Houlebecke, you have an interesting topic here. I believe we should respect our PM for the role she has in our society, but not necessarily for all the decisions she makes.

What many people forget is that she is not making these decisions in isolation. She has a parcel of politicians in her party who vote on any decisions to be made.
I believe she does the best she can with what resources she has.

Runner, Gillard doesn't have to answer to your God or anyone else's invisible man in the sky, as she is an atheist ...

Wobbles>> Do you really think things will miraculously change under new management or will we just swap one set of complaints for new ones?<<

Wobbs it will probably be one set of complaints for another. I looked for positive change in NSW with O'Farrells election, but have been bitterly disapointed. Regarding Howard, I had no time for him either.

Houelly, yes I'm sure I could do better, & yes I am bl00dy sure I would never compromise my principles. You see I don't want a job, just to have the job, I only want it if I can do it as I believe is right, & to the best of my ability.

If that meant I was chucked out quick time so be it. I would be chucked with my principles in tact, & my flag flying.

Gillard doesn't even have a flag to fly, helps you to get lower than a snake, if you have nothing sticking up. I would be utterly ashamed if any of my kids turned out as bad as her.

Abbott is not a known quantity as is Gillard. I believe he is probably an honorable man. It is almost a test of an honorable man to be attacked by a planed disinformation program by Labor & the left. They have had no honour for so long, they know they can't survive against it, & start to smear. I found it interesting to watch their campaign against the "Honest" John title. It took years, but they did it.

Like I did with Gillard, I will give him the opportunity to prove himself. He would not have to be anything special to be an improvement on Gillard. Weather he could come up to the Howard standard will only be known given time.

*It is now seen as the entrench prejudice against women.*

Gawd I love it. The feminists misuse the word for a few years and
now it should have a new meaning! We'll just invent it as we go
along.

Now if somebody dares to mention any kind of biological differences
between men and women, they will no doubt have a new label!

Perhaps you should go back to the psychologist who first came up with
the word "misogynist" and understand what she actually meant by it
and why, before misusing language to suit your semantics, as
you go along.

Respect is earned. Neither Gillard or Abbott have earned my respect.
In fact all I can think of is their many cases of poor judgement

I actually hated Howard with a vengeance, but I see now in hindsight he runs rings around the dregs that are left.

Even if you didn't like his politics, he had beliefs, and was consistent even when they were unpopular.

The place wasn't such a circus when he was around and I cant imagine it being this bad with him in the mix.

'Houelly, yes I'm sure I could do better, & yes I am bl00dy sure I would never compromise my principles. You see I don't want a job, just to have the job, I only want it if I can do it as I believe is right, & to the best of my ability.'

Why didn't you then? Is it because you knew it was impossible and that you would get chucked out? Even if you didn't compromise on your principles, you'd have to select the lesser of two evils all the time.

If you really wanted to effect some change in an area, you'd have to sacrifice something. Or are you happy with no change and no sacrifice of principles? I think a man has to be pragmatic, and it's a bit of a cop out to stand by your principles in order to avoid the tough calls.

I think the real thing missing in the whole mix is transparency and genuine communication. I'd love to have the bare faced truth, the polictical suicide honesty.

Imagine,

'Well I know I said no carbon tax, but I bent over for the greens because I want to be in government to achieve XYZ.'

' I Know there's no weapons of mass destruction, but we really need to bend over for the Americans because of XYZ.'

I suppose people know this deep down anyway (Which is why Assange is harmless), it would be nice to have it affirmed though.

How ridiculous our judgement of these individuals, these humans. These are people.
Houellebecq,
I think you understand "die du mir so ich dir". If they want us to treat them with more compassion then shouldn't they do so to us ?
I think far too many in high office do not have the integrity to hold their office. If they did we'd be a much better society.