There's always more than one side of the story - regardless
of what the Newscorp papers tell you, so,
before Mr Abbott and the Coalition are given sainthood,
here's a small reminder:

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/lies-damned-lies-and-australias-future-20130906-2taav.html

Foxy, "before Mr Abbott and the Coalition are given sainthood"

Was Jardine K. Jardine trying to do that? Or was he simply acknowledging that Abbott used the available, practical and cheap alternative?

I thought too that Jardine K. Jardine's reference to Neo-Feudalism could warrant some discussion at least.

Dear OTB,

Why don't you ask Jardine what he was attempting to
do? I would not presume to speak on his behalf.

My reply was not directed at him - otherwise I would
have addressed the post to him. But thanks for your concern.
And, by all means discuss whatever issues you wish on this
thread.

Cheers.

Dear Poirot, (Light of my feeble life),

>My good man, if I may be so bold, can't you tell a poodle on an IPA leash when you see one?<

Who or what is an/the IPA?
(Independent Philosophical Acolytes?)
(Intellectual People's Association?)
If it's providing any worthwhile guidance for 'the Tone' it must be something pretty special - since he's such a helluva good guy!

Oh, could you mean the 'Institute of Public Affairs':
"Australia's leading free market think tank. Promoting public policy based on individual liberty, limited government, free markets, and peaceful international ..."

From 'The Age', of 25 August 2013 (extracts):
"A source said the IPA would maybe have only one donor among Australia's top 100 listed companies. The IPA's current make-up is a marked change from a few decades ago, when it was supported by large blue-chip companies and a who's who of the Australian business establishment."

"Mr Roskam (Liberal party member, John Roskam) confirmed it had received money from a Gina Rinehart-backed organisation, Australians for Northern Development and Economic Vision. The IPA collaborated with Mrs Rinehart to promote northern development through special cuts to taxes and regulation.
Both major parties now broadly support that policy."

So, is it because John Howard and Tony Abbott have both had nice things to say about the Institute, or the Institute's evaluation of the prospects for the development of our country's north (and possible lobbying in this regard) that causes shock, horror, 'Reds under the Beds'? Or is it the Institute's 'hard line' on climate change action? (Or, is there simply no place for a 'think tank' in Oz? No place for 'alternative' ideas?)
'Liberal' thinking, or liberalised thinking; such 'arrogance'??

Tony is no puppet (or poodle), and I think he deserves a fair go, before all and sundry go running around crying 'crucify him'.

david f,

"Now I have some hope that Abbott will be different in other ways from past politicos. He's off to a better start than I expected."

Poirot wrote: Gawd!

This guy gets elected on nothing but a pocketful of slogans and loony tunes policies (PPL and boat buy-back....Hockey waves around 8 sheets of paper as an excuse for "costings")...and an intelligent gent like you reckons he's just fine.

Dear Poirot,

Where did I write that he was just fine? The question asked how did we feel about that particular act of Abbott. I don't have to either automatically approve or automatically disapprove of everything he does. The question did not concern his lack of costings or anything else concerning his election. It concerned his decision as to where he decided to stay pending the refurbishment of the lodge. Why did you bring in extraneous matter which had nothing to do with the question?

I hope he will make other decisions that seem good to me.

david f.,

"Why did you bring in extraneous matter which had nothing to do with the question?"

I don't know what came over me...sometimes I can't help myself.

........

On the whole, it's pointless commenting here at the mo. The place appears to be overrun (more than usual) with gullible right-wingers.

Think I'll mosey around elsewhere for a while.....