I read a funny post on another blog. A story of an ALP MP turning up at parliament house with a pig on a piece of string.

The pig was crapping all over the place and another MP asked what he was going to do with the pig. Keep it replied the first MP. What about the stench, asked the second MP?

Well, the pig will just have to get used to it!

Dear Shadow Minister,

Interesting thread. So you believe that Rob Oakeshott and
Tony Windsor should now share in Mr Thomson's odium
for protecting him?

Then I assume you would also apply that standard to
Mr Abbott regarding Bill Heffernan.

Or is there one set of behavioural rules when it comes
to the Liberal Party and a different set for all others.

As you stated in your opening post, "Talk is cheap, but with
these two, I am happy to bet that self-interest trumps
stated values hands down."

I would say you're spot on.
You could not have stated it better - regarding Mr Abbott and
the recent - Bill Heffernan scenario. Let's see if you turn
out to be right.

FP72E,

Assumption of innocence only applies to criminal trials, not civil, not public opinion, and not FWA investigations.

That Thomson spent union money on prostitutes is beyond reasonable doubt, that he used union money to promote his own personal political ambitions is also beyond doubt. That he has not yet gone to criminal trial is precisely because of Labor protection.

Lexi,

Are you desperate enough to try and compare Heffernan to Thomson? But at least you agree that Oakeshott and Windsor's protection of Thomson also taints them with the stench of Thomson's corruption.

Dear Shadow Minister,

As you stated in your opening post:

"Talk is cheap...I am happy to bet that self-interest
trumps stated values hands down."

Thanks for proving the point.
In your and Mr Abbott's case - self interest
does indeed trump stated values hands down.

Lexi,

Before charging at windmills compare apples with apples. Heffernan has had allegations levelled against him. No changes, no civil action. Heffernan, and Slipper both acted inappropriately, and both were stipped of parliamentary positions by the liberals. The coalition is simply asking that Slipper face the same consequences for his action. There is no inconsistency there.

Thomson has had a investigation against him provide vast quantities of evidence that he has pilfered hundreds of thousands of dollars from the lowest paid, and deserves a far more serious sanction.

Bob Ellis on Craig Thomson:

http://www.ellistabletalk.com/2012/05/20/the-innocence-of-craig-thomson/#comment-9644