Dear Peter,

Tony Abbott has been all
too happy to embrace the siren call of irrational rage and
conspiracy theory in his quest to tear down Julia Gillard
and get his hands on the office of Prime Minister. It was Abbott
who marshalled disquiet among the climate denialist factions of
the Liberal Party to challenge Malcolm Turnbull in November 2009,
when a deal with Kevin Rudd on the CPRS had already been done.
It's Abbott who has regularly tweaked his message so as to appeal
to those who don't believe in climate change.

Believing the science? Protecting the environment? Perhaps not
burning quite so much coal? Hardly a radical agenda as Malcolm
Turnbull pointed out. And that's the problem with climate
change politics in 2011. In large part because of politicians
like Abbott the issue has become so toroughly politicised that
many conservative voters today really don't believe Australia's
top scientists. As stated previosuly they really do see a
sincere attempt by the government to embrace a moderate reduction
in Australia's Greenhouse Gas Emissions as a kind of conspiracy to
withdraw liberties and increase taxation. And in short they are
irrationally angry. And one of the key stokers of the conservative
rage has been the utter political expediency of conservative
politicians like the leader of the Opposition and his cheerleaders
in the media. Driven by ruthless ambition, and his determination
to gain the top job no matter at what cost, Abbott in recent times
has entertained few qualms in his pursuit of the government, to the
degree where he has been willing to attack with virtually any
weapon available. He has talked down the economy in an effort to
exaggerate the impact of the government's carbon tax, even arguing it
will cause house prices to fall. The sad thing is there have been
few in the mainstream media willing to hold Abbott to account for
his wild statements. Aided and abbetted by journalists who've combined to report unchallenged claims that totally contradict the
facts. And as we know Abbott's self-confusedly tendency is to make things up under pressure.

Just popping in - have got a hectic week-end to finish.

Great response and some good comments to ponder.

My thoughts yet to be revealed.

One thing, I'd encourage everyone to think about the message ... rather than the messenger herself, or her employer.

After all, we don't want to censor them - do we?

Cheers

An opinion piece by Annabel Crabb who has consistently supported Labor and the carbon tax is not a game changer.

Try:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/union-joins-business-to-savage-alp/story-fn59niix-1226100966348

Businesses who are normally quiet on the issue of politics came out against the carbon tax and slam the government as heavy handed,incompetent, and lacking legitimacy. The ETU and TWU (labor affiliated) have both come out against the carbon tax, and have called for at least one incompetent minister (workplace relations) to be removed.

And this:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/labor-all-tied-up-in-red-and-green-tape-20110724-1hv8i.html

Where Juliar is accused of breathtaking dishonesty with respect to her claims that China and India are working to reduce emissions.

Whatever your politics may dictate to you, Shadow Minister, it is extremely poor form to use the term "Juliar".

>>Where Juliar is accused of breathtaking dishonesty...<<

I wish that you and your fellow-travellers would cease the practice, which is thoroughly distasteful and entirely unnecessary.

It is at base an extreme form of impoliteness, and shows that you are the sort of individual who chooses personal insult and smear tactics over civilised discussion.

It is no defence that all politics in this country is conducted at the same gutter level, or that you hear the term bandied around all the time on talk-back radio.

You should be above such cheap-jack soundbites.

Shouldn't you?

Very good 'shadow minister' - the 'bait and switch' that is.

Put your assertion on the line, 'shadow' - show us where the author "has consistently supported Labor"

and

"the carbon tax is not a game changer."

In fact, if you can objectively do some homework, you will find Annabel Crabb has consistently been straight down the line (what every good journalist does) - critiquing and criticising the government, as well as the Opposition, on various issues.

You may prefer to hear what you want to hear from the Andrew Bolts, or Piers Ackermans, or the Alan Jones' of the world, 'shadow' - but that is your own prejudices coming to the fore, as usual.

Most people, 'shadow', think the carbon tax is a game changer - even Annabel Crabb and Tony Abbott.

What I take away from her article is that; while Julia Gillard has a lot to explain, Tony Abbott can 'flip-flop' from one assertion to another, say whatever he thinks his audience wants to hear (with a nudge-nudge, wink-wink), demonstrates he has no understanding of critical contempory issues and dismisses experts in their respective fields as complete incompetants when it is he, the very potential "leader" of our country, that for all intents and purposes - is increasingly being seen as a laughing-stock fool by who would be, his international counterparts.

Simply astounding!

Yet, the very people he intends to 'lead", see him as a veritable 'messiah' where nothing he says is wrong, least of all contradictory or just plain stupid.

Now, rather than employing your typical 'bait-n-sitch' strategy (you have ample opportunity to start your own thread - which you do, often) why not respect this thread and address the topic:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-22/crabb-freed-from-facts-abbott-goes-ballooning/2806640

To be clear ... I challenge you to not kill the messenger, but to address the message.

I honestly don't understand the confusion and outrage about Mr Rabbit. Anyone with a modicom of intelligence knows that he doesn't believe in climate change and the coalition 'policy' is just a formality akin to recording free-to-air TV being technically 'illegal'.

Why is it so hard to understand?

The crux of the issue, is why are you laborites all so easily fooled by a governmnet distracting you all from it's performance by harping on about the *opposition* leader like it is at all relevant. Sorry, no cigar. The opposition is not governing. The ALP is. I reserve my scruitiny for the people actually governing. I'm no fool.

Maybe it's because I don't watch much TV, but I haven't even noticed anything about Mr Rabbit, but all I hear about in the leftie herald is people bemoaning Mr Rabbit and acting like he's some kind of boogie man and that he's everywhere. I'm not interested in sideshows.

It reminds me of South Park when Cochran wins with the Chewbacca defence and that guy's head explodes when Johnnie C holds up a monkey and says 'look at the monkey, look at the sillly monley!'.

Gillard constantly uses the Chewbacca defence and you all swallow it hook line and sinker. I cant honestly remember The Rodent ever mentioning the opposition, he was too busy governing, and the media spotlight was on the government, and the opposition was this vague notion of some group of people that may govern years down the track.

Peter Garrett was honest. 'We'll just change it all when we get in'. All oppositions do.

This is how the system works. The governmnet is there to judge (They ARE THE GOVERNMENT) and you lot are obsessed with the opposition? I just don't get it.

There is a little hint for the dumbies at the very end of Annabel's article, the wink? Huh? Huh?

Man and you lot think the Telegraph reading pikeys are dumb!