to pleading with the US not to default on its loans.

Yet I gather from the polls that Abbott has managed to convince over 1/2 the voters that selling lies is a good way to run a debate, and presumably a good way to run the country. It is impossible to know what promise Abbott would break if he got into power of course, but given his promises at the last election left the country in a $9 billion dollar hole, it's looking he has lifted his campaign tactics right out of Bush's playbook.

Any why not Shadow, eh? As you tirelessly point out he is wining. Just like Bush did - for two terms.

In support of rstuart, and the subject. I also note SM, that your comment of nasty lying shrew displays an unfortunate gender discomfort, as well as colourful adjectives.

On the personal side SM, I have often wondered whether you are male or female ?, I have leaned toward a male, but because of the unnecessary porn adjective (nasty) you have used on this occasion, I have concluded that you may well be female. (ha). And a jealous one at that.

Besides that the talking down of all endeavours Australian, (by the Abbott led opposition) is a counter-productive thing by it's own hand. Paul Keating explained the subject best on Lateline last night.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/.

rstuart'
Regarding Gillard, you said 'Here is what she actually said:
"If I can put it to you as clearly as I can, I’d say don’t write crap. It can’t be that hard,"

Like not calling CO2 'pollution'

Thinker

*I have leaned toward a male, but because *...

I think your first thoughts were more on the mark.

So yep its somebody very pro liberal and if you think hard enough about it you will know who fits that description - think

You are looking for a person with a peculiar personality who is no stranger to upsetting people and enjoys it imop

Kerryanne,

Pot calling the kettle black. Note I use the term Nasty directly after you did. It was an exercise to see who attracted the criticism. Surprise surprise, not one comment against Kerryanne. Other terms are Rabbit, shill etc, and not one criticism from the glee club.

PS, I never even heard of "nasty" as a porn reference. Thinker2 it is now obvious where you get your reading matter.

As for my identity, I have been accused of being Julie Bishop, Joe Hockey and many others. For those that have read my earlier posts, I have spelled it out clearly, but I am dying to see who the neophytes think of next.

Rstuart,

I agree that "We've been unfortunate enough to see what happens to a country when lead by a politician who thinks it is perfectly OK to lie to both herself and her country to justify going down a path."

Shadow Minister

I wouldnt know much about many of your other posts because i picked you ages ago so mostly skip yours given each one i read was the same tone- despite the topic. Bit like Tony really.
I suppose its no surprise birds of a feather flock together. You almost sound like a form liberal campaign manger.
That aside yes -i did use the term nasty because its so disappointing to see the only opposition being headed by somebody with an aggressive personal nasty attack on Julie. I get it that you cant see it because your of the same attitude from what i read. The old school libs and national will never change. Lets just look at them one by one shall we.
So called good Church followers who were in Government for ten years prior Howard 3 weeks into his first term moved to make Animal Welfare self regulated KNOWING barbaric cruelty to animals was red hot on the agenda- so despicable. Tony sitting in parliment screaming sendem anyway.

ALP are hopeless with $ that is true but if the PM sakes 50% of her office staff and a few Ministers and theirs I think she will make twice the PM Tony ever could. Not because hes not intelligent- but because he just cant hide his real nature.
Who wants a nasty PM- nobody. Hes running around scaring the public to do as much damage to Au economy as he can right now.
& you tell me to take some responsibility.

KA

"Who wants a nasty PM- nobody." - But we are stuck with her.

SHes running around scaring the public to do as much damage to Au economy as she can right now.

Juliar's platform is "Lets commit economic vandalism on ourselves to show the world the way. We know we won't do diddly for the environment, but will show we are really really take it seriously."

Time to turn the bulldust down, RStuart

You indict Tony because he had the gall to say that protesters –some of whom happened to carry placards calling Julia “Bob Browns Bitch” or a “Witch” --just might have a valid gripe.

Yet you missed entirely the fact that Julia cavorts with elements of the labour movement who delight in calling Tony “The Mad Monk “.And you missed Julia’s tendency to say “Mr Rabbit” each time she addresses Tony.

You attack Tony for telling lies but excuse away Julia’s lies because “circumstances have changed”

You get things arse about, telling us some cock and bull story about: “ police intervene(ing) to prevent carbon tax protesters from harassing each other” http://www.theaustralian.com.au/story-fn99tjf2-1226093905998
but when we read the article, the woman in question had left the meeting after being called “a tree hugger ” – hardly a name one would call a carbon tax protester.In fact both the woman and her wantabe companion were likely card carrying greenies!

You completely miss what should be the major story of the week : the govts attempt to intimidate the media.
“Julia Gillard has urged journalists to not "write crap" while signalling support for a wide-ranging inquiry into the nation's media.”http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/breaking/9846794/gillard-tells-journos-to-cut-the-crap/

And by the time you get to your 1,2,3… 4th post, you’ve moved on to Bush & the US debt ( all of which it seems was Bush's doing !) and the state of US China relations – you are right about one thing –you do digress.

No wonder Shadow Minster doesn’t want to address your points. He’d be hard pressed just to find them amongst all the bulldust!

It continues to stick out that some seem to think that these tactics have originated (or come to prominence) with Abbott.

The scare campaigns and negativity about the other sides actions and plans have been a big part of campaigning since at least the campaign where Hewson took the GST proposal to the electorate. Possibly before.

A failure to be clear on the detail of opposition policy has been a long running tactic by both sides.

Popping up in places where you can get a media grab (often wearing a hard hat and reflective vest) has been a long running tactic.

Saying what you think you need to say to get elected has been going on for a long time, anyone remember Peter Garrott's comment about that in the lead up to the election a few years ago.

None of that makes Abbott a particularly appealing prospect for PM any more than it's made his predecessors but the targeting of Abbott over it as though he was somehow a lot worse than the others for doing those things is hardly credible.

I'd dearly love to see a candidate for the top job who did not play those games, the major parties don't seem to be willing to take the electoral risk to be different.

R0bert

Shadow Minister,

No shes not running around talking down the economy at all >Tony is.
Apart from that do give the public some credit. Blind Freddy can see we heading for trouble.
The damage being done now over this carbon tax before its even here is worse than the tax itself. Julies problem is some media outlets are pro libs and there are some powerful ones too.

I understand Julies this problem well Shadow Minister as just about every other person or group that tries to improve animal welfare does.

The vetted interests of the media have more power than Julie and Tony put together. eg- a while back there was another stuff up in WA with a ship full of sheep. I am talking about right here in Australia a mini cormo express. The journos were not allowed to print the story and told point blank it would upset the many regional newspapers and others with their vetted interests in the cruel trade. This is WRONG*

What AU needs is a complete clean up of media ownership and how its run. As for Australia SM imop it can not be saved now long term whoever is PM. If USA goes under again with Italy and the others its going to effect China and then god help us.

I sadly predict that down the track there will be no pensions for our elderly ( well slashed by 80%) no jobs for Australians who will be replaced by off shore workers. What we need to do is train kids and get them out of unis into real jobs. We can make our own shoes, push bikes small good, upholstery etc..
Anyway what is the point because nobody wants these jobs right now
Wait a few years - they will be screaming for a job for in return rice. Who knows they may even make Kevin Rudd minister of the rice bowl because the way hes spending Aussies money doubling the aid- he too needs a lesson in economy.

If Julie doesn't sake him for good we will be in even deeper:

R0bert

*I'd dearly love to see a candidate for the top job who did not play those games, the major parties don't seem to be willing to take the electoral risk to be different.*

Robert, best comment on the thread maybe i misjudged you. Well done and for me give me Nick Xenophon to toss his hat in.

@SPQR, Saturday, 16 July 2011 12:36:21 AM: You completely miss what should be the major story of the week : the govts attempt to intimidate the media.

Evidently you didn't notice this earlier comment:
@rstuart, Friday, 15 July 2011 5:53:18 PM: Here is what she actually said: "don’t write crap. It can’t be that hard,"

@SPQR: the woman in question had left the meeting after being called "a tree hugger"

In case it wasn't obvious, it wasn't the verbal argy-bargy that went on in the meeting I was drawing your attention to. It was the fact that she was perused after she left the meeting.

@SPQR: No wonder Shadow Minster doesn’t want to address your points.

They weren't my points?

@R0bert: The scare campaigns and negativity about the other sides actions and plans have been a big part of campaigning since at least the campaign where Hewson took the GST proposal to the electorate. Possibly before.

Again R0bert, it's not the scare campaigns. And although I complained bitterly about Abbott's over the top promises above, it's not about that either. Labor still has 2 years for the dust to settle, to get voters to see both those things for what they are. I agree with Shadow that if Julia can't do that in 2 years she doesn't deserve to win. At least she seems to have planned for it. She has given herself 2 years - unlike Rudd.

My complaint is with Abbott attacking the person, not the issue. That is all. I wouldn't be complaining if Abbott wasn't the leader of the opposition. As can be seen from Bill Heffernan's comment that Gillard is deliberately barren, jibes from the back benches don't set the tone of debate. The closest I can remember us coming to the current situation is Howard personally Kim Beazley, saying he didn't have the ticker for the job of opposition leader. But even then, Beazley later described it as uncharacteristic. http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/pm-gets-personal-beazleys-got-no-ticker/2005/10/13/1128796640367.html

And that is crux of it. Rather than being uncharacteristic, it seems to be one of Abbott's defining characteristics.

@ RStuart

<< Evidently you didn't notice this earlier comment: @rstuart, Friday, 15 July 2011 5:53:18 PM: Here is what she actually said: "don’t write crap. It can’t be that hard,">>

Yes I did, I did, I did notice it. But predictably your angle was : “ She attacked the issue, not the profession.” ( a variation of the * poor Julia striving against adversity line* ) When the real story was it had been a blatant attempt by the govt to INTIMIDATE the media.

<< In case it wasn't obvious, it wasn't the verbal argy-bargy that went on in the meeting I was drawing your attention to. It was the fact that she was perused after she left the meeting>>

And, yes, again : I noticed that too. But as birds of the feather flock together it seems likely she was being pursued by a fellow tree-hugger.
Who intentions I can only guess at , but might reasonably be thought to have included practising their tree-hugging techniques.

@SPQR: When the real story was it had been a blatant attempt by the govt to INTIMIDATE the media.

Only in your imagination SPQR. If you want to see a blatant attempt to intimidate the media, you could try Bob Brown's recent attempt to get a senate inquiry into the media, or Howard's putting in place a "bias watchdog" at the ABC.

@SPQR: it seems likely she was being pursued by a fellow tree-hugger.

So you tell us you have read a report of a man at a Liberal Party function yelling at a Greens supporter and subsequently perusing her and being lead away by police, and on the basis of that you have come to the conclusion his is a fellow green who wanted to give her a hug.

Way to go SPQR. I can't believe you are serious, but the fact you apparently think this is a reasonable way to debate the issue is exhibit 2 for my point.

Who better to deliver that budget BTW than ALP:)
Kerryanne,
In my opinion & experience that is a seriously unrealistic suggestion.

Now RStuart, I think you might be letting your prejudices cloud your judgement.

<< So you tell us you have read a report of a man at a Liberal Party function yelling at a Greens supporter and subsequently perusing her and being lead away by police, and on the basis of that you have come to the conclusion his is a fellow green who wanted to give her a hug>>

This is the article that you are basing your little hypothesis on : http://www.theaustralian.com.au/story-fn99tjf2-1226093905998
If you read it again you’ll find:
1) Yes, there was a man who yelled at her calling her a “bloody tree hugger”.
2) But no where in the article does it say that the man who yelled at her, and the man who “followed” her “two blocks” , were one and the same .

You have ASSUMED they were one and the same.

There might well have been many men (and women) who yelled at her in the meeting.
And it might well have been that none of them – but someone else, who might have sat quietly in the corner --walked behind her for *two blocks* (which after all, might only mean they both lived in the same street!)

(So on the above it is just as likely that the *follower* was a green supporter as a liberal supporter)

Conclusion: it was all a RStuart beat up!

(and you have the gall to support Gillard's call for the media to “stop printing crap” )
How does it go again? …let he who has not..., cast the first stone.

Who better to deliver that budget BTW than ALP:)
Kerryanne,
In my opinion & experience that is a seriously unrealistic suggestion.
Posted by individual,
No No Individual you misunderstood my meaning. I was saying that in context of Australians & people in general wanting more more more & greed of the average person.

I commented on in the 1920s the depression people were a lot kinder - that is all.
Now if you really care about saving a quid push the PM to sake Rudd again.
Hes running around like a revengeful kid spending the public's $ at a alarming rate.
He has doubled and tripped the aid and we cant afford it. Thank God Julie did get rid of him because we would be in a bigger mess- fact

As for Tony I can not believe the opposition leader remained SILENT about the cruelty of live exports and personally dislike him for that. So you look at him & try to sum him up.
I came to the conclusion he goes to the same Church as Bill Heffernan's who has sat on the animal welfare advisory board and heads the inquiry coming up OUTRAGEOUS! and while i am not a religious person i have it from good authority hes going straight to hell!
Hes turned a blind eye to millions of suffering animals for years,.

I utterly despise anybody who does that. Look if you haven't got a heart for animals your not much of a person so who wants that for a PM

Well the very much less than illuminated rstuart, all I can say is bring on the time that I can have a hand in ditching the witch who is Bob Browns bitch. Regarding the amount of offense the said bitch would take to these poorly expressed truths, I believe she would just say crap crap crap crap crap crap crap, as she has taken to doing in broadcast interviews, what a class act, she will be bringing spittoons into caucus meetings next.

sonofgloin

Crikey,

Did that come from the heartland of Tony s camp because it sure sounds like it. That dont you see is the problem.

The media ARE slack and have a duty to report and do some research themselves before they do on the carbon tax.

The quality of the media coverage is as she said- just crap.

Shes asked the media to take some responsibility in reporting on the facts of the carbon tax- simple as that. They have a duty to do some proper research but its easier for them to print snippets of rubbish. Its bee done on purpose in Julies case- Tony well he hasn't given them anything different to look at.
Howard kept the libs on some form of public behavior but thats lost now- pity.

If Tony wants to win he should do present his policy and explain it to us-- instead of arranging imop little old ladies to turn up waving their fists i the face of our PM - whoever that might be.

“The Mad Monk “& Mr Rabbit is at least amusing especially if the cap fits- and you have got to addmitt between him and mad Bill H the truth lays not far from their feet.

However-- bitch - witch is like i said in my first post simply nasty

People notice that. Especially from a bloke towards a woman

Hes doing a better job to have her returned as PM than she is..

Kerryanne, I foresee trouble; the country has gone quite mad, things I have never experienced before. It could be witchery.

Mittewoch just passed near the new moon I saw vision of housewives screaming about mandate at the top of their voices to the PM in a shopping center, housewife activists no doubt. Then on recent past eves I have seen vision of bus loads of protesters turning up in their thousands all around the country bleating "we have never protested before but". I had also seen through the magic of wireless transmissions of a bereft media broadcasting facts that actually discredit the numbers behind Global Warming, and to add insult to injury the world media actually accuse the climate scientists of lying to validate their purchased opinions. The outcome was horrid it upset the "GLOBAL WARMING" theorists to the point that the crusades banner had to be reconfigured to "CLIMATE CHANGE".

Who are these enemies of what is good for the people, Kerryanne via the footage I have seen it seems it is the majority of the people, trouble makers undoubtedly, it is unholy alliance of matures and pensioner scum from the suburbs coupled with bludging capitalist small business associations and the big business that is not fornicating with the ALP.

As Gillard said to the Rudd caucus "I am against giving the pensioners a rise, they don't vote for us anyway" Gillard has identified the enemy, it is middle Australia and the Fabians hate middle anything, for Gillard and her Fabian masters wealth redistribution is the goal with two classes, us and them.

It’s wrong in principal to promote the assassination of the interlocutor’s character but it seems that many Australians feel betrayed by Gillard. The Labor heartland is decimated, party has gone, probably forever, and primarily because the holistic agenda followed by Fabians Rudd and Gillard. Gillard is reminiscent of a Tolkien character named Gollum. He would lie and deceive to keep his “precious”. Gillard’s precious is near to her, it’s called “self” but I would not call her a slimy self-serving bitch.

So we are in agreement.

". sonofgloin

Hi there- Ok CLIMATE CHANGE Let’s start with that and keep it simple. Let’s say its one of the world’s greatest cons just for argument sake. Let’s say a bunch of agriculture heavy weights worldwide all got together and said hey – there has got to be a better way to make a quid. So they invited mining magnates along and all rushes off to landmark and the world bank – got reps from heads of each country. Send so called scientists to stick tubes up cows bellys ( cruel Bustards) who could hardly keep a straight face. So it was a huge conspiracy to get more tax ok

As its going to be passed would it not be better to look how that extra $ can be used in the very best way to pull everybody out of the @. Yes we are in for hard times – no question about it. Harder than most people could ever imagine & I believe harder than the 1920s depression. Its coming in the next ten years- so what can we do best as a nation to prepare for it. TBO I don’t think it comes down to either Tony or Julie. I think its much bigger than that.
I voted for Tony last time- but i can’t bring myself to do it again. I never liked what he did to Pauline Hanson. Like her or not she shouldn’t have been i goal. ( It goes to the nature of the “beast”” ( Under One God would be proud of me)&#61514;
Witchery? Maybe- I would like to think so just to make it more interesting- but imop its plain human greed. You say you see housewives complaining - what about – not getting free child care.?
The problem with this country is people have expected too much for too long & the investors and employers have been expected to carry their wishes. Now I will be attacked for this but work choices was just what we needed – then. Howard was no fool, Costello either.

Tony isn’t either one of them. Rudd did awful damage & is still doing it. Julie made the right hard choice to step up & the men in the ALP camp allowed it. Sure let her cop the flack I hear them say – its only a woman after all. Let’s say you were PM tomorrow & I were your advisor.
– no more $$ to pay for lawyers for migrants & give legal aid funds back to the old age pensioners. I saw an elderly pensioner lose her home because her sister & brother in law were both lawyers and cheated her. I assisted her to attend legal aid. Sorry they said no funding for that- its a civil matter . Mind you there wasn’t too much civil about it at all) Contacted heads of and Attorney General NOTHING. Why? Because funds have been shifted to pay for lawyers for migrants. So if Australia wants Australia back start screaming. People are sleeping in streets and cars while people who arrive illegally are put up in 5* accommodation. Its costing us a fortune and we all know about it- but what do we do about it “nothing”:
That’s the trouble with Australia. People are too scared to stand up for what’s right. We have people on the dole who just do not want to work. Not all but many. We all know but what’s being done about it- nothing…
We have unmarried mothers with 3 to 8 kids( on purpose) & what do we do? We give them more money. Its time to wake up and get tough because they are dragging everybody down & THATS what’s wrong with Australia. Neither Tony OR Julie can fix these things because the do gooders wont allow it.

These people THINK the money is never going to run out---- there will always be pensions & welfare but they are so terribly wrong.

The free ride is over and apart from our elderly everybody has to work and change their attitudes quick smart.

Well I will get off my soap box now
Cheers sonofgloin

Kerryanne,

The sure sign of a government in trouble is when it starts to blame the media as "unbalanced" for not promoting the "facts" (I.e. party line).

Now Juliar is about to launch a $12m taxpayer funded "balanced" party political sell of the carbon tax.

kerryanne:"the men in the ALP camp allowed it"

Wasn't that nice of them? I'm sure Julia was very polite and said thank you.

kerryanne:"The free ride is over and apart from our elderly everybody has to work and change their attitudes quick smart."

Nope, the free ride is just beginning and will continue for the next 20-30 years. Then the money will all be gone too bad, so sad. No more rapid modernisation in China and India, no more Australian welfare state.

The only possible saving grace is African modernisation, but China is already taking care of that to some extent and it's not likely to be a huge resources consumer anyway.

Saul Eslake has it right when he says we should be putting money into investments in the future. I don't like the idea of a sovereign wealth fund, because I don't believe that the nation has benefitted as much as it should have from the huge superannuation pool, which has done remarkably poorly considering the enormous amounts of money locked in to it. I'd prefer some really large scale national infrastructure projects, like the proposal to capture water in the north and pipe it to the south where it's needed, or perhaps a program to create a truly useful fast rail service down the Eastern seaboard. Unfortunately, however, the ability of Governments to deliver these sorts of projects is increasingly suspect, so perhaps Mr Eslake's idea has some merit. God knows it's got to be better than more handouts to the hopeless.

Kerryanne,

Step up to the plate and issue your Policies.

SM,
I think KA put her 'policies' forward on page 8 of this thread.

No comment.

Thought. The ALP put Kristine Kennelly up for NSW Premier when they could see a disaster coming up, to lessen the impact by get the votes of some women. Are they thinking the same in Canberra?

Didn't work to well in NSW. Just barely in Canberra, look out next election!

Lexi-

Big hugs back wherever you are!

Lets make a date for Bundys online Friday evening& we will sort some of these males out who hate having a female PM.

Shadow Minister said
Step up to the plate and issue your Policies.

SM
Typical I posted mine 2 days are your eyes painted on. copy=

More of PM Kerryanne policy's-No jobs for the boys.

1 Agriculture Minister must be off the land * experienced.*

2 Minister must have background in health

3 All funding to State Governments for aged home care &* in home care stopped & instead the elderly picking their own providers.
This gives them 23 hours a week help instead of 3!-

4 Migrants given 2 4 6 years visas- not PR straight out of uni.

5 Aboriginals given top priority *before foreign aid-

6 Coal exporters to undertake a commitment to AU by building abattoirs & small goods plants- good tax cut for them.

7 Church based organizations no government funding at *all.

8 Licenses for having children- before* like driving a car.

9 Intensive farmers upgraded to free range paid for by government.

10 AQIS, Austrade, MLA, ACCC, NFF. etc to be abolished and replaced with board made up of public.

11ZERO polys having conflicts of interest- such as involvement in live exports.

12 A public shame list of people like Nichole K living off the earnings of live exports.

13 Abortion legal in all sates.

14 Slash State and federal staff by half & use that to employ double our police.

15 Army used to clean the streets up of crime & drunken kids in punch ups.

16 Each school to have a army run training programe for fitness education.

17 Schools to have a veggie patch and teach kids how to grow their own and where a egg comes from.

18.All schools to provide FREE child minding on a Saturday to give working parents especially working Mums a break if required.

SM

More of my stepping up to the plate policys - I as PM will implement to DO something about Tariffs-

Section 44 Disqualification (of a politician)
http://www.oziz4oziz.com/restoring-prosperity---details.html
Any person who:

(i) Is under acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power…(is disqualified from being a member of the House of Representatives or Senate).

Only with the approval of the people of Australia, evidenced by successful referendum, could such a momentous decision be made without activating Section 44.

No such referenda took place and tariffs were reduced and removed illegally.

Because surveys reveal that tariff removal was not supported by a majority of Australians, and has clearly caused immense suffering and poverty throughout the nation, it can also be said that tariff removal did not constitute ‘good government’, which also puts the guilty politicians in breach of Section 51 of the Constitution.

A UN-compliant High Court has abrogated its Constitutional duty to prosecute these breaches, in spite of multiple requests by citizenry.

What happened when tariffs were reduced and removed?

In essence, tariff reduction and removal destroyed two thirds of our family farms and one third of our manufacturing sector.
BAN LIVE EXPORTS
Aussie farmers and business people could not compete with cheap third world subsidised produce, fruit, manufactured items, clothing and footwear. They were rapidly driven into insolvency, and workers lost their jobs.

Altogether, the demise of tariffs; along with associated GATS, GATT and free trade agreements, cost Aussie workers about three million full time jobs (Creating 21.3% unemployment: Bulletin Morgan survey; published July 20,1999; p 44).

Most of those affected were from rural and regional Australia (primary and support industries), and approximately one million workers and their families were forced to move to coastal cities to find work; with disastrous results.

Many farmers committed suicide, as did family breadwinners exposed to John Howard’s fraudulent claims of an “Era of Prosperity”. ....

SM as your PM I promise to do something about this- but still no free child care.
Question pls SM
If you and your good women ( it is a woman is it?) Anyway if YOU want kids may I ask why I* should pay for you to have them?
Just something I could never understand. How about you by me* a new boat instead?
No-- then why should I pay for your little miseries--?
I will* pay if a woman's husband has passed away.. but no for the irresponsible to breed more of the same.
If u cant keep a family- dont have one. You expect a wife to work+ look after house and kids- wrong attitude. Bad attitude. Any man? I see thinks ten bucks a week maintenance is enough for child support.
Crikey - we cant have out 4x money taken now can we.
Outrageous . Stand on your own 2 feet you wimpy men of Australia.

More recent effects

Imported products have caused our balance of trade to become dangerously lopsided, with imports now approximately 30% higher in value than exports. This also means that when the US dollar crashes, Australia will be extremely susceptible to the global depression that will most certainly follow. On top of the actual national unemployment level* of 19%¹, and the 54%² whose incomes are under $15,000 PA, this will be calamitous.

Meanwhile, cheap Chinese products are believed to have been subsidised by foreign banks operating in China; the funds of which are owned by Rockefeller and Rothschild-led consortiums. As proof of the subsidies, the CEO of Australia’s BlueScope Steel referred to rolls of sheet steel that are selling in Australia for prices lower than the cost of mining the original ore in China.

This is an orchestrated strategy to undermine Australia’s manufacturing and food-producing capacity, making us dependent on foreign corporations and international bankers.

And the easily calculated reason for all this ruthless targeting is that Australia is the only country in the world that does not have to trade. We are self-sufficient in everything except some oil products.
http://www.oziz4oziz.com/restoring-prosperity---details.html

From the flow-on of a 12 months national service we'd just about achieve most of those lists in a couple of decades.
The open ended handout policies of now clearly aren't nation building.

@individual: From the flow-on of a 12 months national service we'd just about achieve most of those lists in a couple of decades.
The open ended handout policies of now clearly aren't nation building.

I've got to agree with morganzola when he said:

@morganzola: Maybe it's just me, but I'm finding your one-line comments increasingly hard to decipher lately.

So no, it's not just you. I am tempted to add some snide remark here, but that would be inappropriate, particularly as you seem to be enjoying your sparing match with him. Got for it.

Ho Hum,
This thread can be likened to a Tennis Match at last years' Wimbledon, where two unfortunate players played for hours on end (many hours on end-because they were playing point for point), like I have said on a few occasions on a few topics, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and shouldn't be lambasted for stating it. This place is like a war zone. Zzzzzzzzzzzz........ boring!
NSB

Kerryanne,

Your proposals are scary, tariffs stop trade, and are being removed around the world. No party is seriously proposing this.

As for "Anyway if YOU want kids may I ask why I* should pay for you to have them?" Are you advocating for the abolition of public schools too?

My kids are way past pre school, and the reason to encourage women back to work is for gender equality, and to improve productivity, by encouraging smart women to be part of the work force.

As for nuclear, It is well known that there is no viable renewable low cost base load.

@rstuart:

Thanks, but it's actually quite tedious. What's worse is that I've been genuinely trying to find out what he's on about on various threads, but it's really hard to avoid sounding snide or condescending when confronted by willful ignorance dressed up as a cryptic one-liner.

That said, I only engage with him if he posts something ignorant about a topic that matters to me, as part of my increasing interest in agnotology, as I described back up this thread. Some people here make classic case studies :)

S M

I dont know what your so upset about. You got 3 out of 5 of your policys passed.

*Are you advocating for the abolition of public schools too?*

NO of course not and may i say what a irrational response .
What I did say I made clear and thee is no need to re- state my policy or explain why.
Schools do need looking at however. I think kids from different religion & background should attend as one.

**My kids are way past pre school, and the reason to encourage women back to work is for gender equality, and to improve productivity, by encouraging smart women to be part of the work force.**

Yes good point but not a good reason for the public to pay*

*As for nuclear, It is well known that there is no viable renewable low cost base load.*

After Japan several countries are scrapping them- No we only need an earth Q or some drama and things can go very wrong. We have seen it happen. That is why I failed you on that policy.

Three out of 5 isn't bad though.

Have a nice evening

That sounds right Morgan,You have to be fluent in something to use it to best advantage.

The main problem is you are studding the wrong side of the argument. Typical lefty ploy, accuse others of the tactics you have been using for years.

The reason warmers are now so hated is a response to violated trust. The tens of thousands of graduates, even some of us who had the math to check for ourselves, trusted our old schools to be telling us the truth.

Now we find we have been lied to, & when the fools still try to keep the con going, we really get angry, at being taken for fools.

This is followed by Julia's stupidity. I saw one of those gold plated adds of hers tonight. Such simplistic stuff is going to be totally counter productive. Most will just get annoyed, not fooled.

The best way for Julia to improve her image would be to disappear for a year or so. Every time most of us see or hear her, it simply stokes the fire of disgust.

Warmest academics should follow the same advice. Every venture into print by one of you just increases our disgust for you as well.

@ Hasbeen:

I guess you're not interested in turning down the hate rhetoric, eh? I think that ultimately that it will backfire on you, because most Australians are sick of the hate, and are probably getting a bit uncomfortable about the degree of sheer nastiness that's developed in your spin.

My reading is that as many haters and willfully ignorant types as there in the electorate have already heard Abbott's litany of disinformation and hate, so that its continuation is now starting to drive voters away - so on reflection, I now tend to think you should go for it. Think of it this way, at this stage of the debate, every time one of you claims publicly that the Earth is cooling, that just sends one of your voters to Labor or the Greens.

Thanks mate!

http://www.smh.com.au/national/gillard-down-for-count-20110717-1hkak.html

I see that Juliar is not getting any traction. I think that most Labor MPs must be seeing this as a lost cause. I wonder when she will get the chop.

My feeling is that this could end up as the death of both Greens and ALP for some years. I tend to agree that some form of action on greenhouse gas abatement is necessary, but the current proposal is nothing more than a new type of CFD created at considerable taxpayer cost at a time when the economy is already in grave trouble.

As I said elsewhere, current business conditions haven't been seen since the Keating "recession we had to have" and interest rates were at 17%, with social welfare spending at 30% or so of revenue. Today interest rates are at just 7% and social welfare spending, mostly on handout schemes or social constructionalist measures, such as maternity leave ahs blown out to around 45% of revenue.

The Keating recession was deliberately induced to curb the runaway inflation that was threatening and it had a definite and foreseeable lifespan. It was designed to encourage people to stop spending on lifestyle and the damage to the terms of trade that spending created. There was enough spare fat in most people's budget that they could absorb the hit of huge rates, although some did go under because they were over-extended.

Today, there appears to be no fat whatever, even despite the massive level of handouts. Interst rates are at historically low levels and despite that, a lot of people with ordinary mortgages are finding it very difficult to make ends meet. It's got to the point that the PM can say with a straight face "I understand what a struggle it is for people on $170,000 a year living in Western Sydney."

The really sad aspect of this is that Abbott, who should be unelectable, will inherit a gift from the greens/ALP debacle and that will be the end of any serious effort to do anything about emissions, which we probably all agree is something that needs to be done at some point.

What a great legacy for Gillard.

A few years from now we may all wonder what all the fuss was about -
especially after an increase in job, renewables, and so forth. As one experts proclaimed - this is only the first step, and it may not be perfect, but to do nothing is even worse.

I agree with Morganzola - let's cut this vitriol amongst ourselves.
It's only a discussion right? How has it disintegrated to such disrespect? Voters are being turned off by it.

Lexi

>> It's only a discussion right? How has it disintegrated to such disrespect? Voters are being turned off by it. <<

It sure diminishes the number of contributions many posters (myself included) are prepared to make to OLO.

I don't recall Prime Ministers being heckled so viciously to their face as is happening to Julia Gillard - protests yes, and I am all for peaceful protest (having participated in many) but this continuation of calling Gillard "Juliar" to her face is as well as online indicates a degeneration of the expression of opinion into something darker and nastier.

All politicians tell lies, from the beginning of history. Julia Gillard has, like many leaders before her, had to compromise. In this case it is a compromise which will help to usher in the transition from fossil fuel based energy sources to sustainable energy sources.

I can think of far worse outright lies that had no basis in governance for the future, such as "children overboard" and SIEV X where people died due to no more justification than government ideology of the day.

Dear Ammonite,

I fully agree. I wouldn't want the PM's job.
She'd need nerves of steel to put up with the dirty
tactics being thrown at her. However, I think
Morganzola is right - many friends that I've spoken
to are totally against Mr Abbott and Co for the way in which
they're behaving. I'm sure that come the next election
people will give serious thought as to who they want to represent
them in Parliament. Nobody wants an illogical, abusive, person who
uses street-brawling techniques - simply to become PM. It's time
the Liberal Party took another look at who's representing them.
And weigh up the odds to see if it's worth it.

Political insults

http://www.crikey.com.au/2007/07/11/great-australian-political-insults-a-crikey-list/

Some thoughts on political insults at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/7864333/In-praise-of-political-insults-and-memorable-rudeness.html

There are more around but of the Australian lists I could find most seemed to have the same content as the Crikey list.

R0bert

Ammonite:"I don't recall Prime Ministers being heckled so viciously to their face as is happening to Julia Gillard "

You obviously have a very faulty memory or your experience is limited. Both Howard and Fraser were subjected to vicious and violent protest and called much worse than "Juliar". During the gun buyback debate Howard was even given a bullet-proof vest to wear.They didn't seem to find it necessary to cry about it or look for sympathy.

She took the job on and she did it in the nastiest possible way. No sympathy from me.

My favourite, reputedly by Jeff Kennett in reference to Peter Costello

"all the qualities of a dog except loyalty".

Heckling Howard and others. Some of the search results returned were to pages which had been removed.

http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2007/10/howard-heckled-again.html

http://australianpolitics.com/news/2000/00-05-27c.shtml

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/infamous-hecklesand-some-ruffled-responses-1815365.html?action=Gallery

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/10/1047144903564.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2UVjgAgksC8&feature=related

I can recall talk of former PM Gough Whitlam having egg's thrown at him at one point.

I came across references to Menzies being heckled.

Heckling politicians is not a new thing nor confined to one side of politics.

R0bert

Lexi,
Yes It must have been all together too much for him after he took those classes pre election to present himself in a better light to the public. Advisers back then told him to tone it down. He did a good job of it you must addmitt.
Just imagine going through all of that effort only to lose at the tail end. I guess it would be enough to blow anybodies fuse.
All that effort for nothing- I assume the trainers and advisers got the boot but he could really do with them back again i feel.( Poor Tony)

What I have never seen before is a member of public so close to our PM with a fist right in her face. That was poorly done by her security. She could have punched kicked or even stabbed her and thats not on

Robert,
Thanks for putting up those links.

It certainly shows that Lexi and Ammonite have selective memories.

What about Pauline Hanson being heckled, abused and even attacked. How they forget that, not me. All the violent demos have been by socialists and greens, but apparently that is OK.

Ammonite still tries to link Aus with the sinking of the siev X. Facts are blatantly disregarded by the left.

I like Morgan claiming that posters should be nicer to each other. He has called me many names over the time. His usual modis operandi was to attack the poster, with whom he disagreed, with claims of racist a xenophobia, to start with.

@Banjo:

There are some people who are capable of self-reflection, learning and personal growth, even at a quite advanced age. They are the people with whom it is possible to have constructive debates, even when they disagree.

On the other hand, there are other people who are impervious to logic and reason, who will never change their deeply ingrained attitudes, despite having been confronted numerous times with evidence and logical argument that shows that they are wrong. They are the people with whom it is impossible to have a civil debate, and it's just a waste of time talking to them.

Which kind do you think you are?

Banjo "All the violent demos have been by socialists and greens, but apparently that is OK.", if my recollections of Gough being egged are correct that was not socialists or green's. WA farmers from memory.

My impression is that the green's as an Australian political entity are pretty strong on the peacefull (even if disruptive) protests. Not saying that individuals won't go in a different direction but I don't recall any reason to characterise the movement that way.

Thankfully Australia rarely see's violent political protest, there have been instances but they don't represent the norm.

Again to make it clear my point in this thread is that I don't think that either side has a monopoly on any of the behaviours that seem to be the core of most of the criticism of Abbott.

As a strategy it may backfire for him eventually but while Julia and team are putting so many off side it's possibly a winner.

R0bert

Funnily enough I have nothing against Julia personally, but right now
she is going on radio, openly telling porkies.

Her claim just today, that farmers would be compensated by consumers,
is either a massive porky or her "modelling" is not worth the
paper its written on.

Fact is that the majority of farm produce is exported and overseas
consumers are not going to compensate farmers for anything.

So I think its quite reasonable to point out that she is telling
porkies. What major exporters are pointing out is that this
carbon tax is just another nail in the coffin of major efficient
export industries. Next the punters will be saying that they want jobs. Duh.

Dear Banjo,

I don't have a selective memory. I don't deliberately select things
to remember (or forget). However I can put my hand on my heart
and say that I honestly do not recall the viciousness of the behaviour that I witness from the Opposition during the "Question
Time" sessions in Parliament, or the rudeness, interjections, and
carrying on. BTW - I lived overseas during the Whitlam era - so
I wasn't able to witness what went on during that time. It's today's
behaviour that concerns me greatly - especially from a party leader
that seems to have nothing much to offer himself. What a sad situation
this has turned out to be.
Surely this can't be as good as it gets - or the best of what's on offer in Australia.

Hi Lexi,
You are quite right about Tony Abbott, his and other's vitriolic attack on our current PM Julia (for those who cannot spell it properly (ie Juliar).
I posted earlier that the Liberal Party used to be dignified, but since John Howard left (although I didn't like him), the Libs have turned in to an uncontrollable rabble......may they continue with it.....the more they behave like juveniles, the longer the Labor party will stay.
I always was a Liberal supporter, but I look at Abbott and wonder what I was thinking to maybe support them this time, I am glad that I voted for the Labor Party. Oh! and before the professional detractors speak, I will remind them that it is my right to choose whomever I vote for without the crassness of the wannabe armchair politicians (that seem to frequent this forum.) trying to shoot Labor supporters constantly for their choice of Political parties.
NSB

Noisy and Lexi,
Obviously you do not recall Keating and his foul mouthed attacks in the House either.

I do not particularly like Abbott either, but if he stops or overturns a carbon dioxide tax, my distaste for him will deminish somewhat. I expect a liberal government to be the same as was under Howard, which was fair and with good financial control. They were also quietly dispensing with multiculturalism, which was good and they did finally stop the boats. The Libs did construct the rail link from SA to Darwin. Just think what infastructure could have been done with the money wasted by the present government. In NSW the upgrade of the Pacific Highway comes to mind. No shortage of projects everywhere, but it was all wasted.

The carbon tax is just a grab for more money to waste.

The present government has brought its problems upon itself with poor policy and bad management. The PM is an outright liar and cannot be trusted. Her foul language defines her person. May be Ok for blokes on a construction site, but I expect better from any female, especially one in responsible position.

I thought it pertinent at this time to compare 2 former PM's. Howard and Keating.

Keating is currently on the Board of The China Development Bank.

Howard was rejected by a sporting body, in his bid for a spot with the ICC Board.

Howard lost his own seat.

Keating increased his majority in his seat, when he lost Gov't.

Howard's current contribution to the debate is "that he has changed his mind on Emissions Trading
and that Workchoices should be re-instituted and strengthened".

Keating is asking "why should it be important now, to encourage industries that were important 100 yrs ago?".

Stark difference, don't you think ?. It would be even more damaging and traumatic
for Australia, if history were to repeat itself with Tony (Son of Howard) Abbott.

Dear Banjo,

A couple of things:
On both sides of politics we won't know much about this debate
(carbon tax) until the policy is in action, implemented and working for nearly 6 months. Perhaps then the sands will have shifted ever
so gently once in time a lot of Australians will learn for the first
time that the carbon tax does not apply directly to them. By the end
of 2012 the public will have experienced the policy for themselves,
free of anything the pollies might have said. People will be in
a better position to judge whether the tax on polluters was worthwhile and whether the compensation was adequate. Who knows they may also suddenly listen to real information instead of Opposition rhetoric.

As for how good things were under Howard? Let me remind you of a few things. The libs keep referring to the cash surplus of the Howard government as "70 billion in net assets," displaying a difficulty in understanding just what an asset is. One would expect a government in office during a cyclical boom to accumulate a budget surplus, as the
Howard government did, but it did so by leaving us with a severe deficit in our infrastructure and in our institutional, environmental and social capital. The Howard government depleted our assets.

Mr Abbott claims that "since the middle of 2009, interest rate rises have added $500 a month to mortgage repayments." Housing interest rates have indeed risen about 2% since mid 2009, but mid 2009 was the middle of the global financial crisis. It's a credit to the Government that it handled the GFC so well that we didn't have to push official interest rates down to US levels (near zero), which would have caused severe problems as interest rates recovered to normal levels. And, in any event, housing interest rates are now lower than they were when the Howard government left office. Mr Abbott's claim that interest rates will fall if he brings in a large budget surplus, as the Howard government did, shows how little he
understands the working of financial markets.

cont'd ...

One other reminder about Mr Howard. In the lead up to the Iraq War -
Howard dismissed the views of well-informed people, such as retired diplomats, retired members of the Defence Forces, and of the Judiciary, just as he did those of the left opponents of the war.
To be able to brush aside such notables along with the Australian Senate and much of the public service is to display an uncommon ego.
Do we really want a repeat of that in this country?

Abbott is digging his own grave. Opposition is one thing but without policies it is just programmed catterwauling.

Even Peter Reith, who Abbott had no qualms about stabbing in the back, is pushing for more policy based arguments from the Coaltion, cautioning that mindless and relentless 'opposing' may do more harm if overdone.

Substance is sadly lacking in Abbott's direct action proposals. For months he lamented the lack of information about the Carbon Tax while remaining remarkably quiet on his direct action policies. I support direct action but doubt Abbott has the gumption to take it to the level it would need to reduce pollution. It would be tokenism and spin and Clayton's approaches for sure, just wait and see.

For a bit of light relief, here's a piece of satire that has something in it to offend sensitive people of all political persuasions:

>< Like when a mass of Australians latch onto an inane slogan and ride it like the seductive sheep of yore. Little has exemplified our current slump into mouth-breathing idiocy better than 'Juliar'.

"See, we took a word, and then we… changed it a bit… and now it means another thing! That's commentary."

Political observation in this country is like watching a guy slumped on a couch trying to eat pre-chewed food out of his chest hair.

Don't assume I'm a Gillard fan. I mean, I have no wish to see her run over in a rainy street, but nor would I go out of my way to brake that hard. She leads a party that has ditched articulated values for populist flexibility. Regardless of who wins elections, conservatives win on policy. ><

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2800654.html

Juliar is more than just an insulting tag. It defines her, and the lack of trust that Australia has in her. It reminds us of when she looked us in the eye and promised "there will be no carbon tax under the government I lead."

When anyone says Juliar, everyone instantly knows who you mean and why.

By compromising with the greens she chose power over her compact with the people, and the people don't forget.

SM,

This from a man who supports a party whose leader has announced on
television that you can't believe a word he says. And who begged and pleaded for the Greens and the Independents to support him at the last election. He even offered over $1 billion to Independent Wilkie.
They chose Julia Gillard instead. Now to me it sounds a bit like you've got a case of sour grapes. Mr Abbott would have had to compromise had they chosen to support him. They didn't. That's the
only difference in this matter. Get over it.

Lexi, you are a wise woman, and everyone knows that wise women only ever speak the truth :)

The fact remains, that no matter how the polls look now, or the pathetic bleating of Tony to please go to an election now, the fact remains that Julia IS the Prime Minister and Tony is NOT!

One thing is for sure, a lot can happen by the time the next election is due, and that definitely won't happen until 2013.

As long as Tony leads the Labor Party, they won't win the next election (hopefully!).
An ex-priest, wannabe athlete/action man is just too strange!

Two policy u-turns in twenty-four hours - good one Tony!

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-19/tony-abbott-emissions-comment/2800910

Suzeonline:"the fact remains that Julia IS the Prime Minister and Tony is NOT!"

And the sky is blue, the grass is green and what was your point again?

Poirot:"good one Tony!"

Sadly, it just gets worse and worse, on both sides. Can anyone suggest how we happen to have arived at a point in our political history when there is simply no credible potential PM on any side of politics, while our economy has been allowed to become something that miners do and the rest of us watch?

We should be basking in the warm glow of reflected prosperity, with not a care in the world, instead we have a situation in which people face losing their homes because they can't afford historically low mortgage rates; retail is at the lowest ebb in 20 years; construction, especially domestic construction is basically non-existent; manufacturing ditto.

While "unemployment" appears to be low, underemployment is endemic, especially among young men and men over 45, while the public bureaucracy is booming. At the same time we're handing 45% of the money taken in by Government out in the form of social security spending (at a time of "full" employment?), with very little targetting on the basis of need and when such targetting is attempted, people on high incomes whinge and bleat because they're "missing out" and the PM says "I can understand how families on $170,000 can be doing it tough".

So no, Poirot, I can't support your "good one". It's a tragedy and it's going to get a lot worse, simply because neither side has anybody of any ability who can get past the mass of mediocrities that infest both sides, not to mention the fairies at the bottom of the garden that Gillard has saddled the ALP with. Gawd 'elp us.

Well actually, Antiseptic, you have no right to make so much sense so early in the morning.... good post.
My "good one" comment was a last minute toss in before I turned the lights out and went to sleep.
I happen to agree with you about the no credible PM situation - how is it possible in a country with 22 million people that it's come down to this?

Oh, I don't know. Malcolm Turnbull would make a great Labor PM ;)

Loved that link Morganzola.

Like where did J Gillard's personality go after her swearing in by the GG?

And this:

"The Government has no vested interest in making tobacco or gambling less profitable - it makes revenue off that profit. But it does have a vested interested in lowering smoking rates, and illnesses, and health costs, because it represents the people. It has a vested interest in reducing problem gambling and social harm, because it represents the people.

It does not have a vested interest in ruining mining, because that sector supports the economy that keeps the Government out of trouble. It does have a vested interest in getting a decent slice of revenue made by selling assets belonging to its people.

Governments, then, have some sort of agenda other than their own enrichment. Companies have an existence entirely predicated on profit. Their arguments to protect that are easily punctured. You can't Glad Wrap a dog sh1t and call it a crème brulee.

But in the PC gentility of the age in which we live, media sources mistake impartiality for timidity. Being impartial doesn't mean sitting quietly while everyone has a say. It means interrogating any point that may need it, regardless of where it comes from. Instead we get 'balance', defined as 50-50 airtime between the nine scientists who back climate change and the one mathematician who doesn't."

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2800654.html

And the likes of Abbott is our alternative PM?

Where did Australia's IQ go?

Maybe we never had much to begin with, maybe we were always just the 'lucky country'.

Gotta go, my chickens are roosting.

It looks as the Labor heavy hitters have abandoned Juliar to sell the toxic tax by herself.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/labor-big-hitters-let-gillard-sell-tax/story-e6freooo-1226097877738

God forbid that they should go down on the Gillard Titanic. Labor backbenchers fearful of losing their seats are refraining from mentioning the tax at all in their electorates.

Juliar herself is fearful of engaging directly with her public after being confronted at a Brisbane Mall and being admonished for lying to the public. She has avoided further mall tours.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/carbon-plan/pm-only-selling-tax-in-alp-seats/story-fn99tjf2-1226097872884

I am actually feeling sorry for her.

"I am actually feeling sorry for her."

Words from the ministeriaLiar - thanks for the laugh Shadow.

@Poirot: Well actually, Antiseptic, you have no right to make so much sense so early in the morning

My thoughts exactly.

I agree with Antiseptic's take on things. It is a sad state of affairs at present - politically. As a leader Julia Gillard developed her own brand of consensus politics which basically entailed letting others run the show. Perhaps this was because her predessor - Kevin Rudd had the reputation for inflexibility and not consulting with anybody else (and look what happened to him). Or perhaps because of the perception of illegitimacy regarding the way she assumed power - she didn't have the authority to assert her views or to be herself.
This left her looking hopelessly out of her depth on the international stage and somewhat spineless on the domestic stage.
However, we'll have to wait and see what develops next. 2013 is a long way off yet - and in politics things can change in a flash.

cont'd ...

I forgot to add - regarding the conservatives bleating on about the PM's "broken promise" and "she lied," mantra. Broken promise? All parties promised things before the last election, However the electorate rejected a Gillard Government AND an Abbott Government and gave the nation, eventually, a Coalition Government of Labor, Greens, and Independents. Surely it was obvious during the horse-trading after the polls had closed that whoever led whatever coalition was formed would be unable to do everything they could do in a majority government. The conservatives and the Murdoch media continually saying
"She lied," and "broken promise" does not make it so. It's merely a
political tactic - granted a clever one.

Lexi

>> This left her looking hopelessly out of her depth on the international stage <<

I agree with you on Julia's lack of success on the domestic front, however, I was impressed with her address to USA congress and other international speeches, particularly as Julia has admitted that international politics were not her forte. I saw shades of the old Julia watching her deliver the USA congressional speech.

She has less than 2 years in which to find the 'real' Julia, if she wishes to lead Labor to another term in office. Tony Abbott remains her best asset if she would only call him out on his many fabrications and backflips.

Dear Ammonite,

You've made a good point regarding the PM's International expertise.
And as far as Tony Abbott is concerned - I couldn't agree with you more. I wish that the PM and her colleagues called Mr Abbott to account for his statements - and show them up for what they really are - empty rhetoric.

Lexi,

Regarding "broken promises", we should be mindful that it was the Howard Government who introduced completely new terms into the Australian vernacular. I mean, everyone now gives a knowing nod of understanding when the terms "core' and "non-core" are mentioned in connection with government policy.

That's quite a feat of truth juggling when you come to think of it.

Dear Poirot,

Excellent points. I'd forgotten about them.

Antiseptic <"Suzeonline:"the fact remains that Julia IS the Prime Minister and Tony is NOT!"
And the sky is blue, the grass is green and what was your point again?"

And your point is?
I am amazed you could drag yourself away from the anti-female threads you love so much.
Mind you, what with Julia being our first female Prime Minister, no wonder you are commenting..

Poirot, Lexi, Ammonite, and others , its important to remember that drifting down the ideological pathway that Howard took us, during his years, (his cronies still virulent in the Liberal Party we see today) is the last thing this country needs now.

If we really consider the relative beginning of the Howard Reign in 96, the economy was golden. The fruits of this were handed to cronies; public infrastructure and wealth was neglected and sold off, especially the profitable bits. E.G Telstra etc, and skills were allowed to run down and bleed to other countries. Power shifted from the public to the private sector.

I remember a country heading for the future in 96. They say Howard took us back 20 yrs, it was more like 50.
Abbott represents a return too this. No matter who leads the Labor Party.

"no right to make so much sense so early in the morning"

The "young turks" in my lab indulge in obviously debilitating (legal) substance abuse and similarly do their unaccountable best in the wee hours.

Anti just goes them one better, covering performance, debilitation, and further, (like many of us here) lacking the supposed youth of the aforementionted turks.

Rusty

They say Howard took us back 20 yrs..
Thinker 2,
I think you're not thinking clearly. I'm inclined to say Howard prevented or at least attempted to save us from the decline that's evident all around us. Just look at the countries that you want to catch up to. They're not so great now are they in comparison to our isle.
All throughout history people with vision have been dragged down by the masses who can't see more than a minute into the future.
Just look at the pre GST furore. Now look at the post GST situation. Where do you really think Australia would be now without the GST ?
Compare that with the present global warming shamozle. It has no future. It amounts to nothing more than trying to undo what's already happened & you can't undo history, can you now ? There is a huge difference between vision & dreaming you know.
Think, Thinker.

@ individual:

You realise, of course, that your arguments with respect to the GST apply equally well to the Carbon Tax?

"All throughout history people with vision have been dragged down by the masses who can't see more than a minute into the future."

How far into the future does your AGW denialist perspective look?

morganzola,
I don't believe that there are any denialists. I think everyone agrees that there is a climate change. It's what this federal Government proposes to do about it is what causes the rift.
It's like putting new brakes on bus that has already crashed.
What is needed is a new bus & driver & smarter passengers.

This cartoon says it all:

http://www.kudelka.com.au/2011/07/dont-ask/

I also like these ones:

http://media.crikey.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/spectator.jpg
http://austeaparty.com.au/web/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/aaaaatYwxL.gif
http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/mly/lowres/mlyn1189l.jpg
http://www.inkcinct.com.au/web-pages/cartoons/2011/2011-408--political-fortunes-golf-.gif
http://www.inkcinct.com.au/web-pages/cartoons/2011/2011-369--ALP-direction-.gif
http://www.inkcinct.com.au/web-pages/cartoons/2011/2011-311---carbon-tax-starter's-orders.gif
http://www.inkcinct.com.au/web-pages/cartoons/2011/2011-302--Julia-Gillard-planking-.gif
http://www.inkcinct.com.au/web-pages/cartoons/2011/2011-286--sweeping-the-refugee-problem-under-the-carpet-.gif