If a high-powered woman is ­described as the “top dog’’ and her deeply personal struggle to fall pregnant dragged into the public domain to score cheap parliamentary points, is it sexism? For most feminists, and just about every labor member, the answer sadly seems to depend on their politics. As Crikey’s Bernard Keane noted on Twitter: “I see lots of progressive thinks (sic) sexist attacks on Peta Credlin are OK.

After all the outrage when Abbott made a speech while a crowd member held up a "Ditch the witch" sign, the attack on Peta Credlin should have been met with outrage, but the silence was deafening. The "progressive" side of politics had the opportunity to show that their principles on sexism extended to all women and failed miserably.

"Mr Abbott is not a new figure on the public field. He has many years of record to stand by and those are the things that people rightly will judge him on," Ms Roxon said. "I think it’s clear from these sorts of stories that the Liberal Party research must be showing that Mr Abbott does have a problem with women, and that he is trying to do something about it."

Nothing to do with the left. This is a fight between rightards. The left can just sit back and enjoy.

i believe this will go before the court
warning do not get caught up in this/redirection..from the budgetry woes.

the lkeft is silent cause the right went extreeM
AND THE WOMAN THING WAS EXTREEM LEFT..let get into the biggest cause of infertility in woman..is clamidia/next its diet food health related
but iun her case i think ITS HER AGE..and all that photocopy chimical that accumulates under the glass ceiling,.

oh your right
this could be a fun topic
she hasnt hasd vexposure to gmo?..[3 rd generation=sterile]
how healthy is her workolace..ius she using the right method?..see that we are needding definitiver stEPS TO FULLY ENHANCE OUR DNA EVOLUTION/SHE MAY HAVE RETARDED HERE/OR HER SPIRIT MIGHT BE REPELLING AND WILLING SPIRIT..TO ENJOIN INTO LIVING WITHIN HER.

she no doudt hasnt recieved any 'govt'[public service free lunches?]
is her job so stressfull it kills the unborn[how many public serevants having 'concieviung'; issues in parlement house[them undser ground houses accumulate toxix stuff [how much time she spending in the archives

yes she will sue someone
be carefull/never get between a blogger and his belobed party ,making red flags out of \black widows..get all the facts before commenting.

Hi Mikk & 579,

So that's established then, that it's sexist to wink, look at your watch, or wear a blue tie. We should jump up and down when these occur. But we should be silent when a woman is put under the microscope for her fertility, or for the - presumably unjustified - high position she may have attained. Or, more historically, a man compares a woman to jar of mussels.

Yes, the left will sit back and say nothing.

Feminism should not be just a 'woman's thing', we should all be outraged when women are impugned or shamed or attacked, no matter what part of the political spectrum they may adhere to.

Joe

'Nothing to do with the left. This is a fight between rightards. The left can just sit back and enjoy. '

to right Mikk all about self interest for the left rarely if ever about principle.

Dear SM,

The Silence of the Left?

There is no silence.

The personal attacks on Ms Credlin were made by Clive Palmer
who refused to apologise for them. He stand alone on this
issue. The Leader
of the Opposition - Bill Shorten has
described Palmer's attack on Ms Credlin as, "Unwarranted and
Wrong." And, his Deputy, Tanya Plebersek has also made it
quite clear that of course Mr Palmer can debate policy but
he should not debate staff members in doing so.

Ms Plebersek said, "The Abbott Government's Paid Parental
Leave Scheme is bad policy - (ask any Liberal or National MP),
it's extravagant and unfair, and its on that basis my
colleagues and I have made the case against it - on the policy,
not the personal."

Clive Palmer is on his own in this matter, and he has been
criticised for his remarks by all sides of politics.
Accusing the so called "Left" in this matter just doesn't
wash.

What a disingenuous crock of ....

Dont come here with you fake concern and try to use this incident as a weapon against those you dislike. That is even more disgusting than the sexism.
You people are full of it and you think we are fools to fall for your confected outrage with its sinister ulterior motives.
You never protested the sick things said about julia gillard and it is a bit rich to come here and pretend that you give a toss now one of your own has been insulted.

You dont care.
All you care about is a chance to bash the "leftys".
And it was one of your own who said it anyway. Palmer is hardly a lefty is he?

Whats next rabbott insults the queen(again) and its labors fault because they want a republic?
Poor people being blamed for hokey being fat?
Leftys to blame for the GFC?

Your motives are transparent and disgusting. No one believes one word of your LIES and your pretend outrage. Its just sickeningly obvious what you are doing and you are demeaning yourselves by trying.

I do believe that Ms Credlin is a Liberal party enforcer for her husband, the head of the Liberal Party. She tell Abbott what the faceless men behind the scenes want done & Abbott does it or else he's out of there.

its a complicated issue/clive is both right and wrong
but its a reightness THAT ISNT BEING MENTIONED[ie public servants have allways had that or betrter/but now its going 'public'.[after the public service been licking the teat for all its worth

i would agree/that mothers milk is essential/and the mothers touch/etc
but feeding the bottle and were [paying for you who in ten years earns a million buck..get real..thats where clive is correct[right topic/wrong point\by what right do public servants vote themselves better thasn we the ones sereved[we are your masters]..and now ya even taKEN ..AWAY YOUR PENSION CASHCOWS[IE THE P[IBLIC ASSETS YJE SSERVANTS HAVE PRIVATISED

YES CLIVE GO FOR IT/THEY DARE NOT FIGHT BACK
they cant/they been caught hand in cookie jar[regardless]
as tosee the books..they wont give you seervants/then attack the system/designed run bythe autopcrats/that cant self achieve/spo sit there lutrking up 55 thousand dolar pensions[cause they helped set up the cvash cow

audit the govt
vote nonbe of the above
issue shsares in the p[iblic util;ities that allow the lowestr 50 percent users to get free water free power

get rid of public servaqnts
and grants[the two biggest costs of govt]

ya want kids take ;leave/use up ya holiday pqay flexitime youe duty..man you nest fearthers sure got it great/the endless govt grants..and board seats and quango funds...too clever by half

no she wont complain/the systems leeches got too much to loose.
THATS THE LAST THING YOU WOULD NEED TO HEAR CHEERLEADER..of the them/that hide in the shadows.

No Foxy, there was a silence from the left until someone pointed out
how quiet they were, then and only then did the left speak out.
I watched it happening and had to be amused.
Look, it is not unusual at all for the left to say nothing when things
are done by those on the left that would cause immediate outrage if done by the right.
It happens all the time. Perhaps the left is just starting to realise it.

What a bunch of hypocrites. Every left whinger has completely failed to personally make a comment on Clive Palmer's sexism, not even Foxy. I saw the same feeble response on Twitter. It was also factually incorrect, because as a highly paid public servant Credlin already gets paid maternity leave worth as much or more than the PPL.

Every tiny PC misstep Abbott has made has been shouted from the roof tops as a sign that he hates women and what do we get when there is an outrageous case of sexism against a liberal staffer. Sweet stuff all.

Shorten called it "Wrong" (don't over react) Plibersek in essence said nothing, nor did any labor MP.

All of you have lost any credibility on the issue. Be sure that I will be there to ram it down your throats next time you bring up anything against Abbott.

It is definitely not something that the national purveyor of 'Progressive' political correctness, the ABC, would ever 'fact check'.

Dear SM and Bazz,

Let me set the record straight once again for you: -

Mr Palmer on Monday used a Parliamentary debate to lash out
at the government's Paid Parental Leave Scheme. His comments
provoked a backlash from ALL sides of politics.
I repeat, from all sides of politics.

From the Opposition Leader Bill Shorten, who described Mr
Palmer's attack on Ms Credlin as, "unwarranted and wrong,"
His Deputy, Tania Plibersek who made it quite clear that
Mr Palmer can debate policy, but he should not debate
staff members in doing so. Then there's Labor's Education
Spokeswoman - Kate Ellis who stated that she found Mr Palmer's
views "Wrong, inappropriate, unnecessary, and low." Just to
name a few.

The comments by Mr Palmer were made in Parliament on Monday -
and the reaction was instant from all sides of politics.
Mr Abbott did not react to Mr Palmer until Wednesday.
However, that doesn't really matter. What does matter is that
MPs from all sides of politics do not agree with Mr Palmer's
comments regarding Ms Credlin. And that in all fairness
is what matters, and is something that is recorded in
news reports found on the web.

BTW - I would have thought that my position would have been
quite clear from my earlier post on this matter.
Of course I don't agree with the premise of what Mr Palmer
stated regarding Ms Credlin. I have family members who went
through the IVF procedure (We now have a lovely one year old grandson - as a result). So I definitely can identify with how
hurtful Mr Palmer's remarks would have been to Ms Credlin.
And MP Ellis is absolutely correct - they were "Wrong,
inappropriate, unnecessary, and low!"

Dear Foxy,

Thank you, you carry the weight of many of the left on your shoulders ;) But perhaps the critics are referring to the silence of the Fcuk Abbott crew, and the Socialist-Opportunist Alliance.

Joe

When the Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, announced his new cabinet it was broad brushstroke. A day later, we discover Mr Abbott will be responsible for women's policies and programs, with the assistance of West Australian senator Michaelia Cash, as minister assisting.

His reason? "This will ensure that these key whole-of-government priorities are at the centre of government." And the real agenda? To ensure that he has final control over decisions which affect women. His values align with a society which says women are not equal. It's not just that they are not the same as men, they don't deserve equality.

At first appearance, it is not exactly like appointing a rumoured climate change denier as the Minister for Science. Or an anti-vaccination fruit loop – if those people still exist – as the Minister for Health.

It's much worse. Here's why. Mr Abbott believes men and women have different abilities – and he considers that position to be evidence-based

Definitely not the self-righteous rolling thunder that was apparent everywhere when Penny Wong became very, very sensitive and even more upset over a little meow in Parliament. What did Tanya Plibersek and others say then?

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

You'd have to ask the critics.

I wouldn't presume to speak on their behalf.

If we're going to bring up past events -
it's worth remembering the party fundraising
dinner for Liberal Candidate Mal Brough which
featured a Menu including - "Julia Gillard
Kentucky Fried Quail - small breasts, hugh thighs
and a Big Red Box..."

Mr Abbott described the Menu as "tacky" but refused
to withdraw support for Mal Brough who had organised
the event.

Therefore before pointing fingers - about "hurtful"
remarks -
the Coalition's track record also needs to be considered.
And if we're going to go down the Left/Right divide -
then where was the righteous indignation from the Right
on this matter?

The silence of the left on many issues is deafening.

The progressive left constantly berates the public on the evils of the big end of town. The bankers, the miners and the millionaires. We are also constantly reminded of the value of freedom of speech, freedom of the press and freedom of choice.

Can the progressive left please explain why is it OK to be a miner as long as you are Clive Palmer, why is it OK to be a millionaire if you are Kevin Rudd, Malcolm Turnbull or Clive palmer? Or why it is OK to be a banker but only if you are Malcolm Turnbull?

Whilst we are in question mode. Can the progressive left explain why it is OK for the ABC, Fairfax and The Guardian to freely express their opinions but not the journalists employed by The Murdoch Media Group? Why is it OK for the progressive left to howl at sexism and “call it out” when they see it but fail to call it out when those expressing it are “aligned” with the left of politics?

The lack of explanation of such matters leaves the progressives and their fellow travellers with the minor problem of abject hypocrisy, but hey, that’s what they do best. Unless of course anyone can step up to answer these questions?

Hello?

rubbish, SM..

On twitter there are plenty of lefties condenming Palmer's words re Credlin.

I couldn't give a toss about her fertility, myself.

I'm more interested in her being the architect and facilitator behind the Abbott Govt's cretinous and dumb policies.

Take a look at consumer sentiment.

http://www.businessinsider.com.au/australias-budget-has-knocked-consumer-sentiment-out-2014-5

"Australian Consumer Sentiment Is Plummeting, Even Faster Than During The GFC"

So let's concentrate less on the PM's CoS's fertility - and more on her (and the IPA's) dearth of economic nous.

Shadow Minister has now been CAUGHT OUT as a hypocritical misogynist. It took me just 4 minutes to find these past posts from him ......

"Now it's time for the red haired weasel to face the music"

"Juliar may have slept around"

"Was she so stupid"

"Juilar is a complete idiot"

But, but, but .... when a woman from SM's side is picked on, he is *UTTERLY OUTRAGED* (totally feigned of course) and starts an entire new topic about it. The Shadow Minister misogynist doesn't give a damn in hell about Peta Credlin, as this thread is merely for the purpose of his ignorant criticism of the left.

The best comment anyone can make about Shadow Minister's "fake" topic is ...... "HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA"

Well done Madame Poirot,

It has become a very popular expression, “to segue”.

“ the act of changing smoothly from one state or situation to another or the act of passing from one state or place to the next”. (we used to call it obfuscation, remember?)

Well done, that was better then your normal “rhetoric”. Congratulations.

Have you finally found a replacement?

Did Clive know she was pregnant or in the IVF Programme? If he didn't then what does it have to do with what was said. He could have used any woman in the area at the time as an example.

She is a stooge for her Husband & the Liberal Party backroom boys anyway. Abbott is only a Puppet for them.

Dear Foy,

From memory, Mal Brough did not know about that stupid menu, which wasn't even circulated. Perhaps Poirot can correct me or - look ! a Liberal politician doing something !

Joe

nhoj,

"...The Shadow Minister misogynist doesn't give a damn in hell about Peta Credlin, as this thread is merely for the purpose of his ignorant criticism of the left"

Says it all!

Having expanded my interactions of late, it's become clear just how light-weight is our Shadow Minister.

Jayb,

"She is a stooge for her Husband & the Liberal Party backroom boys anyway. Abbott is only a Puppet for them."

Couldn't agree more.

Foxy, I am sure that that menu was well and truly discussed here and
that you were very aware that it was not the menu actually used.
I think you are being politically precious !

Again,

The left whingers who flew into apoplectic fits of outrage, yet once again not one of them will proffer one iota of support for Credlin after a blatantly sexist attack. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Nhoj,

If you "quote" me but don't use the words as I stated them, this makes you a liar. You are biggest fake and misogynist on the thread.

And yes Juliar has displayed stupidity, deceit, and bedded crooked union officials and other unsavoury characters. Discussing publicly available facts is not sexism, or are you going to pretend that Juliar was a nun.

I don't think there is anything particularly wrong with criticising any politician for doing or saying something stupid or duplicitous, Labor or Liberal, male or female.

However, and slightly off-topic, I am concerned that this topic gets so much comment compared to this simultaneous thread:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16364

concerning the imminent hanging of a Christian woman in Sudan, as soon as her baby is weaned, i.e. when she turns two years old. The woman had to give birth while shackled, and will remain in Omdurman prison for ..... oh, just a bit under two years now.

Her crime ? She married a Christian and has been raised - and considers herself - a Christian because her mother was a Christian, and she was raised with her mother. But according to Shari'a law, i.e. the Koran - she is Muslim, because her father was, and it is a capital offence under Shari'a for a Muslim woman to marry a Christian, although, funnily enough, not any sort of offence for a Muslim man to marry a Christian woman.

So while we bicker over comparative trivia, real people, women, face imminent death, mainly for being women.

And again, the Left is dead silent .......

Joe

Shadow, rest easy,

I can’t wait until JG appears at the RC with I was “young and naïve”. Next week Bill Shorten receives a knighthood thanks to the Sword of Damocles wielded by Bob Kernohan.

AJ is singing like a bird and JG will have her (last) chance later this year.

This will be a great year for everyone except those who are anti-Australian.

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

The fact remains that Mal Brough who hosted that particular
dinner was not a political novice. He was an experienced politician
and wasn't it convenient that the Menu circulated on Facebook?

I didn't buy it then, or on the Forum, and I still don't buy it.
It's a clever tactic - not just deny, deny, and deny,
but spin the blame back onto the victim in some way.
In this case somebody had to take the fall. And somebody did,
but not before it circulated widely.

Dear Bazz,

Me being precious?
No. Just realistic.

As we can see there are signs of cracks
appearing in the Abbott government, and they
are well and truly widening. Bill Shorten is polling
better than Tony Abbott in the preferred PM stakes.

Which may explain this thread, and Andrew Bolt's recent
attacks on Malcolm Turnbull.

Interesting times ahead.

Poor Shadow Minister, it must be so hard for him, a misogynist, *FEIGNING* interest in Peta Credlin's welfare. Too funny indeed.

THE ROAST HAS A SKIT..in it called media botch
its a comprehensive summation of the other side..[ie they revealed at least 3 newspapers doing fat jokes og the fat guy/thats much the same thing/[OR AT LEAST MEDIA BOTCH PUT IT INTO PERSPECTIVE]

http://iview.abc.net.au/programs/roast

Poor Nhoj, it must be so hard for him, a liar, FAKING quotes, Too funny indeed. Not only a bludger, but a liar and misogynist too.

Parrot,

You simply repeat the hate radiating from the left whingers. What a feeble bunch of hypocrites. You are just bitter at being exposed.

This is a great gotcha moment.

Shadow Minister is now copying his religious master ToneLIAR. We all know ToneLIAR is the biggest political LIAR of all time.

So, now when someone goes back and finds old quotes from Shadow Minister, he just denies he ever wrote it in the first place. In other words he LIES. Ha ha ha. ToneLIAR has taught Shadow Minister very well. It's hilarious.

Shadow Monster,

"This is a great gotcha moment."

Really?...I must have missed it.

Lol!

Must be so embarrassing, having touted the LNP/IPA as the great saviours, to have them revealed as a bunch of serial and inveterate liars.

They're even screwing their "mates" the Nationals.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-04/liberals-boast-of-playing-the-nats-over-fuel-excise/5500704

"Budget: Liberals boast of 'playing the Nats' over contentious fuel excise hike"

"One of the budget's most contentious measures, the fuel excise, was born out of a double-dealing power play.

At the very top of the Government there was ferocious arguing, furious lobbying and extraordinary political manoeuvring, as senior Liberals tried to manipulate their Nationals colleagues."

Oh well....to be expected by this bunch of cretins.

'And again, the Left is dead silent ....... '

yes Joe the 'moral' outrage is only for the Catholic church. The left and Islam have much in common.

Runner,

Wow. I never thought I would ever agree with you, but I think you may be right. Both Socialism and Islam have their authoritarian sides, Islam obviously but Socialism much more subtly:

Socialists seem to come in two varieties

- those who see the best, and the most potential in people, who have faith in the people, and in the virgin principles, if you like, of socialism,

- and those who, from the outset, would be on the look-out for traitors, misfits, backsliders, etc., who would easily move into roles as Cheka or NKVD or KGB apparatchiks, Executioners for the Revolution. Putin-types.

And yes, both that Utopian fascism/socialism and Islamism purport to seek out perfection, a finished product, one in paradise, the other here on Earth. A fascist goal, I now believe.

After seventy-odd years, I've come to believe fervently in that most miserably inadequate form of representation, of political participation, and of government - democracy. If there is ever going to be any form of socialism on earth, it will be an imperfect one which builds on democracy and which accepts humans as having - not so much faults as - differences, varied opinions, multifarious experiences, all of which can contribute to the richness of an ever-imperfect and ever-evolving society.

On Earth. Which is where I assume, with respect, Runner, my beliefs differ from yours.

Joe

Dearest runner,

Hmmmm, from what I can see the *RIGHT* has been pretty silent over the decades regarding Catholicism pedophilia. So I guess the right has it's own form of silence .... let's call it "The silence of the right".

Islam is much the same, as pedophilia is almost as rife there as in Catholicism, yet Muslims stay silent. The right and islam have much in common.

Love from Nhoj. xoxoxo

Loudmouth,

"So while we bicker over comparative trivia, real people, women, face imminent death, mainly for being women.

And again, the Left is dead silent ......."

What are you talking about?

This story was/is horrendous...anyone would be disgusted by this action against this woman.

But why would we be discussing it on a thread about Credlin and Oz politics?

Why accuse us of "being silent" about an issue that has nothing to do with Credlin or Oz politics?

Desperate to thump lefties are you?

(just read your latest...what a lot of disjointed gobbledygook)

.....

Shadow Monster,

"Poor Nhoj, it must be so hard for him, a liar, FAKING quotes, Too funny indeed. Not only a bludger, but a liar and misogynist too."

I can see why you're a fan of this govt.

Fake are they?

Not according to these two links...

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14469&page=0#250252

"Juliar and Roxon may have slept around, but it is the voters that got screwed."

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=14469#249855

"Well the weasel is out, and couldn't win an election for dog catcher in his electorate.

Now it is time for the red haired weasel No 1 to face the music for lying about pretty much everything."

Why accuse nhoj of "faking" your quotes when it's so easy for us to search for key words?

That kind of stunt is not working for Abbott...and it doesn't work for you either.

And so much for the man who claims to repudiate misogyny.

Then Foxy you must call the Chef a liar as he stated on TV that it was
a joke menu that one of the cooks made up and it never left the kitchen.

Loudmouth,

"But we should be silent when a woman is put under the microscope for her fertility, or for the - presumably unjustified - high position she may have attained. Or, more historically, a man compares a woman to jar of mussels."

Just looking back over the thread and once again found you deploying you much loved "mussel" reference. I was going to have a bit of a chat about that...but I discovered I'd already done that here:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5901&page=0#167006

(worth perusing as it links to all of your "mussel" references)

Not much chop for someone who pretends to defend feminine honour.

As for Ms Credlin being put under the microscope for her fertility.

She had a bit of a go here at pointing the microscope at herself...should we condemn the Herald Sun for going along with it?

Albeit she intertwined her fertility problems with a huge plug for her boss, Tony Abbott - so I s'pose it was understandable

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/with-tony-on-my-side/story-e6frf7jo-1226548140341

What Clive Palmer said was way out of line, and he must have been on an island with no communication when Credlin confessed to the media that she was having fertility problems and her Boss was so supportive...apparently.

Clive knew exactly what he was saying when having a go at Abbott's generous paid parental leave scheme, by suggesting Credlin put him up to it so she would cash in on the big money if she has a baby.

Mind you, Abbott and Credlin were also willing to use her fertility problems for political advantage at that time too, so we would all see he wasn't really a misogynist.

Of course, the Libs ( and some nasty posts on this forum) can't say too much about the lack of decency when discussing women's fertility, when they had no problems insinuating that Julia Gillard must be 'barren' if she didn't have children.

What a load of crock, Shadow Minister!

Parrot,

You quoted me correctly Nhoj deliberately did not, in short he lied. Secondly as this was following another posters list of the impressive bed hopping by Labor MPs such as Shorten, Emmerson, Roxon and Juliar, and is thus the 100% truth. If you can demonstrate that what I said was in any way incorrect then I will apologize.

If Palmer had a recording of Credlin demanding from Abbott the PPL to benefit her, then what he said would simply have been reporting the truth. The fact that it was impossible, and designed to denigrate her based on gender is what makes it sexist.

What has outed Parrot, and all the other left whingers raging hypocrites, is that you pretend to be outraged at minor PC slips by Abbott, but remain silent when an outrageous deliberate slur is targeted at a liberal.

Next time I see any faux outrage against Abbott I will remind you of your deceit.

poirot: "But we should be silent when a woman is put under the microscope for her fertility, or for the - presumably unjustified - high position she may have attained.

But, it wasn't Clive that did this. He was unaware. It was the Media & herself. It's all one upmanship aimed a discrediting Clive because he is a threat to their two Party governing game.

Jayb,

That was Loudmouth's quote...I put it in my post because I was pointing out that Credlin had in the past used her fertility issues to give a huge plug to her boss.

That is she allowed herself to be interviewed and to discuss her fertility issues - for party political gain prior to the last election.

Funny isn't it, that when Palmer makes a faux pas using Credlin's fertility issues, it's horribly sexist.

But when she uses the issue herself to make Tony out to be a sensitive new age guy, for election fodder - it all hunky-dory.

Shadow, Palmer's attack on Prta Credlin was totally and utterly unjustified. Politically, for Palmer to attack Abbott's paid Maternity Scheme is fully justified.

http://www.mamamia.com.au/australian-politics/clive-palmer-attacks-peta-credlin/#KfhEKkkmbhQzIe6c.97

From the above article; Editorial Update: Several members of the Labor Party including Opposition Leader Bill Shorten have since come out and condemned Palmer’s comments today. Some feminist commentators have done the same.

This kind of political attack on women started way back in the Whitlam years when the Murdoch gutter press found it convenient to launch sexists attacks on one Junie Morosi, which was picked up by a plethora of media piranhas at the time. Disgusting!

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/10/17/1066364484505.html?from=storyrhs

A note on Palmer from me, to say this, and to roll up to Parliament in his fancy cars should send a "message" about his political maturity to those who were possibly mislead as to who and what they were voting for with the PUP. Palmer is certainly a political pup, in more ways than one

'Hmmmm, from what I can see the *RIGHT* has been pretty silent over the decades regarding Catholicism pedophilia. So I guess the right has it's own form of silence .... let's call it "The silence of the right '

really Nhoj a few of the bbc and abc luvvies luvvies were very silent about some of their own. Just another distortion of yours. At least you are admitting that pedophilla is wrong something that not all the left agree on. Some like to call child porn art. I wonder where you draw your moral base from to call it wrong.

its funny how the fuzzy picture suddenlty becomes more clear

its clear that globa;ly bankers are being installed
[hence the silence on the left[see the bankers like the idea of a carbon credit/they set the values /price..for

with the power to shut down energy here
increase it there/PLAY BIG GAMES

bankers who know we are broke/thus the need for a global energy tax[read carbon credIT..[now watch as the warnist denier[the abbot]
gets knifed/by the banker..

it was set up in setting up clive[the INFO WAS PUT TO HIM AT THE MEETING..that set up tonies key adviser/at a key time[tony either wins this time..or we all loose.
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16376&page=1

runner,

Can you explain the far "rightie" extremist Abbott Govt pulling those millions out of the RC into institutional child abuse to give to RC into flogging Labor over pink batts?

Surely you'd be opposed to such measures?

SM,

I don't pretend to be outraged at anything Abbott does, PC or not. He's a monstrous joke as a Prime Minister...so much so that the cartoonists are having their material rained upon them. (I see you're now on twitter so you must be privy to the hilarity daily encountered on there from this govt's cock-ups)

He's even a satirist's dream in the US now. I take it you caught this from John Oliver's HBO programme?

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbott-roasted-by-john-oliver-on-hbo-show-last-week-tonight-20140602-zrvl1.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3IaKVmkXuk

It's only got 563,000 views.

Paul,

"Shadow, Palmer's attack on Prta Credlin was totally and utterly unjustified."

For the very first time, a lefty has shown a shred of integrity. As I am not a fan of the PPL (probably for different reasons) and it is irrelevant to the discussion, I will let that slide.

Parrot,

You should be ashamed.

On Twitter I also find plenty parodies and cartoons against Shorten and his bunch of incompetents.

SM,

Oh really...I reckon the cartoons would be 10 to 1 in favour of this govt's debacle.

Although, I happen to have an original by one of the SMH's leading cartoonists on the wall next to me as I type this...depicting Joe Hockey as Santa holding an empty sack with Labor printed on it.

I don't have a problem with Labor members being portrayed in cartoons...good old Shorten is drawn as a sleepy koala by this same cartoonist.

But when in govt, you're far more likely to cop the satire - especially if you're as hopeless as Abbott and his motley crew.

Did anyone see the 7.30 Report last night and
the Clive Palmer interview? He denies saying
what he's accused of, and calls it a "media beat up."
He went on to explain the point he was trying to make
and also when asked if he would apologise to Peta Credlin
stated that he had sent her a letter explaining he had no
intention of "hurting her." It seems that this is a tactic
used often by certain people. Not just deny,deny, but spin
the balance back on the victim.

I stated quite clearly on page 3 of this discussion - that
Mr Palmer's comments about Ms Credlin were "inappropirate,
unnecessary, wrong, and low." And as people
on all sides of politics have pointed out - discuss the policies
but not the staff.

Dear Bazz,

The Menu cited earlier did leave the kitchen.
It circulated freely on Facebook.

Foxy: he had sent her a letter explaining he had no intention of "hurting her." It seems that this is a tactic used often by certain people. Not just deny,deny, but spin the balance back on the victim.

Do you believe that every word a person speaks has an ulterior motive? If so then it says more about your thinking than anyone else's. "This, I believe."

Or, is this, "A male has made a boo boo." (which we are inclined to do, at times, without thinking.) "lets stick it to him."

Are the Abbott government's science policies "foolish" and incoherent?
Yes, it makes no sense to take money out of scientific research while building a medical research fund.
96%
No, the government has a good plan to improve Australia's investment in medical research.
4%

CSIRO is closing several research sites and relocating world-renowned climate research from its atmospheric laboratory in Victoria, following budget cuts.
An annual direction statement, written by CSIRO chief executive Dr Megan Clark and obtained by the organisation's staff association, details significant internal changes to research as CSIRO enacts the cuts and offsets lower expected commercial revenue.
The organisation will cut key research areas such as geothermal energy, marine biodiversity, liquid fuels and radio astronomy and close eight sites across the country.
The Abbott government cut CSIRO's funding by $111 million over four years in the federal budget, at the cost of 500 jobs.
Australian MP Dennis Jensen.
Dr Jensen said he had serious doubts about the details of the medical research fund.
''Is this funding to medical research going to be general, or specifically targeted at cancer, Alzheimer's and the like? How are we going to source those researchers?
''They don't grow on trees, and the training required is long and arduous, and very long

Poirot

in case you are blinded like many other lefties, child abuse has occured not only in the RC church. The national broadcasters, artist and people with arts degrees are just as likely to offend as anyone else. They embrace paganism and in case you have not noticed among pagan tribes child abuse is rife. I have stated numerous times that I would vote for male child molestors to be castrated. How about you?

Also I doubt whether the families of those killed by Rudd incompetence think the royal commission is a waste of money. Then again life is cheap among lefties who condone baby murder. The 1000 plus drownings caused by the incompetence and gutless policies of the sisterhood went with little scrutiny while the ABC luvvies banged on all night about the one death on Manus Island.

I firmly believe poly's are fair game for cartoonists, satirists, comedians, the general voting public. If you put your hand up seeking public office, and if your do have too many sensibilities then my advice is "DON'T DO IT" look for a job driving an Ice Cream Van, all the kids will love ya!
I don't have a problem with Abbott going overseas, and representing Australia, providing its nothing more than a ferry trip from Circular Quay to Manly, that's overseas. With the Mad Monks up comming visit to the US, is there anyway we can convince the Yanks that Tony Abbott is in fact the Prime Minister of New Zealand or somewhere other than Australia. I feel again Abbett in the US its going to be as Effie would say "How embarrassment!"
I can just picture our man Tone rolling up to the White House front door in his budgie sumgglers, zinc cream on nose (its summer time in the US, Tone been advised to dress for the weather);

Ding dong. President Obama opens the door.

Tone: "Tony Baloney here from Oz, to see the Pres!"
Obama: "I am the President."
Tone: "No offense mate,... but your Black!"
Obama: "I hadn't noticed, but now you mention it"
Tone: "I thought you were the butler, or something."
Tone: "Who's the sheila?"
Obama: "The sheila you refer to. is the First Lady, Mrs Obama."
Tone: "I'd intro ya to me cheese and kisses, but she's busy, carrying the suit cases to our digs. and see'n if you Yanks can flog us a couple of chicko rolls, I'm starve'n, got any coldies in the fridge"
Obama: " I had been advised to expect your arrival, GOODBYE!"
Door Slams!

Next days news headline. Following a visit yesterday by the Australian Prime Minister Mr Tony Abbott, President Obama has asked Congress to declare war on that rough state in the South Pacific.

Dear jayb,

Everyone is entitled to make mistakes.
But Mr Palmer
has been elected to a Parliamentary position
and it was his choice to speak in Parliament
on the subject. He did not simply choose to discuss
the policy of the Paid Parental Leave Scheme.
He made it personal,
and spoke about a member of the PM's staff who's
struggling with IVF in her attempt to get pregnant.

This resulted in a backlash from all sides of politics.
Mr Palmer is entitled to make mistakes. However, if he
did not mean what he said in Parliament - he should
apologise for what he did say - and not call it a "media-
beat up" or try to deny it. That doesn't sit well either
on him or the people he represents.

Runner; "among pagan tribes child abuse is rife" Judging by all accounts, in the christian tribes as well. When it comes to child abuse, no one does it better than the Catholic Church, I suspect that mob have most likely been abusing children since Jesus was a boy and meet Peter down by the lake!

Runner is a typical immoral Catholic who "excuses" the rife pedophilia in Catholicism by pointing out the fact it occurs elsewhere. This Catholic "excuse" (often used by immoral Catholics) is part of the Catholic ingrained culture, where all attempts must be made to lessen the church's culpability and protect it's reputation. Their first priority is the reputation of Catholicism, and the many thousands of church pedophilia victims come a long distant last. It's the equivalent of a rapist saying in his defence, "but, but, but what about all those other guys who rape women, I'm not the "only" one who does it".

Not all Catholics are like Runner. "Some" of them have fought long and hard against this disgrace within this corrupt church, often against amazing odds. They, and the Catholicism pedophilia victims, are the "real" heroes in this disgraceful saga within the discredited Catholic church.

Poirot,

I see Foxy has at least taken the moral high ground too.

WRT the number of cartoons, given your predilection for only left whinge blogs, etc, I am surprised that you see any criticism of the left at all, I however, see plenty.

The response from Labor and Greens polies is pitiful. A few days after the fact we get a handful of lukewarm tut tuts only after being exposed as hypocrites.

I see that Nhoj, 579 Poirot, and the other usual hypocrites have all failed to indicate any opposition to this blatant sexism

Nhoj, "Runner is a typical immoral Catholic who "excuses" the rife pedophilia in Catholicism by pointing out the fact it occurs elsewhere"

BS, try playing the ball and not the man. You are fabricating as usual to poison the well. I have never seen Runner excuse child abuse. He has always done the opposite in fact. His views are not immoral either.

The danger is that you encourage a perception that all or most child abuse is limited to male Catholic priests.

I am not a person with Runner's faith. It is a very great pity that I have to add that qualification lest you stupidly and unfairly level the same accusation at me.

Dear SM,

Can't we just for a change discuss policies instead of
turning everything into a Left/Right divide or
grabbing at straws with personal attacks. I watched
the Bob Hawke/John Howard appearance on the National
Press Club recently and I was quite impressed by Mr
Hawke's professionalism in not blaming any side of
politics (even the current budget debacle). He remained
totally professional and diplomatic.

We need to see more of that sort of leadership today.
More caring for what's good for the country then
personal political agendas.

What on earth happened to the co-operation that used to
exist between parties and pollies in the past.

We could of course make an effort to change things on OLO.

Or are some of us so brain-dead that all we're capable of
doing is attacking each other. Remember your delightful
"pigeon and chess" quote?

Here's a few more quotes from our new "feminist", Shadow Minister:

In addition to, "Juliar is a complete idiot" and "Now it's time for the red haired weasel to face the music" and "Juliar may have slept around" and "Was she so stupid" we now have from Shadow Minister ......

(1)"deleted for abuse" ...http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4290&page=0#108622

(2)"Lexi (a woman), you are completely shameless"...http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5625&page=0#156255

(3)"deleted for abuse" ...http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=15638&page=0#270937

(4)"Juliar will be remembered as a stain" http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5625&page=0#155739

(5)"deleted for abuse" ...http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5157&page=0#139259

(6)regarding Julia Gillard "a deceitful and untrustworthy weasel" ... http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5625&page=0#155560

I wonder why our new sensitive feminist, Shadow Minister, is so sensitive to the feelings of Peta Credlin (a hard line, feisty CONSERVATIVE) in light of his repeated personal abuse towards women and his repeated deletions for personal abuse? Hmmmmm.

Click on the links folks ... there's the *PROOF* that the poor, little, sensitive, new age, feminist Shadow Minister is "really" a HYPOCRITE, and merely a radical rightie pawn and abusive dogamatist, who doesn't give a damn about respecting women.

Shadow Minister didn't start this topic because he was *OUTRAGED* at a slur against a woman (as he is "pretending"). He started this topic as a vehicle to slight who he considers his political enemies. He doesn't give a damn about women.

The empirical proof has been presented. Case closed.

Foxy,

I would be happy to simply discuss policies and have done so several times. However, it is difficult to show restrain when individuals are only capable of slogans and insults.

But to be honest, I have seen similar insults over footy teams.

'Runner is a typical immoral Catholic who "excuses" the rife pedophilia in Catholicism by pointing out the fact it occurs elsewhere.'

Nhoj

u r a typical leftist revisionist who knows only moral relativism.
btw I am not a Catholic so try revising your filthy little fables to fit your narrative.

why do i feel the need to defend the shadow>?

damm it..before i cried when on the beach defended runner
and lexie toO..NOW WE GOPT JOHN TRYING TO DIVIDE US..I KNOW SHADOW ISNT SEXIST. sure hes a smug knows what he knows..but hes no mysogonisy ANTI WOMAN BLOGGIST....UNLIKE THE OTHER YOU YOURSELF OUTED[BUT THEN EVEN A DEAD CLOCK IS RIGHT TWICE A DAY..unless you go diget-et'al..then only right nce.0

[john backwards..get lost]..even though
a few times a wanted tO DEFEND YOU2..whats got into you to do such in depth research..[over kill>plus shot the wrong burdie]

Onthebeach, I played the ball and outed the man (try actually "reading" my post on the previous page). Many good Catholics work hard within the church, worldwide, to purge Catholicism of pedophilia, often to no avail and great internal opposition. Runner is NOT one of those Catholics.

Runner offers the "rapists" excuse when defending Catholicism. The rapist's excuse is, "but, but. but ... I'm not the only guy who rapes women, other guys do it too". And Runner's version of the excuse is "child abuse has occurred not only in the RC church".

So when Runner sees criticism of Catholicism pedophilia, he *IMMEDIATELY* ignores the victims, and *RUSHES* in with the rapist's defence. It's the reputation of Catholicism put first, and the plight of the victims put last.

Nhoj,

Here's a little tip to help with your illiteracy:

Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on a person's sex or gender. Calling someone an idiot, untrustworthy or a weasel is not gender specific and therefore not sexism. Nor is it racism, ageism, homophobia etc.

If you don't want to look like a pratt, don't post such rubbish.

Claiming all females should have a free pass to avoid criticism is more sexist than anything else on this forum.

I've just been informed Runner is not a Catholic. That makes his defence against criticism of Catholicism pedophilia even stranger still. I guess it's a case of different Christian sects joining forces to defeat criticism of Catholicism pedophilia, in order to protect the forever stained "reputation" of Christianity.

It's Christianity's reputation first, and pedophilia victims last.

Shadow Miniter,

"...However, it is difficult to show restrain when individuals are only capable of slogans and insults."

Lol!...that coming from the biggest insulting name-caller on OLO.

Oh I do love a bit of hypocrisy on a Thursday!

......

Btw...regarding this govt's slimy "everyone must bear the burden" garbage.

Have a gander at this:

http://m.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/budget-help-for-ballet-australian-ballet-schools-new-47m-mansion-20140603-39h29.html

"More than a few eyebrows were raised when young ballerinas emerged as rare winners on budget night, especially after the federal Treasurer declared, ''The age of entitlement is over.''

Tucked away in the budget papers was a $1 million grant for the Australian Ballet School, to help with its purchase of a new boarding residence. Armed with that taxpayer money, the school has spent more than $4.7 million on a mansion."

"On the board of the Australian Ballet School is Daniele Kemp, the high-profile wife of former Liberal arts minister Rod Kemp, a predecessor of George Brandis as arts minister. Mr Kemp is now the chairman of the Institute of Public Affairs, a right-wing lobby group."

Etc...

What a bunch of con-artists.

Yep, that's correct Poirot. They feather the nests of their "own", whilst demonising the poor, sick and needy.

One of the budget's most contentious measures, the fuel excise, was born out of a double-dealing power play.

At the very top of the Government there was ferocious arguing, furious lobbying and extraordinary political manoeuvring, as senior Liberals tried to manipulate their Nationals colleagues.

This is the inside story.

Months out from budget day, senior ministers were searching for savings and contemplating something politically toxic.

They wanted to resume indexing the fuel excise to ensure petrol prices rise in line with inflation.

Treasury calculated the measure would reap $2.2 billion over the forward estimates and, most importantly, it would keep raising more and more money every year.

The hard-heads liked the idea but knew they had a problem. How would they get the Coalition's junior partner on board?

'I've just been informed Runner is not a Catholic. That makes his defence against criticism of Catholicism pedophilia even stranger still. '

actually Nhoj it shows you are willing to lie and smear to back up your dogmas. You know no shame.

JOHN;1=MIRROR=1NHOJ

first john1

The Word Became Flesh

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,[a] and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

The Word Became Flesh..
now..nhoj 1

THEN CAME NHOJ1..flesh 0f the wurd..undone

1 In the end was the World,
and the Wurd..was with death,..and the Word was dead.

2 He was..in the beginning..with God.
then..was not..at the end without sin.

3 All things were un-made through nhoj,
and with him [nhoj]..was not any thing made that was made.

4 In him was death,[a] and the dead was the darnesss of men.

5 The darkness IS DISPELLED..BY THE LIGHT,
and the LIGHT has overcome it.

6 There was a man sent..from death, whose name was mhoj
7 He came as a witless, to bear witness about the light, that all might diss-believe through him. 8..He was not the lie, but came to bear witness about the lie.

Come off it! Attacking Nhoj for his comments on Runner who tried to label some who support what could be deemed "left politics" as supporting child pornography/pedophilia with the comment;
<<At least you are admitting that pedophilla is wrong something that not all the left agree on. Some like to call child porn art. I wonder where you draw your moral base from to call it wrong.>>

Will Runner like to put a name to any so called lefties supporting child porn, based solely on their political leanings. I'll give you 2 political names you could try and use, Frank Arkell and Milton Orkopoulos. However there is absolutly no evidence that either based their crimes on any sort of political belief.

Poor Runner, he criticizes people like me who are against Christianity pedophilia. Why? Because I criticized him, for using the Christian version of the "rapist's excuse" in order to protect the reputation of church.

The rapist's excuse = "but, but, but I'm not the only person to rape women, other guys do it too". Runner's excuse = "but, but, but child abuse has occurred not ONLY in the RC church". Runner then goes on to list secular child abuse, in an effort to "excuse" and "protect" the church's reputation.

Runner's main goal is to protect Christianity's reputation. His main goal should be to protect the victims of Christianity pedophilia, but it's not. As soon as the church is criticised here for it's pedophilia, Runner rushes *IMMEDIATELY* to protect the church's reputation. He has shown, by his posts, that THAT is his main goal. No different to the cardinals and priests who protect their own.

Runner,

"...Then again life is cheap among lefties who condone baby murder. The 1000 plus drownings caused by the incompetence and gutless policies of the sisterhood went with little scrutiny while the ABC luvvies banged on all night about the one death on Manus Island."

You really are the most hated-filled ranting petty little excuse for a Christian I've ever encountered.

You come on to this forum spitting your vile venom in any direction, proclaiming to stand up for some sort of self-aggrandising morality.

What's this blather?..."....so try revising your filthy little fables to fit your narrative."

Your odious diatribes are the antithesis of the goodness you proclaim to uphold. Your whole construct as "a whiter-than-white" Christian is belied by your dark heart - a heart that is constantly on display on this forum as you strut about flaying your fellow posters with your faux morality.

"Your nasty, vicious, judgmental psyche which you attempt to disguise under the guise of "Christianity" is the reason people run for their lives from fundamentalist Christendom.

Poirot

as one who has proven a pathetic judge of character and other issues I am happy not to have your endorsement.

Runner's no Christian. "Real" Christianity and Jesus Himself have *NOTHING* in common with Runner. There's plenty of fake Christians, and Runner's one of them as evidenced by many of his heartless posts.

you Nhoj and Poirot show how bereft and deceitful atheism is.

runner,

"you Nhoj and Poirot show how bereft and deceitful atheism is."

Lol!

Runner, you just proved my point with your reply. Thanks.

Sometimes the most fundamentalist and/or strident Christians are in fact the least Christian Christians.

Nhoj and Poirot,

Even though Christians profess to worshiping but only the one god, the truth is over the ages they have in fact had numerous gods, The Hateful God, The Vengeful God, The Merciful God, The Loving God, just to name a few. Depending at what point in time your at, it will then depend as to which god applies.
Although the majority of Christians today would most likely paint their god as The Loving God or The Merciful God, not all Christians hold to those more popular gods. Runner is in with the minority of Christians who are yet to emerge from The Dark Ages and is still worshiping one of the less desirable gods, possibly The Hateful God. Runners posts do reflect his personal interpretation of god, plenty of fire and brimstone stuff and not much of the love and kindness. To people like Runner, gods is a capitalist heading up the multinational business known as 'Heaven Incorporated' with his boy, the pope running the branch office on Earth.
Despite Runners persistent personal attacks on both of you, I give you top marks for sticking to your guns, and giving him back as good as he gives you!
Runner I would be interested to know, if its not the Catholic Church you adhere to, which other strange church do you profess to be a member of, come to think of it, maybe its your own "personal" church

yea I would expect you Paul to encourage Poirot and Nho to keep up their lies and slurs. I suspect it is the God that reveals to you not only your corrupt nature but also the Saviour that you despise so much

Parrot and Nhob,

I have just witnessed from you two the most extreme vicious and spiteful attack on runner in my experience on OLO. While as an atheist I differ from runner on many issues, the judgemental venom from Parrot while accusing runner of exactly the same displays a level of hypocrisy and intolerance that would make Pauline Hanson blush.

As for Nhob, you are the typical troll, probably living with your mother, bludging off society, and attacking anyone that is not happy to contribute to the lifestyle to which you wish to become accustomed. All I can say is get a shower, a shave walk and outside blinking in the sun and get a job, preferably one that does not require intelligence or a personality.

BTT ?

runner,

"yea I would expect you Paul to encourage Poirot and Nho to keep up their lies and slurs. I suspect it is the God that reveals to you not only your corrupt nature but also the Saviour that you despise so much"

So it's perfect fine for "you" to strut up and down this forum picking off targets to slur and insult, while using your "Christianity" as a shield - but if any of us call you out on your malicious behaviour, you shout that we're corrupt.

I'm fed up to here with you tarring posters with the most heinous qualities and motives and then slinking off dragging your cross behind you. Who else on this forum tags other posters as corrupt or promoting evil because we don't follow their religious belief?

I'll say again that you appear nasty, vicious and vindictive and it emanates from your personal psyche - and which you conveniently cloak in Christianity to mask your true motives.

Loudmouth,

"BTT"

Like this you mean?

"However, and slightly off-topic, I am concerned that this topic gets so much comment compared to this simultaneous thread:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=16364

concerning the imminent hanging of a Christian woman in Sudan, as soon as her baby is weaned, i.e. when she turns two years old. The woman had to give birth while shackled, and will remain in Omdurman prison for ..... oh, just a bit under two years now.

Her crime ? She married a Christian and has been raised - and considers herself - a Christian because her mother was a Christian, and she was raised with her mother. But according to Shari'a law, i.e. the Koran - she is Muslim, because her father was, and it is a capital offence under Shari'a for a Muslim woman to marry a Christian, although, funnily enough, not any sort of offence for a Muslim man to marry a Christian woman.

So while we bicker over comparative trivia, real people, women, face imminent death, mainly for being women."

(For folks just joining us, Loudmouth likes to call us back to topic when he doesn't approve of the tack of the conversation. If he himself wishes to waffle off topic - he just goes right ahead and does it)

Dear SM,

Yes it is difficult to show restraint -
we're all only human and when the right
buttons are pushed - I guess we all do react.
As much as we would all love to be thoroughly
fair all the time, we would be less than honest
if we claimed we are. In fact, we are all thrown
curve balls in the form of people and situations
we are tempted to judge.

It takes discipline and vigilance to do the mental
work necessary to not make judgements. Attack is an
easier response. However I feel that we do
need to find an alternative way to debating on this
forum. We need to at least have a go.

Poirot

as usual you are extremely selective in your reading and comprehending. You defend

'Runner is a typical immoral Catholic who "excuses" the rife pedophilia in Catholicism by pointing '

no evidence and factually wrong and yet something u insist on from others. What upsets you is that your common hypocrisy is clearly on display. You lose the arguement and spit the dummy.

runner,

Show me evidence where I have defended the following:

"Runner is a typical immoral Catholic who "excuses" the rife pedophilia in Catholicism by pointing"

I haven't accused you of anything "except" coming onto this forum and serially attributing heinous vices to anyone who holds a differing philosophy from yourself.

I stand by that.

When I read things like this:

"....Then again life is cheap among lefties who condone baby murder...."

I find it represents exactly your ongoing style. You serially accuse fellow posters, of hate, filth, immorality - condoning baby murder!" -, etc...simply because they hold differing opinions to yourself.

That's no way to debate, all it does is raise the ire of your opponents.

Wrong runner, you lie. There's PLENTY of evidence that you are not a "real" Christian, and that you excuse Christianity pedophilia by pointing.

I have proved the "pointing" allegation time and time again on this thread. Come on Runner .... MAN UP, admit it, then reform your behaviour by becoming a "real" Christian.

And you have proved that you are not a "real" Christian by the abusive content of your posts over the years towards those who don't agree with "your" opinions.

Runner, get some "real" religious counseling for yourself, stop defending the church against people who attack it's history of wicked pedophilia. Runner, place the victims first and the church last .... instead of the other way round.

Be a man, be a "real" Christian for once.

When a child has been sexually abused, the child's welfare *MUST ALWAYS* be placed *FIRST and FOREMOST*. No ifs, no buts, no exceptions, no defending the church.

ok Poirot your style is hate rant posts against budget cuts has ( all Abbott really) and I use graphic language to describe what I hate (the murder of the unborn).

The words 'filth'was used to describe Nhoj 's narrative which suggested that I was in favour of covering up child abuse by priests. You know that is a disgusting untrue slur which I have never suggested. What I suggested was that all organisations be held to the same scrunity. The so called police whistle blower that the ABC rounded up has proven to be a fraud. I have and never will defend the Catholic church but I will defend truth something you use extremly loosely.

Nhoj

I suggest you do some reading and get a little understanding before continuing with your vile worthless rants.

Parrot,

I apologise for raising issues to do with the oppression of women in other countries, and black as well. I'll try not to bring such irrelevant topics up in future :)

Joe
www.firstsources.info

runner,

"....but I will defend truth something you use extremely loosely.'

There you go again, when am I loose with the truth?

I have an opinion, and I state it liberally.

Regarding your run-in with nhoj...it seems you were both going pretty hard at it.

For my part, I was commenting mainly about your earlier post in this thread and your history of blanket denigration of people whom you label "lefties"...like myself , for instance.

I certainly wouldn't denigrate a whole section of society by saying they condone things like baby killing or accuse them of promoting deaths at sea. I would, however, stridently criticise a govt which enacted policy with which I disagree.

I'm constantly amazed at how you promote your faith. We had our two good friends over for tea last night. Both elderly church attending Catholics...and a more caring and considerate couple you would never meet (who vote Liberal!).
I can't imagine them denigrating others in the fashion you do, merely for holding opposing political or philosophical/religious outlooks.

'I certainly wouldn't denigrate a whole section of society by saying they condone things like baby killing or accuse them of promoting deaths at sea. I would, however, stridently criticise a govt which enacted policy with which I disagree. '

really saint Poirot? Your abbottphobia has bordered on hysteria.

Runner "claims" innocence. So, let's forensically examine Runner's first post on this subject within this thread, to determine his guilt or innocence:

(1) On page 7 I first brought up Catholicism pedophilia, pointing out that some people have remained silent on the issue. In his reply on page 8, Runner then defended Catholicism pedophilia by saying not ONE WORD of criticism about this church pedophilia, and then "pointing" in order to deflect my criticism of Catholicism pedophilia. Runner started "pointing" by saying that pedophilia was not reported by "luwies" within the ABC and BBC about "some of their own". Runner then began "pointing" at the "left" saying that they don't agree with each other that pedophilia is wrong. Runner then "pointed" at people who think child porn is art. Runner then "pointed" at me asking where I got my morals from. Runner was doing ALL he could in the reply to *NOT* criticize Catholicism or Christianity and "their" pedophiles and handling of the matters. His main intent was to "point", in order to defend Christianity. In his reply he was not the least bit interested in expressing any concern whatsoever for the victims. He was *ONLY* interested in deflecting criticism away from "Christianity" pedophilia. He was "defending" the church, by "pointing".

MY POINT PROVEN. Case closed.

"really saint Poirot? Your abbottphobia has bordered on hysteria."

I reserve the right on this forum to criticise the govt and its leader...especially when it's being seen to have lied its way so comprehensively into govt.

What I don't do on this forum, runner, is to consistently paste fellow posters with whom I disagree as haters and immoral people simply because they disagree with me.

I don't accuse fellow posters of condoning baby killing or drowning deaths at sea.

I don't antagonistically accuse the "righties" on this forum en block of things such as these:

"...all about self interest for the left rarely if ever about principle."

"And again, the Left is dead silent .......The left and Islam have much in common"

" At least you are admitting that pedophilla is wrong something that not all the left agree on."

"in case you are blinded like many other lefties..."

"Then again life is cheap among lefties who condone baby murder."

"u r a typical leftist revisionist who knows only moral relativism."

"you Nhoj and Poirot show how bereft and deceitful atheism is."

"yea I would expect you Paul to encourage Poirot and Nho to keep up their lies and slurs."

(and all of that from just this one thread..your slurs on fellow posters over the years could fill a book)

So I'll criticise Abbott & his govt if I so wish....and while you wave around your abusive attributions toward fellow posters in the guise of Christian morality, I'll criticise that too.

@Poirot,

Total hogwash!

You were hysterically ranting about the Abbott govt even before it was sworn-in -–and you haven’t stopped since.

And as for “ I don't accuse fellow posters of condoning baby killing or drowning deaths at sea.” --Bullstwang!

Remember your old line about the US being responsible for every baby that died in Iraq duruing the UN sanctions.

And your second favourite line (or was that the one you lifted from Namoi Klien?) is that the West --through the Green Revolution (which was, any, only one giant conspiracy to rob the poor) was responsbe for the suicide of thosands of Indian farmers.


And then we have you running mate obNHOJious!
The only forensic examination he’d have experience in would be on his own sphincter ani externus

The left -–as it is in much of the West today -- is corrupt and cowardly and you and Nhoj are prime personifications of it.

Ahhh, another personally abusive post from SPQR. Cool.

SPQR,

What a load of waffle.

You appear to be equating the debate on various issues and public personalities (which is what we do on OLO) with the low act of stooping to impugn your opponent in lieu of argument.

Your quote from me:

"And as for “ I don't accuse fellow posters of condoning baby killing or drowning deaths at sea.” --Bullstwang! "

Followed by:

"Remember your old line about the US being responsible for every baby that died in Iraq duruing the UN sanctions."

Erm...how does criticising the "US" stack up to abusing a "fellow poster"?

For that matter, how does criticising Tony Abbott equate to abusing fellow posters because they don't hold similar philosophies?

As for:

"The left -–as it is in much of the West today -- is corrupt and cowardly and you and Nhoj are prime personifications of it."

Typical - and no wonder you step forward to defend runner and his charming habit of abusing OLOer's who disagree with him - you're exactly the same.

The most amusing aspect being is that those who have no recourse but to abuse those they're debating - obviously lack the capacity to argue issues on their merits.

As a human being, and a male, I cringe whenever I think how the main stream religions disrespect women, and children for that matter. They are utterly and totally irrational man dominated organisations which show scant regard for women. With the male dominated hierarchical structure of religions on earth, one would have to believe heaven too must be male dominated, with every position of authority from the head honcho to the third class dunny cleaner being the exclusive domain of men, God is a man! Well so the macho religious would have us believe.
Can anyone point to a mainstream earthly religion where women hold any position of real authority, have any real input in decision making, have any real equality within the organisation, or are treated in any other way than being disrespected second class citizens. I am a male and can't bring myself to be part of any earthly religion, even if they are nothing but a boys club. Why would any woman ever contemplate joining such disrespectful chauvinistic institutions, it defies belief.

Hi Paul,

Thank you for bringing the discussion back to the mistreatment of women, you may have partly redeemed some of the Left by your courageous words, if only by being so exceptional.

Yes indeed, almost by definition (since religions are expressions of power-holders) religious theory and practice almost invariably, one way or another, not only demeans women but attempts by a multitude of justifications to keep women firmly in a subordinate place. Christianity is pretty bad, but surely Islam takes the cake, with its stoning of women for supposed adultery, its hanging of women for supposed apostasy (sorry to bring that up, Porrit), the power of men to marry up to four women, and divorce them with a simple "I divorce you", the power of live and death of men over their own mothers, the fact that women inherit far less than their brothers or even their sons - not to mention the vile organisations, such as that currently murdering thousands of people (hundreds this week alone) in Nigeria in the name, quite explicitly, of stopping women from gaining any education (and, as they would be fully aware, of gaining any semblance of power). And so much more. And what does the left say about Boko Haram ? Sorry, what was that ? Hello ? Hello ?

In short, Islam is barely any more civilized, or friendly to women, that backward Christianity was five hundred years ago. Pity the women in Muslim countries who still have five hundred years (or more, if the idiot left has its way) to wait.

And don't get me started on Aztec virgin sacrifice.

Joe

Loudmouth (appropriate name) asks, "And what does the left say about Boko Haram? Sorry, what was that? Hello? hello?".

Here's what it says:

http://tanyaplibersek.com/2014/05/speech-at-the-welcome-reception-for-australian-american-leadership-dialogue-young-leadership-dialogue/

and

http://unaa.org.au/un-lists-boko-haram-as-a-terrorist-organisation.html

and again

http://socialistpartyofnigeria.blogspot.com.au/2014/03/killings-of-students-by-boko-haram-in.html

and yet again

http://www.socialistworld.net/doc/5702

and even more

http://time.com/108025/nigeria-chad-boko-haram-american-troops-obama/

and even more yet again
http://globalresearch.ca/boko-haram-and-the-wests-intervention-in-nigeria/5383236

and ditto
http://socialismtoday.org/169/nigeria.html

There's literally *MILLIONS* of remarks, comments and actions from the left all over the world.

Loudmouth, all you have to do is open your eyes, and emerge from your "Fortress Australia" and *LOOK*. But you won't. Why? You're too busy worshiping your Trinity ... thy Father Andrew Bolt, His only begotten Son Tax'Em Tony and thy Holy Ghost Alan Jones, and you're too busy indoctrinating yourself with your Bible.... The Holy Daily Telegraph.

Loudmouth, believe it or not there's a big world out there, and believe it or not education and knowledge is actually good for you. I hope that helps.

DYSLECTIC-JOHN/QUOTe..<<..(1.On page 7 I first brought up Catholicism pedophilia, pointing out>>

thats called trolling[the topic is how come the SILENCE
[RE SOME VERY IMPORTANT ADVISER/MEDIA*TOR\PUPPET MEISTER..RUNNINg tony[AS INSTALLED..INTO CLEVES MIND SOMEHOW DURING THE LUNCH CONVERSATION WITH THE BANKER ATHE TREASURY OFFICIAL..ETC

ie off topic troll

<<..that some people have remained silent on the issue.>>
by what right do yoU DEMAND WE REply/your off-topic troll?

<<>.In his reply on page 8,..Runner then>>

lol..wait for this*;]

<<>.defended Catholicism pedophilia
by saying not ONE WORD of criticism about this church pedophilia,>>

oh dear.saying nuthing means your guilty..of not saying critizism..about church*pediphilia and then "pointing" in order to deflect my criticism of Catholicism pedophilia. Runner started "pointing" by saying that pedophilia was not reported by "luwies" within the ABC and BBC about "some of their own".>>>

who..boy slow down
the error was your presuming we need reply your freaking off topic troll[then worse]..casting guilt..upon no reply?..[guilt by avoidence/non assosiation>

grow up child..[trolls get ignored]..he ignored your troll
then named shamed/blamed..your own minds perversions

still do

<<..Runner then..>>

AFTER OFF-TOPIC/TROLL PRODING..<<began "pointing" at the "left" saying..that they don't agree with each other that pedophilia is wrong...>>

they dont/please..go into the archives
recall them photos of that 11 year old child/we are all divided on if thats pedophilia[ie/pedophillia means child LOVER..,[LOVES CHILDREN]..SO OF COURSE IF YOU WANNA SEE PICtURES OF NAKID 11 YEAR OLDS THEIR PEDOPHILE=[CHILD LOVER]

you love kids too right no jo

mojo..moves it on

DYSLECTIC-JOHNa..aha../QUOTe..<<..<<>.Runner then "pointed" at people..who think child porn is art. Runner then "pointed" at me asking where I got my morals from.>>

ITS OK TO LOVE KIDS[WE ARE AL PEDOPHILES
but its wrong to..touch/them..thats peversion...beyond pedophile..[loves kids][THUS THESE BECOME HAS SEX WITH KIDS..\0r/..BIG*GasSFATAS-SCUNTUScumm]

we know them by their works
thats that one step too far/its a huge accusatrion to throw arround untuscumm..but back to your quote

<<>...Runner was doing ALL he could..in the reply
to *NOT* criticize Catholicism or Christianity..>>

they too..are child lovers
but hate the name pedophile/cause they know the lie it hides[satanic lie]..but truth be told..inthink hes jewish or muslim[so respect..is good//yet you turn it to sss hit/following off your troll.

let the dead tend the dead..let lovers love
let haters hate/let back biters be bitten back

<<>>and "their" pedophiles
and handling of the matters..His main intent..>>

stop telling me..what he.. presumes
i know the man/you only think you know.a type.

you presume..'his main intent..<<>>was to "point",
in order to..defend Christianity.>>[\not.offend/?]

he is respectfull..of all religions
i allways thought he was musLIM/BUT THERE YA GO

WE assUme=\thus/=..we
make an = ASS..out of..u.and me

<<..In his reply he was not the least bit interested in expressing any concern whatsoever for the victims.>>

he has many/times raised the mURDER OF millions..he hates abordtionists [maybe worse than pedophiles;proper]

any other forum..where you insult
a respected elder poster like that would see your id disappear

but you still got that..cute puppy innocence..babby smell..
so we wipe the poop from ya rug..and shrug..

there but for olo/arte i..
[eye ate..aye..UNTO THE I-Tie]..guides advise your from italie

@ Poirot,

<<You appear to be equating the debate on various issues and public personalities…>>

ROFLMAO
There is HNOOOOOO way that any of your posting activities in relation to the Abbott govt -- and for that matter, most other threads--could possibly be misconstrued as “debate” . It is more in the way of a hysterical rant...

More akin to this [picture an old red hen scratching up the veggy patch]:
Lookie,lookie , here’s something I cherry-picked squawk squawk
And see here's some more squawk, squawk... scratch, scratch.

<<[how does criticising the "US" stack up to abusing a "fellow poster"?>>
You have many times implied that those who support the US/US policies have blood on their hands.

<<- and no wonder you step forward to defend runner >>
Yes Runner Is a good bloke.
I don’t always agree with everything he says but I take exception to two obNHOjious bullies beating up on him.

Hey Poirot, just on another issue. I remember you told us you were going into Twitter bigtime. Would you care to tell us your twitter handle?

..................................
@obNHOJious

<< "And what does the left say about Boko Haram?>>
obNHOJious gives us a grab bag of links including -- the UN (glad he owns-up it’s lefty!) and Time magazine (another lefty?).

But his links to the “Socialist” sources are most telling
1) Socialistworldnet , boldly headed “Stop violence of Boko Haram” Starts off with:
“Mr President [then waffles-on awhile about sister socialist fraternity crap] before saying “ I condemn the violence of Boko Haram" …BUT the next two dozen lines is about the struggle against capitalism!

Likewise, the link to Global Research – it is largely about the need to “defeat globalised capitalism” and have a "socialism revolution"

Little wonder that when the Ayatollahs came to the fore in Iran the Left,much to their own great cost, formed and alliance with the Islamists because it saw capitalism as the real enemy.

SPQR,

There is a difference between ranting about pollies and their policies and randomly attributing your fellow posters with every diabolical vice known to man (which is what runner does regularly)

Btw, what do we make of Credlin and Abbott cancelling talks with important people just before hosting the G20?

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/confusion-clouds-tony-abbotts-washington-meetings/story-fni0fha6-1226946285710?sv=2833e0ef17b284ce6900cb5d87ed8901

"THERE was some consternation among bureaucrats in Canberra this week when word spread that Tony Abbott had decided against meeting three of the most important economic policy figures in Washington during his forthcoming visit.

Arrangements had been made for the Prime Minister to meet Jack Lew, the US Treasury Secretary. He was also scheduled to hold talks with Christine Lagarde, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, and World Bank president Jim Yong Kim."

"The likely cancellations were particularly surprising because Australia is host of this year’s G20 summit. The leaders of the 20 major economies will assemble in Brisbane in November for what is probably the most high-powered international gathering ever held in this country. According to the Budget papers, the whole G20 exercise is costing Australia almost half a billion dollars — $476.7 million to be precise. That is an indication of its importance.

Lew, Lagarde and Kim are crucial to the summit. Lagarde and Kim are involved in much of the preparatory work and will be there at the table alongside the leaders. And reform of the IMF is one of the items on the summit agenda."

Really, this double act can't seem to go more than a day or two without landing us with a debacle.

I'm tempted to give you my twitter handle, but I think I won't...although I did give a hint here once.

Maybe you can work it out for yourselves : )

Loudmouth, I'm not going to dispute what you say about the Islamic religion.
What I will dispute is the claims by some that the "left" of politics in some way perceives Islam as being a "left" religion as opposed to Christianity being a "right" religion, and therefore the "left" gives some kind of de facto support to Islam. Of course the evidence of "left" support for Islam will be the support for asylum seekers in Australia, by and large these people are Muslims, so in some kind of misrepresentation the nonsense is put forward that to support asylum seekers is to support Islam, totally untrue. Support for asylum seekers is not support for Islam, no more than support for Jewish people by non Jews in WWII was an indication of support for Judaism, it all about support for humanity, not religion.

Loudmouth,

What Paul1405 said....." it's all about support for humanity, not religion."

Poirot wrote

"...Then again life is cheap among lefties who condone baby murder. The 1000 plus drownings caused by the incompetence and gutless policies of the sisterhood went with little scrutiny while the ABC luvvies banged on all night about the one death on Manus Island."

You really are the most hated-filled ranting petty little excuse for a Christian I've ever encountered.

You come on to this forum spitting your vile venom in any direction, proclaiming to stand up for some sort of self-aggrandising morality.

What's this blather?..."....so try revising your filthy little fables to fit your narrative."

Your odious diatribes are the antithesis of the goodness you proclaim to uphold. Your whole construct as "a whiter-than-white" Christian is belied by your dark heart - a heart that is constantly on display on this forum as you strut about flaying your fellow posters with your faux morality.

"Your nasty, vicious, judgmental psyche which you attempt to disguise under the guise of "Christianity" is the reason people run for their lives from fundamentalist Christendom."

Well said.

Hi Paul,

I haven't really considered refugees to Australia as being Muslims, except in the sense of being 'moderate', live-and-let-live Muslims fleeing from Islamist terrorism ranged against them. Obviously I've been thinking here of Hazara refugees from Afghanistan. But Tamils from Sri Lanka are not Muslim. Sudanese and Eritrean refugees tend to be Christian.

To the extent that right and left have any meaning any more - more like 'pro-status-quo' versus 'opportunist-oppositionalist' - yes, I do condemn the 'opportunist-oppositionalists' for their implicit support for Islamist terrorism, for their praising it with faint damns, for their avoidance of linking, say, Boko Haram with Islamist terrorism (calling it something like 'a disaffected group', or 'separatist', when it most certainly isn't: Islamist terrorism is very much in the business of uniting territories under its brand of fascism).

Yes, I do have contempt for the arrogance of O-Os in, thinking, for example, that they can manipulate terrorist groups as the idiots thought they could with the Iranian Islamists back in 1979-1980, - just before they were massacred, that is.

And yes I do have contempt for O-Os, like Socialist Alliance, who push issues that they think serve as a handy stick up the @rse of the Status-Quo mob, and only for that reason. So, Poirot, you may support Peter Slipper even with his crass remarks because he didn't look at his watch or wear a blue tie or wink. THAT's Opportunism, pure and simple, dearie.

So sue me.

Joe

Loudmouth,

After regaling us with a longish narrative on what he thinks about Islamists, etc...Loudmouth finishes off with :

"And yes I do have contempt for O-Os, like Socialist Alliance, who push issues that they think serve as a handy stick up the @rse of the Status-Quo mob, and only for that reason. So, Poirot, you may support Peter Slipper even with his crass remarks because he didn't look at his watch or wear a blue tie or wink. THAT's Opportunism, pure and simple, dearie."

Odd?

VERY odd.

Loudmouth, to say "Socialist Alliance, who push issues that they think serve as a handy stick up the @rse of the Status-Quo mob" implies such people are crass opportunists lacking in any sort of moral conviction. I see them as people with strong political views with rather clear objectives. Socialist Alliance members can be rather strident when it comes to articulating their message. I may not always agree with their tactics, or their politics, but in no way have I ever considered the members of SA to be nothing more than political opportunists, if nothing else they are passionate about what they believe.

Thank you, Paul, yes, I assume that many of the SA camp-followers are young and naïve, but on the whole, I'll stick with my analysis above.

BTT: there does seem to be a silence across the so-called left - I don't give a rat's freckle for the 'Right', I take it for granted that they are what they are - but very little comment seems to be coming from the so-called Left about women's rights, about the facts of that brutal terrorism which happens to be associated with Islamist fundamentalism (almost as bad as that brutality of another of the 'Left''s secret heroes, Bashar al-Assad: how do they square those opposites, I wonder).

When the 'Left' condemns Boko Haram, or al-Nusra, or the Taliban, without going off at a tangent about Abbott's winks, or blue ties, or US banks, I'll begin to take notice of them. Otherwise life's just too short.

Joe

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Left/Right/Left ... And the beat goes on!

Goodness me. Most voters I know know don't vote
as a bloc on issues. I know both conservative voters
and so called "progressive" voters who vote differently
from what's expected when it comes to many issues.
That's why I don't think that sweeping generalisations
of any particular group
is a good way to argue. There are always individual
differences within each group. As for the Left not
speaking out for women's rights? Perhaps you need to
broaden your reading? Just a thought.

Loudmouth, in order to know what the so called "left" is saying about issues, you need to reject "Fortress Australia" by stop listening *SOLELY* to Andrew Bolt, Alan Jones, the Daily Telegraph and the Australian.

If you don't *LOOK* elsewhere for comment, you won't find it.

Australia risks seriously damaging its international reputation and being isolated in the global debate on climate change unless it rethinks its inaction on greenhouse gases, international experts have warned.

And a top adviser to the Obama administration on climate change said Australia could jeopardise its relationship with the United States if the Abbott government fails to fall into line on climate policy.

''I think everyone except the climate deniers is deeply concerned with the direction [Australia] is going,'' Heather Zichal, the White House's chief climate adviser until last November, told Fairfax Media.

A new report released ahead of a meeting between President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Tony Abbott next Friday found Australia's commitment to addressing climate change had slipped behind other countries, including China and Indonesia.

If Abbott continues to act as the stalking horse for global climate change deniers, he will not just weaken his own legitimacy as an international leader, but he may do long-lasting harm to Australia's position as a constructive middle-power.

Ignoring climate change, the biggest threat facing the world's economy, environment and population, is simply not a moral option for Tony Abbott, Australia or the G20. It would be a huge mistake for the prime minister to make

The PM is driven by a right wing "version" of religion and ideology. He can't change. If he remains PM for the next 2 years (unlikely indeed) he will become an international laughing stock, and Australia's reputation as a progressive country will be severely diminished.

Foxy, my thinking exactly, I find the terms "left" and "right" (which stem from the days of the French Revolution) are no longer appropriate when describing a persons political views. I much prefer the terms "conservative" and "progressive", On certain specific issues my views could be deemed to be conservative, that is, unwilling to support any meaningful change on a particular issue. I, like some politicians, agree with the oft quoted aphorism "If it ain't broke don't fix it" but that is not to say I do not support progressive change on many issues. We are all of a political mixture, sometimes conservative and at other times progressive.
Take the recent Abbott budget, which contains a number of changes. On the issue of say, the proposed Medicare copayment, a fairly black and white issue, no doubt Abbott and co see it as a necessary progressive change to the medical system, I hold a conservative view and want to see the status quo maintained. On such an issue its impossible to hold a radical view, as the copayment proposal is nothing more than rather minor tinkering with the medical system, that is not to say its not an important issue, it is. Radicalism can only be applied to much bigger and broader issues, in this instance it would be radical to propose the scrapping of Medicare altogether, as Medicare has now become a fundamentally intrenched part of our very important medical system.

Paul,

The co-paynment issue is radical in the sense that it was instituted at the behest of the IPA to undermine Medicare.

In order to make this decision a little more kosher, the Abbott govt came up with a hastily confected Medical Research Fund Thingy. $5 from each $7 consultation is headed for this "fund", the other $2 going to the doctors.

The amazing thing is that Dutton and Co keep waffling on about how the co-payment is vital for the sustainability of Medicare...even though none of the co-payment appears to be bolstering the system at all.

Another sham from this despicable excuse for a govt.

...........

Loudmouth,

What is your beef?

Boko Haram and similar groups are beyond redemption...the absolute end in diabolical intent. I deplore what they do and what they stand for.

However, I am interested in "our" govt's attempts to alter the social fabric of our society - and if I address that with priority, so what?

Keeping in mind that Tony Abbott is always blathering on about Australia being open for business (even going so far as to slap it crudely into his D-Day commemoration speech) one wonders why his illustriousness has cancelled high level talks with some very important people.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jun/07/tony-abbott-embarrassing-australia-says-tanya-plibersek?CMP=twt_gu

"The prime minister has reportedly cancelled meetings with the world's top finance officials during his visit to the United States."

"It follows a report from political columnist Laurie Oakes, who said Abbott had cancelled long-planned meetings with US treasury secretary Jack Lew, International Monetary Fund head Christine Lagarde and World Bank president Jim Yong Kim despite Australia hosting the G20 summit in November.

“The G20 is the most important meeting ever on Australian soil. The head of the IMF, World Bank and US treasury chief will be critically involved with preparations for the G20,” Plibersek said."

He's really a bit of an embarrassment, don't you reckon?

You'd think Ms Credlin would understand the importance of such talks...even if her charge is limited in his abilities.

Poirot, I tend to define radical more in the context of totally upending something. I only picked on the Medicare copayment as an example of a progressive change, not that progressive should only be taken at its literal meaning of positive change, like this one is, in my opinion, a recessive change.

Paul,

The term progressive politically originally meant "favoring reform; radically liberal,". Until the 1970s this largely meant big government owning the means of production and dispensing social justice, i.e. essentially socialist. The crunch came in the late 70s when it became clear that the socialist economies were beginning to implode.

It then fell to Margaret Thatcher to radically reform the UK, with such dramatic success that most countries incl Australia followed suit, giving the UK and Aus virtually unbroken growth for 2 decades.

It was labour under Blair and Brown in the UK and Rudd and Gillard that started to unwind this boosting government involvement in most facets of life and business, increasing expenditure, and trying to restrict freedoms on the media and internet. In fact becoming regressive.

Calling the left "progressive" and the right "conservative" is newspeak from the left.

Left and right still do it for me.

Ergo...this govt is "far" right...

And employing the US term for rabid (and not very bright) far-right nutters - Tea Partiers.

P,

Yup and Labor are far left and are rabid and moronic communists.

SM,

"Yup and Labor are far left and are rabid and moronic communists."

Lol!

<<Yup and Labor are far left and are rabid and moronic communists.>>

Shadow, I'll take that as a "shot" from you on a little Aussie political forum, I don't thing you mean it, I give you some credit for intelligence, you as well as I know what "moronic communism" really is, something Uncle Joe practiced with great "success". I expect that from OTHERS amongst the 'Usual Suspects' on here, not you.

Moving On...

I just don't like the terms left and right, too abstract, trying to make sense of left/right, I'll say Turnbull is left of Abbott, on what, on everything, no he's not,therefore meaningless. No on some particular issue Turnbull may well be conservative whilst Abbott could be progressive.
I'll partly take your definition of 'progressive' as one who does favor reform, obviously including some degree of liberal thinking, liberal in the true sense of the word, not as one today could apply it to The Liberal (conservative) Party of Australia, as it now stands, very difficult these days to find the liberals in the Liberal Party, where are they, joined The Greens.
I actually meet a Green, before the last federal election who was ex army, ex Liberal Party, the fellow was so committed that he was seeking endorsement for the Senate as a Green. I liked him, a very articulate guy, with a good take on issues.
To be totally honest, if you meet Kevin Rudd, which I never have, you would have to discuss politics with him for a very long time before you would come to the conclusion he is a member of The Labor Party. If in deed you ever did, without him telling you so, as it would equally apply to Malcolm Turnbull and The Liberal Party. In fact it would be quite possible to switch Rudd and Turnbull around and you wouldn't even know what party they belonged to.
con't

con't
The political DNA of The Labor Party and The Liberal Party is 75% alike. The political DNA of Rudd and Turnbull is 99% alike. I'll just add for a laugh, the political DNA of Abbott and a chimpanzee is 100% alike, except the chimps smarter!

Paul,

Of course I don't believe it any more than any rational person would believe that the T party and the liberals share anything in common.

Health care costs at the current trajectory would consume the entire federal budget roughly by 2050 leaving nothing for pensions, schooling, etc. Just remember that it was the Labor party that first identified that Medicare was in trouble and that a co payment was necessary to reduce unnecessary visits and prevent medicare costs from blowing out of control.

While I have heard the Left whingers throwing stones at the measures in the budget, not one labor MP has offered an alternative. While closing one's eyes and pretending that rapid debt growth is OK will work for a short while, it will all come to Greek style grinding halt at some point.

If the Greens or anyone has any viable alternative, I would be glad to hear it.

Perhaps today part of the problem lies in the fact that
we have political parties where lawyers, accountants and
other middle-class professionals make up the vast
majority of members of parliament. This is not to argue
that these elected politicians are wise philosopher
kings - far from it. However, their life experiences and
lifestyles are uniformly middle-class, and, hence, it is
in the interest of this class that they tend to promote.

Some of us would take this outcome to represent a loss
of the diversity of knowledge and interests that parliaments
need. And it is. There's no answer yet as to what we should do
to improve parliamentary democracy. We still struggle to
find a democratic solution - that would satisfy us all.
Hence our divisions and labelling of "Left" and "Right."

The means by which modern, representative, liberal democratic
governments acquire a rough understanding as to their
constituent's trials, tribulations, and wishes, are reflected
in what the electors ask governments to do for them via
public opinion polling, and in the probing of focus groups.
These tools of modern politics do nothing more than alert
members of parliament to the views and desires of those they
represent. Of course public opinion polls are based on
representative samples of voters and hence are a useful guide.
Howver, there is a fundamental matter to deal with before
people are polled and that is the question of -
how well informed are voters?

A democracy requires its citizens to make informed choices.
I'll repeat what I've stated in the past : -

If citizens or their representatives are denied access to
the information they need to make these choices, or if
they are given false or misleading information, the
democratice process becomes a sham. Under such circumstances
the people cannot use their rights in a meaningful way.
Hence the current expression of disgruntled voters from
all walks of life displaying their frustration in the protests
currently taking place around the country.

cont'd ...

As far as the US is concerned?

It's torn between a religious "Right" and a secular, liberal,
"Left" and from this comes diametrically opposed public policies
on foreign affairs, education and health.

Perhaps the solution has to be to improve the knowledge of
people across the board. The democratic experiement should be
pushed to deliver much more: not be curtailed as some
conservative thinkers want. By challenging the next
generation to higher standards - there is hope. Only caring,
secular teachers can counter the prejudices of
parents who themselves may not have had the schooling to
break the (generally ignorant) cultural inheritance of their
parents. Trace this process back far enough and you may have
a 21st century child with 10th century, 7th century or year
zero understanding of the world.

SM,

"Just remember that it was the Labor party that first identified that Medicare was in trouble and that a co payment was necessary to reduce unnecessary visits and prevent medicare costs from blowing out of control."

Why, oh why in that case is the proposed LNP Medicare co-payment not going to bolster Medicare. Why have they hastily confected their Medical Research Thingy?...I mean why?

You might say, it'll make people think twice about seeing the doc...(athough Hockey has been keen to tell us it's only the price of a couple of beers, so it won't make any difference in that regard at all)...but why the hastily constructed Medical Research Fund. Someone cynical might say the Abbott Govt thinks people are so dumb that including something like that will suffice to shut out criticism.

Regarding the likening of the Abbott Govt to the Tea Party...one doesn't have to look to far to see the similarities. Privatisation of social services like health, http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/you-will-pay-more-medicare-changes-will-create-usstyle-system-20140607-39pud.html ....booting an entire section of society off the welfare net for 6 month periods....the demonisation and sadistic treatment of asylum seekers...pandering to the extremely wealthy....climate change denial ahoy!

Not to mention this Govt's post-election policies bear almost no resemblance to their pre-election spiel.

Deceptive in the extreme...although some people seem to think that's just fine.

SM,

I never intended to debate the Medicare copayment proposal on this thread, I only raised it as an example of "progressivness". To provide a simple answer, budgets are also about priorities. I think the Abbott government has got its priorities rather contorted, misshaped, even bent, and only a total rethink of priorities will bring it back into line. I like this one.
<<Health care costs at the current trajectory would consume the entire federal budget roughly by 2050 leaving nothing for pensions>>

Abbott and co can't see past the end of their noses. little own gaze into the future at the year 2050. Its a bit saying "If you drive your car in a straight line from Sydney to Melbourne, you will crash before you get there. It a long way to Melbourne, just as the year 2050 is a long way off, people can change direction, slow down, speed up etc etc. Nothing is set in concrete regarding budgets between now and 2050.

Paul,

Well, yes, any expenditure committed (perhaps by a former government) into the future is a constant, and probably growing, flow of cost to any government, and has to be at least matched as much as possible by a similar flow of revenue. Costs out, revenue in.

1It's not that different in principle from your household budgeting - whatever you want to spend, has to be matched by what you earn, and if you have very long-term expenditure such as house repayments, then you have to plan ahead - adding in the costs, say, of a few kids, and the partner not working for some years, unexpected health costs, purchase of a new second-hand car, etc.

So you would know from the outset that, if you were young and relatively carefree now, and still could barely get by on your wage, that you might have some trouble if any of the above extras happened, that you may have difficulties staying out of debt for the rest of your life. o you would plan for the problem of what to cut, or reduce.

Any Treasurer has the vastly larger responsibilities not to get the entire country into debt, Labor or Liberal, or to minimise the stream of future debt inherited from a previous government.

I hope this has been useful.

Joe

Poirot,

You are really grasping at straws. You are in effect saying that a Medicare co payment is OK if the money goes back into Medicare.

Considering that the majority of money that goes into Medicare comes directly from tax (not the medicare levy) the money goes to medical research is additional money to that Labor would have provided.

If you are going to get silly about the T party, the Labor party is the party of big government controlling the means of production, similar to the communist party that killed millions.

Oh no you don't, SM.

Naughty, naughty, putting words into people's mouths.

My point was that all we've heard so far from this mendacious govt is that Medicare is supposedly unsustainable. Time and time again Dutton stands up to say things along those lines.

My question is that if the general message of this govt is "that we can't go on with an unsustainble system like Medicare, therefore we need a co-payment".....then why is the majority of their "co-payment" going to a confected research fund - and the rest to doctors to oversee the co-payment - and not to Medicare?

(My point being that Dutton's guff is merely a cover for the wedge to undermine Medicare)

Regarding the US Tea Party overrun Republicans...can you highlight for our benefit any major differences between that outfit and the IPA/LNP?

Oh no Poirot,

You don't get off so lightly. The point of the co payment is not to raise money, but by making patients pay a tiny fraction (about 10%) of the cost of a medical visit, the huge number of unnecessary visits can be reduced, and the costs instead of growing at 6% p.a. can drop closer to the CPI.

The majority of the money comes from consolidated revenue, so if the co payment does not go to medicare, the difference is made up from other sources. The difference between the Labor co payment and the liberal co payment is in effect that the Labor co payment was greater in real terms.

P, your ignorance of what the libs actually stand for is colossal. The libs and the T party have virtually nothing in common.

What is the difference between Labor and communists?

SM,

You're as slippery as this govt.

On the one hand, Hockey tells us it's a mere bagatelle - two beers and it won't make an ounce of difference to whether people see their doctor.

Amanda Vanstone reckons it's only the price of a tuna sandwich.

And on the other hand, you and they tell us it's to stop people going to the doctor in quite such large numbers or quite so often.

Reality is that it's the thin end of the wedge.

Make up your mind - or at least set Eleventy Joe straight.

No word on the similarity of policy agenda between the Tea Party Republicans and the IPA/LNP?

I been to an Army reunion over the week end & wow! have you got stuck into this subject or not. Wandering all over the shop..

nhoj: I first brought up Catholicism paedophilia,

How come it's always Catholicism paedophilia when there is just as much, if not more, from the C of E's & OPD, not to even touch on what Islam does to children.

poirot: What I don't do on this forum, runner, is to consistently paste fellow posters with whom I disagree as haters and immoral people simply because they disagree with me.

Yes you do. I can vouch for that.

paul1405: Why would any woman ever contemplate joining such disrespectful chauvinistic institutions, it defies belief.

It wasn't until the Combined churches Conference in Belgium around 1850 that women were declared "Human" & allowed to participate in religion. Can't put my finger on the exact name of the Conference or the Date.

paul1405: it all about support for humanity, not religion.

Unfortunately in supporting the Queue jumping Boat People one is supporting Islam, as the Majority are Islamic. they, & their Belief System ARE an extreme danger to any Western Democratic Society. Therefore in order to preserve the Australian way of life & Culture we must exclude this Vile Religion. That may seem inhuman to some, but to allow these people, even so call "nice ones," would be inhumane to Australians.

Dear mikk, it turns out that the fight on Manus started because the Iranians were pushing everybody around, them being superior to the Iraqis' & Afghan's. The Guards went in to sort it out & got attacked by both sides. Ok, one got killed, but in a War their are casualties & these people are still fighting a Sunni/Shite War which they are intent on bringing to Australia, See Kanimbla.

Loudmouth: their avoidance of linking, say, Boko Haram with Islamist terrorism (calling it something like 'a disaffected group', or 'separatist')

Ahh, the value of Political Correctness that makes picking up a turd by the clean end OK.

579: Australia risks seriously damaging its international reputation and being isolated in the global debate on climate change unless it rethinks its inaction on greenhouse gases, international experts have warned.

nhoj: If he remains PM for the next 2 years (unlikely indeed) he will become an international laughing stock, and Australia's reputation as a progressive country will be severely diminished.

In the affairs of the World. Australia? Who? Ordinary citizens in Europe & America don't even know we exist. I asked.

paul1405: I much prefer the terms "conservative" and "progressive",

I fail to see how that works.

"Conservative" Old, steeped in past, out of date traditions & unwilling to change or keep up with the modern changing World. What ever you're for we're against especially change to the status quo.

"Progressive" Change for change sake, mostly weed smoking weirdo & overly sensitive type that cry at the drop of a hat, on any subject. Against everything, so much so that they are even against anything they are for.

Left & Right? Doesn't really work either.

poirot: I am interested in "our" govt's attempts to alter the social fabric of our society - and if I address that with priority, so what?

That worries me too. It seems like there is some Hell bent idea to integrate Islam into Australian Society by some people & THAT is a BIG worry.

Foxy: If citizens or their representatives are denied access to
the information they need to make these choices, or if they are given false or misleading information, the democratic process becomes a sham.

Foxy, it has always been a SHAM. That's why they have the "30 year" rule & some "Never to be released." What happens behind closed doors, stays behind closed doors.

poirot: Not to mention this Govt's post-election policies bear almost no resemblance to their pre-election spiel.

No Govt's post-election policies bears any resemblance to their pre-election spiel. Never has, never will.

Jayb,

"poirot: What I don't do on this forum, runner, is to consistently paste fellow posters with whom I disagree as haters and immoral people simply because they disagree with me."

Some evidence please...that I have ever accused someone of "immorality" or being a "hater" just because we hold different philosophies?

Links please?

Foxy, the American Political system is a strange bird, it actually has two right feet. Yes, it's torn between a religious "Right" which can get rather secular when it needs be, and a secular "Right" which can get rather religious when it needs be.
As the American Bible clearly states on its dollar bill "In God We Trust" there was no room for "Everyone Else Can Go To Hell".

<<any expenditure committed (perhaps by a former government) into the future is a constant, and probably growing, flow of cost to any government, and has to be at least matched as much as possible by a similar flow of revenue. Costs out, revenue in.>>

Loudmouth is that the reasoning behind the Abbott government ripping $80 billion from the previous governments commitment to health, education etc.

Planning ahead... Is the Abbott government planning to be there in 2050? I thought with a bit of luck they would be gone by Christmas! This Christmas not the next, We can only hope.

poirot: Some evidence please...that I have ever accused someone of "immorality" or being a "hater" just because we hold different philosophies?

Links please?

Dear poirot. I was thinking of myself in particular. Just about every discussion (dozens) we've ever had at some time, especially on the value of Islam in Australia. xxx

Hi Paul,

If you have another look at your last posting, you may notice that you have not actually said anything - nothing substantial, only a few cheap (if quite accurate) shots, insults, (I don't know how to classify 'two right feet') and unsubstantiated assertions. You may be right in everything you wrote, but there's no way of knowing with such fairy-floss.

Is there any chance of anybody getting back to topic ?

Joe

Joe, not everything need be analytically serious. When it comes to dance n' some are known to have two left feet. LOL.

You did say <<<<any expenditure committed (perhaps by a former government) into the future is a constant, and probably growing, flow of cost to any government, and has to be at least matched as much as possible by a similar flow of revenue. Costs out, revenue in.>>

The undertaking pre-election by Abbott not to cut Labor's (monetary) commitment to future expenditure on health and education, would seem to support your above statement, but come budget night the new government ripped $80 billion off that Labor commitment, thus giving a 'lie' to what you said. you must be disappointed with Abbott on that score of not sticking to the principle you stated. There was no new overriding reasoning given to justify the cuts.

Yes,

You are as slippery as the labor goddess of deceit Juliar.

And it was Labor's co payment that was more expensive in real terms.

If you had bothered to read any of the articles with respect to the co payment, you would realise that its prime function was to give people a price signal that medical visits had some value.

If you had done any economics ever you might understand.

No word on the similarity of policy agenda between the communists and Labor.

SM,

"If you had bothered to read any of the articles with respect to the co payment, you would realise that its prime function was to give people a price signal that medical visits had some value."

Okay....now could you explain to me how that dovetails with Abbott's most vociferous and clear-as-a-bell statements prior to election that "There will be no changes to health"?

You do make me laugh at impugning Gillard for "deceit".

We now have a situation where it's nearly impossible to locate a single area where the PM and his shonky govt haven't lied.

There are so many lies that we can hardly keep track of them.

Entertaining, to say the least.

poirot: There are so many lies that we can hardly keep track of them.
Entertaining, to say the least.

Insert, "from both all Political Parties," after, "lies,"

Sad, so sad.

Hiya Jayb,

Can you name me a govt who has begun its tenure by back-flipping on around 95% of its pre-election spiel?

At present, the only areas where Abbott appears to have kept his pre-election "promises" are his intentions to axe the carbon & mining taxes and install his PPL.

And that's beside all the "surprises" he's sprung on the electorate since lying his way into govt

"There will be no changes to health"?
Poirot,
You'll get to eat your own words when the health services start to improve because of this.
You really don't appear to see how much waste this will cut out do you ?
Go to your average public health facility & count how many are simply taking up valuable doctors' time by not staying home instead & do their own dressings.
25% are hypocondriacs who just want some attention because their own families don't give them the time of day & the other 25 % are lazeabouts with no interest in looking after themselve better & find it easier to be on drugs & then clogg up the health system.

poirot: Can you name me a govt. who has begun its tenure by back-flipping on around 95% of its pre-election spiel?

Yep. ALP, LNP, somewhere along their tenure.

Gee's that was easy. Sad, so sad.

We’ve had another week of the Coalition crawling through the mud of its budget sales job to a hostile electorate.
The government thought it was on to something with its argument that, of course, Labor had once advocated a medicare co-payment in 1991.
Strangely, it didn’t mention that at least Labor was proposing to exclude all federal health concession cardholders from the scheme, and boost the Medicare safety net.
But you wonder whether the Coalition would now be able to persuade that a co-payment, even on the Labor basis, was fair, or that anything in the budget is “fundamentally fair”.
What’s more, the more tyres that are being kicked on the budget car, the less persuaded people seem to be that it is in the national interest either.
That is, that the various “reforms” may produce a smarter, more productive country. You even have to wonder whether it can deliver the outcomes the government says it wants.
Here is just one example of how some unrelated policy shifts in the budget may interact with potentially disastrous implications for our health system.

Jayb,

"Yep. ALP, LNP, somewhere along their tenure."

Haha.....very funny!

I'm sure you'll enjoy this Mike Carlton piece he puts it so well.

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/tory-selfdestruction-is-so-painfully-enjoyable-20140606-zs0e2.html

"You can smell the doubt in Tory ranks, see the fear in Tory eyes. It’s not yet panic, although in this febrile political climate it wouldn’t take much to start one. But they are worried, deeply worried, that Tony Abbott might just have lost the plot.

This swine of a budget has been a disaster, both in its construction and its political execution. Stunned by the public protest, Abbott and his ministers have been furiously daubing the pig with lipstick, but it’s not working. The polls have the Coalition trailing badly on the primary vote and Bill Shorten is streets ahead as preferred prime minister, even though he has done little but keep his bum pointed to the ground."

"The polls tell you more and more people are realising Abbott has not so much lost the plot as that he never had one. In opposition he was the wrecker, brutally effective against a divided and demoralised Labor Party, promising to lead an adult government faithful to its election commitments. But in power he and his ministers trudge through the smoking ruins of their policy flip-flops and broken promises, haplessly blaming their predecessors for the mess. This scaled new heights of idiocy on Wednesday when Defence Minister David Johnston proclaimed that it was Labor’s fault Abbott’s RAAF VIP jet had been late leaving for Indonesia."

.....

Yup, individual....I'm sure the health system will be thrilled to address all the major health problems arising in the wake of people deciding to put off seeking advice about minor ones.

We see the news doctors are reporting a 'significant' drop in the number of people seeking attention since the budget was announced due to the worry over paying the $7 contribution.

Firstly I don't believe there has been a significant drop. And how would they know the $7 was the reason if they didn't ask? And if they asked and heard that was the reason they could simply inform the fee hasn't started yet.

But on another note, anyone who is genuinely sick enough to feel the need to see a doctor would not be stopped by $7. And anyone who weighs up and decideds $7 is the deal breaker can't really be that sick or in need. Too many people run to the doctor for every little sniffle, perhaps the $7 is a good deterrent.

Poirot,
Your last post is just simple hangers-on gobbledeegook. Of course the kids are cranky when Mommy stops dishing out the lollies.
That is precisely the situation we're at now. The ALP Govt was the devious uncle handing out the sweets & the Coalition is the more responsible Mom telling the kids not to accept any more gifts from uncle Labor.

But Mr Abbott is now suggesting the states don’t really need the money.
“Money isn’t everything,” he said on Sunday. “Over the years we have thought the only solution to school problems was more money. Now money is important, no doubt about that, but are you really saying that we can’t be more efficient in schools? Can’t we be more efficient in hospitals?”

poirot: Haha.....very funny!

No. I was serious. Do you seriously believe that the ALP, or any Political Party never broke a promise, or never intended to break any promises they made during their Election Campaign as soon as it got into power or some where along it's tenure?

If you do, then you need a good dose of reality.

Breaking promises is what Political Parties do. Although they say that, we (the Public) misunderstood, misread their intention, was reported wrongly, circumstances changed, their hand was forced & it was the other Party's fault anyway. All Political Parties are the same horse, just a different colour.

sbr108: Too many people run to the doctor for every little sniffle.

You are so right. The lady down the road kiddy fell of his bike with training wheels, gravel rashed his hand & elbow. She took the child to the Doctor. I said to her, "What was the matter with a little kiss & a hug, a dab of Iodine & a band Aid. " She didn't know what Iodine was. Everything is an emergency & needs a Doctor. A sniffle is definitely "The Flu" not a common cold. 7 days of lemon & honey sip, an occasional aspirin & rest. No, got to have Antibiotics, which do no good for a virus anyway.

Scrapes cuts & scratches, Boils were always attended by the Ambulance man. A suggestion was made that the nurse at the Doctors surgery could look after these things, They made an assessment as to whether the person really needed to waste the Doctors time. The Doctors thought they might miss out on a lucrative remuneration con & canned that idea.

individual,

".... The ALP Govt was the devious uncle handing out the sweets & the Coalition is the more responsible Mom telling the kids not to accept any more gifts from uncle Labor."

Well, double Lol!

Guess who was the fella who initially started the trend, ramping up middle-class welfare...nominating the middle-class as "battlers" and pork-barrelling for his life.

(Ans...Johnnie Howard)

Check the record if you will - and you'll find that is accurate.

That's when he wasn't busy selling public assets to achieve his "surplus".

At least he wasn't a dimwit like Abbott, who today, apparently, publicly referred to Canada as "Canadia".

poirot, well that was a waste of Post wasn't it. Much ado about nothing.

busy selling public assets to achieve his "surplus".
Poirot,
And what has Labor done with that surplus ?

Meanwhile, the 'left''s new bestie, Uncle Clive (after all, he's not a Liberal [ no, indeed], therefore good) is being let of the feminist hook but all these clever diversions. The issue remains:

Should a right-wing politician abuse his parliamentary position to insult a woman and attempt to denigrate her on the grounds that she is working for Abbott ?

I respectfully suggest, yes. From the silence (and desperate diversions) of the left on this thread, it is clear that they would rather not have to say anything, but if they had to, it would be a 'no'. After all, she works for Abbott, doesn't she ? So she's fair game, there are no tactics too dirty to pull her down.

If any politician had said something similar about Prime Minister Gillard, that would have been just as disgraceful and despicable. E.G., like that moron Heffernan. As would - presumably in that case - the silence of the Right.

Joe

Now it's starting to dawn on you why Labor introduced the Medicare co payment, and why the coalition is continuing with it, you want to change the subject.

Given your ability to duck and weave, you should have been a labor MP. Perhaps you should consider why the most deceitful PM in Australian History Juliar lied to Australia about the carbon tax and lots of other promises.

Uncle Clive is in Parliament for one thing & one thing only. Furthering Clive's Business Interests. Same as Gina siding up to the NLP.

SM wrote, "Wonderful Ms Gillard lied to Australia about the carbon tax and lots of other promises".

SM, name the other pre election "promises" that Ms Gillard broke.

I'm waiting ............

I'm waiting ............
Nhoj,
honest & transparent Government for the good of all. Competence was another she rambled on about.
At least Abbott is working on reducing our debt whilst Labor couldn't give a damn how much it was because they knew that it would up to a Coalition Government to fix their immoral stuff-ups. Labor always counts on a Coalition Government as indeed do all hangers-on.

I see that poor old Individual couldn't name one, not even ONE, other pre election promise that ms Gillard broke.

And keeping in kind this was Gllard's full sentence on the carbon tax...

“There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead, but let me be clear: I will be putting a price on carbon and I will move to an emissions trading scheme.”

And we got a carbon price....

"individual,

"And what has Labor done with that surplus ?'

Saved us from a GFC recession...as disgusting as that notion appears to be to you "righties".

(Never mind...Tones is putting that to rights as we speak:)

Loudmouth,

Palmer accused Mike Willesee today of having "a plum stuck up his arse."

Will you all be rallying in defence of older men being impugned in that manner?

Poirot wrote, "There will be no carbon tax under a government I lead, but let me be clear, I will be putting a price on carbon and I will move to an emissions trading scheme". (That's exactly what she did, put a price on carbon and was moving towards an emissions trading scheme)

The crazy righties here NEVER provide the "FULL" quote, that's left up to rational, truthful people like Poirot.

Whereas ToneLIAR is a 100% outright, unmitigated LIAR with .....

"No new tax collection without an election".

"I can assure your listeners there will be NO cuts to health, no cuts to education, no cuts to pensions".

"No cuts to education, and no cuts to the ABC or SBS"

"Can I just scotch this idea that the coalition's policy is or has ever been tow backs"

Etc, etc, etc, etc ,etc .........

Here's a list of 28 broken Abbott promises (the 28 broken promises are listed at the end of the page before the comments). Tax'Em Tony is the biggest liar in Australian political history, by FAR. http://sallymcmanus.net/abbotts-wreckage

Hi Pirrot,

Thank you for that information. I'm not sure if an accusation of a plum stuck up one's arse is gender-specific, but if such an insult coming from a bloke to another bloke is gender-specific, and/or sexist, then yes, I condemn it without reservation. So hurtful. [Well, depends on the size of the plum, I suppose]. Actually, I'm not sure what it means, but perhaps you could enlighten me.

But also, I'm not sure what age has to do with it. Is it more offensive for older men to be accused of having a plum stuck up their arses than for younger men ? I don't know, I haven't really given it much thought.

No, I still haven't.

And no, I still haven't. But I'm trying :)

In defence of your hero, [i.e. because anti-Coalition], and at the risk of antagonising the male, aged and perhaps gay communities, I respectfully suggest that he may have been close to the mark. Sometimes Willesee is great, but sometimes he IS a bit up himself, as we all are.

But all in all, what you report is yet another outrageous and vulgar anti-Liberal rant by yet another buffoon. Thank you, Porrit.

Joe

not even ONE,
Nhoj,
The left orientated media did not publish the Rudd/Gillard broken promises whereas it bombards us with saturation no-stop bleating of broken promises.
Rudd?gillard promised us way more than Abbott & broke the promise. They promised good Government.

Nhoj,

Juliar put a price on carbon, by putting in a carbon tax.

"Tax - a compulsory contribution to state revenue, levied by the government on workers' income and business profits, or added to the cost of some goods, services, and transactions."

There are lots of ways to put a price on carbon without a carbon tax. But as all the revenue from the carbon tax went to the state it was 100% tax. Juliar Gillard Lied.

Shadow Minister .... you obviously don't like to actually read posts. At bottom of page 28 I pointed out that Ms. Gillard lied on ONE promise, by my use of the word "other" in my post. Please learn how to read. I directly asked you to name any "other" broken pre election promise from Ms. Gillard. You have been unable to do that.

I have just pointed out 28 broken election promises from Tax'Em Tony in my post on page 29. There's actually more than that.

ToneLIAR is the biggest LYING PM in the history of Australia politics.

Dear Shadow Minister,

Just to jog your memory:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/why-julia-gillard-didnt-lie-about-carbon-tax-plans-before-election/story-e6frerdf-1226421929786

Loudmouth,

"...[Well, depends on the size of the plum, I suppose]..."

Lol!

Hey, hey....he also called him a "dcikhead" but OLO wouldn't let me put up the link because that word was in it.

The reason I mentioned "older men" is because Willesee is in that category...surely if Palmer had said that to a woman, there would have been all sorts of sexists overtones, etc.

Btw, I see you're taken to addressing Poirot as anything but...as in "Pirrot" or "Porrit". I think, myself that SM's usual favourite of "Parrot" is at least funny...even OUG's "Pure Rot" stacks up as clever word play.

Being as you're such a grown-up, I'm sure you can do better than your recent effort

Nhoj, Thanks for that "short" list of the lies from Tax Em' Tony, terrible, the fella has no shame, lies and more lies. I've just heard the news that the new Prime Minister of New Zealand, Tony Abbott, ha ha, has embarrassed that poor little kiwi country across the ditch, on his visit to Canada, the country he stupidly refers to as "Canaria". As Effie would say "How Embarrassment!"

I must say how pleased I am that Nhoj has returned to the forum, with his factual, informed and balanced comments. Nhoj keep up the good work, the intelligent side of the debate appreciates your incisive input. Unfortunately the 'Usual Suspects', and they know who they are, continue with their misguided mumblings, ratbag ramblings and general ill-defined diatribes. Yet we live in hope that they too may one day see the light, and throw off the heavy shackles of conservatism and breath the fresh air of socialism!

Nhob,

You have made the same assertion that Juliar only lied once several times before, and I have answered immediately with a string of lies and broken promises. And while I tire of endlessly repeating myself when boneheads demand a response and fail to read it, here are a number of lies and broken promises:

Juliar guaranteed that there would be no carbon tax, and 3 weeks later, we were getting one. = Direct lie.
Juliar promised an East Timor solution when there had been no negotiations with East Timor, only one phone call. = Direct lie.
220 promises of a budget surplus in 2012/3 the latest one from Juliar herself only weeks before Whine Swan admitted they weren't going to make it by a country mile = direct lie,
Then there was the people's congress,
The mining tax revenue that Juliar promised and spent but never delivered.
The NBN business plan that failed completely, and the endless litany of failed deadlines.

Nhob, I have a request, and that is that you provide one example of Juliar meeting a promise she made.

P.S. deliberately misquoting me is also lying, so please stop.

Foxy,

We have been down this road before. Paul Syvret is trying to argue on a technicality that as the definition of a lie is an intentional deceit, that because no one could determine whether Juliar intended to break her promise at the time she made it, she could only be accused of breaking a promise not lying.

Unfortunately for PS, he has left two logical holes you could drive a truck through:
1 - If this logic were true, no one ever could be accused of lying and the term would be redundant.
2 - If arguing on a technicality, one definition of lying defines giving a guarantee which one has no intention of keeping as lying. The brevity of the gap between the iron clad guarantee and the breaking of the promise is proof that Juliar lied.

Perhaps you would also do well in trying to recall one promise she kept.

There seems to be some issue about what is a lying and what is not.
This is lying: http://imgur.com/m4t8CZZ

Abbott didn't lie to me thus far, I'm seeing a gradual improvement in sorting out the ALP legacy of utter incompetence & that's what he said he'd do & he didn't promise that.
Some of the policies need changing & again that is not lying, that is finding other ways of doing it. In fact I can't recall him ever saying "I promise" except in the case of the moronistic Carbon Tax & let's face it's only the morons jumping up & down about that. The morons have been jumping up & down since day 1 because they see integrity & responsibility as the greatest threat to their parasitic existence.
So, come to think of it, any links to where Abbott said "I promise" ? What about some links where Shorten & Milne say they promise to oppose legislation ?

Unfortunately, the 'Usual Suspects' do not have the latest copy of 'The Concise Oxford Dictionary' 2014 edition. If you did and turned to page 742 under the letter 'L' there is the word;

LYING

Definition; "Any thing that comes out of Tony Abbotts mouth!"

and if you were to turn to page 368 of said dictionary. and looked up under the letter 'T", TONY ABBOTT;

It says "Go to page 742 and look up LYING!"

LOL.

individual,

Amongst other things:

"...Some of the policies need changing & again that is not lying, that is finding other ways of doing it..."

Words fail me...in between guffaws.

Just how do you reckon "democracy" can work when a man goes into an election saying one thing - and then "as soon as he's elected" decides to spill the beans that what he was saying in every policy area was almost "entirely" bunkum, and, in fact, he plans to do the opposite?

People of your ilk obviously don't give a toss "how' Abbott got himself elected, but what about those people who were swinging voters who trusted that he was at east 70% truthful. (people like me are even surprised at the sheer breadth of his deceit)

Those swinging voters will never trust him again - even after he attempts to pork-barrel them prior to the next election.

You do realise that a lying toad like Abbott and his miserable govt are unelectable for ever more.

Unfortunately, the 'left whingers' do not have the latest copy of 'The Concise Oxford Dictionary' 2014 edition. If you did and turned to page 742 under the letter 'L' there is the word;

LYING

Definition; "Any thing that comes out of Juliar Gillard's, Bill Shorten's or Christine Milne's mouth!"

and if you were to turn to page 368 of said dictionary. and looked up sanctimonious , It says "Go to page 742 and look up Green party member!"

at page 666 under corrupt this is defined as Labor MPs with a special mention for AWU back handers to Juliar.

"hypocrite" refers to Greens taking huge corporate donations.

LOL.

Unfortunately it's now well established and widely accepted that anything that emanates from the Abbott Govt is a "lie"....

Unless proven otherwise.

If falsehood, like truth, had only one face, we would be in better
shape. For we would take as certain the opposite of what the liar
said. But the reverse of truth has a hundred thousand shapes and
a limitless field.

Words fail me...in between guffaws.
Poirot,
No, reality is what you fail.

'The Concise Oxford Dictionary' 2014 edition. If you did and turned to page 742 under the letter 'L' there is the word;

LYING

I have a Macquarie Tasman Dictionary & an old School "Collins" (you know, the Navy Blue one) They both say, " Anything that comes out of any Politician mouth when they speak." or "untruthfulness."

Shadow, don't steal my stuff, please think up your own one liners. I though that was rather good.

Now that we ALL agree Tony Baloney been telling porkies. Moving on, back on topic.
This topic, " The Silence of the left..." The political conserves have always referred to 'the left' as the "noisy rabble" so the title must be a contradiction. Besides the conserves always say they speak for "The SILENT majority" Little Johnny Howard was always prattling on about the "silent majority..." Typical conservative rubbish, how on earth could they possible know what the silent majority think, after all they are silent! What, did Howard have telepathic powers, more like pathetic powers.

Shadow, I warned all, before he went OS, Abbott would be an embarrassment, and he hasn't let me down. Calling Canada, Cambodia or Canary or what it was he called the place, As Effie would say "how embarrassment!" can someone please confiscate the Mad Monks passport and lock him in The Lodge, until we can have a fresh election, it will save us the embarrassment. I did warn you!

Hi Paul,

Usually, when I make comment on an OLO thread, I do so in the faint hope that somebody out there will be struck by the impeccable logic of my argument and in some small way, change their viewpoint.

Your epithets - Tony Baloney, Mad Monk, {sooner or later] Abbott the Rabbit, &c., and your slag about his saying 'Canadia' before correcting himself (who hasn't done that sort of thing ?) are perhaps less likely to change anybody's fundamental viewpoint, except perhaps in an undergrad bar or TAFE cafeteria.

So, apart from the epithets, what's your point ?

And by the way, 'back to topic' doesn't necessarily mean 'back to part of the topic', and then some semantic sliding away from even that.

So - BTT :) Is the Left, so-called rather laughably, selective on whose denigration it gets outraged about, or not ?

Joe

Paul,

Now we ALL agree that Christine Milne is a consummate liar, we can move on.

Paul, I have seen some unadulterated waffle in my time, but your last few posts lead me to suspect the use of recreational supplements.

P.S. no one could be as embarrassing to Aus than our last 2 Labor leaders or the alien whispering Brown eye Bob.

Loudmouth,

"Your epithets - Tony Baloney, Mad Monk, {sooner or later] Abbott the Rabbit, &c., and your slag about his saying 'Canadia' before correcting himself (who hasn't done that sort of thing ?) are perhaps less likely to change anybody's fundamental viewpoint, except perhaps in an undergrad bar or TAFE cafeteria."

You run a nice line in hypocrisy Yes?

Try these epithets on for size...they should fit because they're yours : )

"Hi Pirrot"

" Thank you, Porrit."

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6413&page=0#190670

"Parrot..."

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6413&page=0#190372

Etc...

And..."And by the way, 'back to topic' doesn't necessarily mean 'back to part of the topic', and then some semantic sliding away from even that."

More hypocrisy....

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6413#190161

"However, and slightly off-topic, I am concerned that this topic gets so much comment compared to this simultaneous thread:"

"concerning the imminent hanging of a Christian woman in Sudan, as soon as her baby is weaned, i.e. when she turns two years old. The woman had to give birth while shackled, and will remain in Omdurman prison for ..... oh, just a bit under two years now."

Etc....

On page 28 and then yet again on page 30, I asked Shadow Minister to give us any other pre election lie from Gillard other than "no carbon tax". Finally on page 30 SM in his eventual reply showed he could not even name *ONE* other pre election lie from Gillard. Poor "old" SM tried and tried, but he could not list one other actual pre election lie.

Whereas, I had previously pointed out 28, yes that's right *TWENTY EIGHT*, unmitigated, outright pre election lies from ToneLIAR ... not one of which SM has been capable of refuting.

CASE CLOSED.

SM, also asked me on page 30 to name "one" promise that Gillard kept. Ok SM here's "one" for you ..... the plain packaging of cigarettes. (See SM, the difference between you and I is that I can actually answer questions).

There's no doubt, all of Australia now knows that ToneLIAR is the biggest LYING PM in the history of Australian politics.

Hi Poirot,

Okay, I apologise, never again.

But as you quote me,

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=6413#190161

"However, and slightly off-topic, I am concerned that this topic gets so much comment compared to this simultaneous thread:"

"concerning the imminent hanging of a Christian woman in Sudan, as soon as her baby is weaned, i.e. when she turns two years old. The woman had to give birth while shackled, and will remain in Omdurman prison for ..... oh, just a bit under two years now."

I don't apologise for that: I'm amazed how few - 'Left' or right - have commented on that thread.

That poor woman now has about three weeks short of two years left before she is hanged, since according to the Koran, a child is to be weaned at two years of age, at which point its mother can safely be hanged.

No comment, Poirot ?

Joe

poirot: concerning the imminent hanging of a Christian woman in Sudan, as soon as her baby is weaned, i.e. when she turns two years old. The woman had to give birth while shackled, and will remain in Omdurman prison for ..... oh, just a bit under two years now."

Bit of a change of heart from you, poirot. You normally support your Islamic comrades in any of the disgusting things they do. What's happened, you wake up to yourself, or is this just because it's a woman.

Jayb,

I was quoting Loudmouth.

He was highlighting the deplorable treatment of that Sudanese woman...and berating us because we weren't discussing it on a thread about Peta Credlin and the "left".

I included it here as an example of as Loudmouth's hypocrisy as he was again berating a poster for not going "BTT" - when apparently Loudmouth gives himself permission to go off topic whenever the urge appeals to him

Your comment:

"...You normally support your Islamic comrades in any of the disgusting things they do..."

...is mendacious.

But that's exactly what I've come to expect around here.

Seeing as the finger pointing continues about who
lied the most - the following link may be of some interest
and to also jog some memories (ones not set in
concrete of course). It's not from the usual NewsCorp
media so of course it may be unaccetable to some -
who prefer their news carefully selected:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/is-australia-run-by-compulsive-liars-part-two-abbotts-astonishing-30-lies,6398

Hi Poirot,

Again I apologise, but I did think the two topics were in some way related. My mistake perhaps ?

Perhaps you're right, when somebody puts up a thread about Palmer's mistreatment of Peta Credlin, we should be talking only about Abbott and his lies or whatever, not anything as irrelevant as the mistreatment of a Sudanese woman. After all, Sudan is a small country, a long way away from us, about which we need to know little.

With respect, I disagree.

Joe

poirot: Your comment: "...You normally support your Islamic comrades in any of the disgusting things they do..."

"...is mendacious."

No it's not. Your past posts on other any Subject relating to Muslims & Islam you have always defended their atrocious behaviour. Now if you ask me for a link I'll scream. I wouldn't have enough time left in my life to fill out the form. Let's just say, "All your other posts on anything to do with Islam."

As regards criticizing women.
Back to the Subject.
Sound like the usual Feminist thing. Men can be criticized but if you criticize women then you are sexist. Would I be right in this assumption?

Nhob,

I gave you a selection of Juliar's lies and you cannot refute a single one. You are incapable of telling the truth. You provided a link to a trade union official that made up claims of Abbott's lies, which were mostly lies in themselves.

Claim 1 Abbott promised to stop the boats. Done you lied.

Claim 2. Abbott promised to fund Gonski. Yes but only for 4 years. You lied.

Claim 3.NBN. The promise was based on the status of the NBN as Labor promised, which proved to be complete crap.

4 NDIS promise to fund has not been broken. Labor's trials were a cock up and have to be modified.

5 Fails to provide boat to monitor whaling. As whaling has stopped what boat is required,

etc etc.

In all most of the "broken promises" are not broken promises at all.

Please tell me what happened to the East Timor solution?

SM, you proffered *ONE* Gillard pre election lie, a lie that I have told you on MANY occasions *IS* a lie. You did not provide any other pre election Gillard lies. Why? Because you *CAN'T*. Why can't you? Because there were none.

All you provided was your brainwashed rhetoric, and blind devotion to your Lord and Master ... ToneLIAR

Dear Shadow Minister,

Why don't you have a go at refuting the 30 lies
of Mr Abbott's that are listed in the link I gave on page
33. Or are they simply "broken promises" only, in your
eyes.

SM,

Such contortions!

When it's clear the majority of Australians have already concluded that we have elected the most deceitful leader and govt in our history.

You're going to slip a disc if you keep this up.

Tony Abbott should heed John Howard's warning about "political deafness" and stop making the same mistakes as Kevin Rudd.

It could get awkward between Tony Abbott and Barack Obama when the conversation steers towards climate change action.

That the two dills, Abbott and Harper have come out and proven their complete lack of understanding of the most effective way to combat this scourge which is seriously threatening to change, or even destroy, life on Earth as we know it, should not be seen as presenting any kind of solution to the problem.

Paying big polluters to "not" polute as Abbott is waffling on about is nothing more than handing them subsidies to continue polluting unrestrained.

Any person who has ever observed the performance of corporations which have been offered such incentives will know that a way will be found very quickly indeed to work through a loophole which will allow them to pocket the payments from the government and still pollute as they wish.

What Abbott and presumably Harper as well, seem to be wanting is to do nothing during their very short political futures ignoring the way history will deal with them for their lack of effective action in combating global warming. But that will not be as harsh as the way their own children and their children will deal with them for their inaction as the effects of their inaction start to be felt.

This Earth does not need ignorance like this.

There should be a price on carbon to encourage alternative energy sources to coal.
Abbott is with a like soul in Canada. They are both out of touch with what our world needs.
Abbott says he's friends with Murdoch, Bolt, Jones, Rinehart, Pell......
His ministers like Pyne, Morrison, Andrews, Bishop .....Their policies are unfair and totally based on ideology

Nhob,

You are an outrageous liar. "You did not provide any other pre election Gillard lies."

Stop talking absolute crap.

Here are some outright lies by Juliar.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/andrew-bolt-does-your-leader-lie/story-e6frfhqf-1226271224387

Jayb,

" Your past posts on other any Subject relating to Muslims & Islam you have always defended their atrocious behaviour. Now if you ask me for a link I'll scream."

In that case, you leave me with no other recourse but to ask for a link.

Of course, you won't provide a link - because there is no link that contains words from Poirot "defending atrocious behaviour" from any race or religion.

Mendacious.

If you intend to slur a fellow poster, be sure to provide evidence in future.

....

Loudmouth,

"Again I apologise, but I did think the two topics were in some way related. My mistake perhaps ? "

Which might be an acceptable excuse - except, you were rather forthright in your post to Paul, saying:

""And by the way, 'back to topic' doesn't necessarily mean 'back to part of the topic', and then some semantic sliding away from even that."

You can't have it both ways, if you choose to berate others for posting on topics slightly related to the main, then why do you persist in doing so yourself?

I don't give a particular toss if topics veer away from the original post - that's how conversation tends to go. (I'll add, that if posters don't wish to take up a related topic amidst a convo, that's also no reason to berate them.)

As you know, I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy of your stance with your regular call BTT.

So, Poirot, what's the main thrust of this topic ? Doesn't it have something to do with attacks on women, with the shameful abuse of parliamentary privilege by Palmer in attacking Credlin, and the lack of any comment on the subject from anybody on what used to be called the left ? Or from anybody concerned with women's issues ? And by extension, the mistreatment of women generally ?

Yes, somehow, the discussion has degenerated into something about Abbott and his budget and so on. But there's a difference between 'getting lightly of-topic', and 'veering well away from it', don't you think ?

Imagine of it were Julia Gillard being attacked in this vile way - what would you suggest then, to slide well away from the topic ?

Joe

Loudmouth,

First two lines of opening post:

"If a high-powered woman is ­described as the “top dog’’ and her deeply personal struggle to fall pregnant dragged into the public domain to score cheap parliamentary points, is it sexism?..."

You say:

"Yes, somehow, the discussion has degenerated into something about Abbott and his budget and so on. But there's a difference between 'getting lightly of-topic', and 'veering well away from it', don't you think ?"

You seem to think this is "lightly" off topic:

"concerning the imminent hanging of a Christian woman in Sudan, as soon as her baby is weaned, i.e. when she turns two years old. The woman had to give birth while shackled, and will remain in Omdurman prison for ..... oh, just a bit under two years now."

Notwithstanding you ticked off Paul this way:

"And by the way, 'back to topic' doesn't necessarily mean 'back to part of the topic', and then some semantic sliding away from even that."

Gillard "did" have to put up with similar kinds of things - and more.

You posted: "From memory, Mal Brough did not know about that stupid menu, which wasn't even circulated. Perhaps Poirot can correct me or - look ! a Liberal politician doing something !"

So it's just a 'stupid menu" when it concerns a Labor woman, but you yell from the rooftops about Credlin - and then impugn lefties because they don't want to join in with your off topic convo regarding the dreadful treatment of a Sudanese woman.

Why aren't you bleating your faux outrage about the fact that the menu existed and made its way to facebook. What about the jibes about Gillard being "barren" etc, etc?

Why are you attacking "lefties" for a stupid ignorant comment made by Palmer who used to be a member of the Liberal Party?

This has become so far off topic that I apologise for commenting but, Whoa 579 hold on... you say "That the two dills, Abbott and Harper have come out and proven their complete lack of understanding of the most effective way to combat this scourge which is seriously threatening to change, or even destroy, life on Earth as we know it, should not be seen as presenting any kind of solution to the problem."

Are you saying taxing the air will change the climate in the future? Hardy-har-har, you have to be joking.

Chill out dude, the sky is not falling. You are letting yourself get sucked into the lies of the climate zealots (assuming you are not one). Just take a step back and analyse the facts. Even the IPCC admits there hasn't been any global warming for the past 15 years. There is no such thing as carbon pollution. You have nothing to fear.

Abbott and Harper are to be congratulated for not blindly following the climate hysteria.

We have come to the point on this thread where it is clear that the voters cannot trust either the Liberal Party or the Labor Party to tell the truth, a sad situation indeed. Added to this is the gross corruption exhibited by both major parties. The voters today are left disillusioned, wondering who can they trust, who can they vote for. Is there a party out there which is made up of people with honesty and integrity flowing through their vain? Do not despair, such a party does exist, consisting of truly noble parliamentarians, a party Australians can trust to look after their interests, The Greens!

Shadow it looks like The Greens, and only The Greens, are going to side with your mob on Abbott's 'Paid Parental Leave Scheme'. Some Coalition Senators are threatening to cross the floor and vote against it.
I do not support it in its present form and have already shot off a strongly worded protest to Australia's best Senator, Lee Rhiannon. I think you are also opposed? Are you not.

<<Usually, when I make comment on an OLO thread, I do so in the faint hope that somebody out there will be struck by the impeccable logic of my argument and in some small way, change their viewpoint.>>

Joe when it happens, let me known as it will be the first time ever that has happened on OLO. One poster changing the mind of another through any thing at all, the use of logic. Views on this forum are rather intrenched and can't be changed, but its fun trying, Good luck Joe, don't give up.

Shadow Minister, has still been unable, after many days of obfuscation and "excuses" from him, to provide even one pre election Gillard promise that's been shown to be a lie (other than the one I mentioned ... which he keeps repeating as if I didn't mention it, ha ha ha).

Whereas Foxy has provided him with *THIRTY* ToneLIAR lies, that he has 100% ignored.

Therefore, I can only thank him for his admission that ToneLIAR is the biggest lying PM in the history of Australian politics. I know SM worships his Lord and Saviour, ToneLIAR .... but as the Earth is not flat, I wish SM would try to update. Believe it or not SM, education is actually good for you.

Paul, you're correct. ToneLIAR will be *MORE* than willing to cuddle up to the Greens if it's to his advantage. ToneLIAR is thus a lying hypocrite..... a manipulator who will get into bed with *ANYONE* for a "price".

Nhob,

You are lying again.

Juliar was the single most deceitful PM this country has ever had, and the only people that defend her are also liars like yourself.

You have not even tried to repudiate the dozens of lies she has told.

Juliar has been fingered in the Royal commission as taking corrupt money. I believe that she is nothing but a crook.

Nhob,

You are a shameless troll. Probably stuck in a dead end job alternating between watching porn and trolling. For god's sake get a life.

There's something quite hilarious about SM calling "someone else" a troll and expressing it thus:

"You are a shameless troll. Probably stuck in a dead end job alternating between watching porn and trolling. For god's sake get a life."

Pot - Kettle.

Poirot,

A little rich coming from you too.

Just a reminder that this thread was initially about the left's hysterical furore over trivial perceptions of sexism against Juliar, and subsequent deafening silence over blatant sexism against someone that is not their darling.

The reality is that the left whingers couldn't care rocks about sexism except to feign outrage against the opposition. Next time they try to play the sexism card, they will be lacking any credibility.

Rather than carry on this useless debate as to which party, Labor or Liberal, has the biggest lying conniving politicians. What we should all realise is, that on the Richter Scale of corrupt political liars they both rate a 10!
Those of you who voted Liberal and Labor last election you were not to know that you were voting for parties of lying scumbags, and that you had terribly misguided in trusting such dishonest dirtballs. Please excuse my French, but there is no other way to describe these scuzzbags, but, to put it mildly, as scunbags and dirtballs. But, and it's a big but... redemption is at hand, and its painless, come next election simply vote for noble people with honesty and integrity, vote Green of course.
I hear you ALL say, "Naturally I want to vote Green. but will there by a local Green candidate for me" Do not despair, there will be a friendly Green candidates in every electorate, and in the Senate in every State as well. I think we are going to do rather well, firstly in New South Wales next March, then in the Federal election after that, can't wait.

paul1405: come next election simply vote for noble people with honesty and integrity, vote Green of course.

Paul, Paul, Paul. Vote Green? You have got to be kidding. You gave the LNP & ALP 10 for lying. That I agree with. But the Greens? I'd give a 10+++++, plus another 10+++++ for being just plain loony.

SM,

Don't pull a Pyne and attempt to foist your faux sensibilities on me...not after the dregs of your last post to Nhoj.

Here you are bleating your moral rectitude about Ms Credlin, while slamming a fellow poster with this:

"You are a shameless troll. Probably stuck in a dead end job alternating between watching porn and trolling. For god's sake get a life."

Simply because you were frustrated in your debate.

Harking back to your first paragraph of this thread.

"....her deeply personal struggle to fall pregnant dragged into the public domain to score cheap parliamentary points."

On this point, my sympathy for Ms Cedlin is tempered by the knowledge that she herself "dragged her fertility battles into the public domain to score cheap political points."

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/with-tony-on-my-side/story-e6frf7jo-1226548140341

That interview was given willingly - by Credlin - primarily to plug Tony Abbott.

"And then last year, she ended up learning more than she ever expected to about what Tony Abbott really thinks about all of these difficult, complex issues when she endured the personal heartbreak of multiple rounds of IVF treatment and no baby.

That's when Abbott surprised even her - by offering to keep her secrets and help store her fertility drugs in his office bar fridge."

"Credlin kept ticking off her concerns during her conversation with Abbott that day in 2010. "I also heard you are against contraception," she said. Abbott replied this was "ridiculous" as he was the father of teenage girls."

"Abbott insisted this was wrong too: " I am not against IVF, I am passionate for IVF. Anything that helps families is a good thing, it's not a bad thing." Credlin left the conversation surprised that Abbott's position on IVF, abortion and contraception wasn't as black and white as she had assumed. Why did she think otherwise? A big reason is Abbott's own words."

"As the next federal election looms, Team Abbott has wheeled out a succession of women to endorse his female-friendly credentials to assure the voting public he's not the anti-woman ogre they were led to believe."

Yar...well...

Jayb, can I take it from your above comment that you are still wavering a little when come to deciding to VOTE GREEN?
I think I have almost got Shadow on side, just needs a slight push to the left. And me olde' sparing partner OTB, defiantly a closet Green. As for Hassy, Butch and Indy, judging by their Green friendly posts, defiantly on side, probably life members of the party. LOL

Remember a couple of weeks ago the Chinese said they would like the northern parts of au to be a special zone, where they could bring in their own labour for projects.
The coalition has released it’s green paper on plans for the top end.
They said there was constitutional issues involved with the outlining.
Abbott today said China is no threat.
Makes you wonder what Abbott has been talking to the Chinese about, that we don’t know about.

579, "Makes you wonder what Abbott has been talking to the Chinese about" yes, and its not the menu "I'll have a Combination Chop Suey and a large Fried Rice." Can't trust Abbott not to sell off more of the farm. As for China wanting Northern Australia to become a "Special (Chinese) Zone", defiantly not on, I can't see any major political party in Australia even suggesting that. little own supporting the idea, the Australian people wont wear it! But, then again when it comes to money we can't trust Abbott and his cronies on anything, can we.

Asked if direct action was preferable to an international emissions trading scheme, Mr Abbott said: ''There is no sign - no sign - that trading schemes are increasingly being adopted. If anything trading schemes are being discarded, not adopted.

In the US, he said the recently announced emissions limits on coal-fired power plants - expressed as targets imposed on the states by the Environment Protection Agency - would likely lead to more states adopting emissions trading to deliver required cuts.
''Apart from Australia I don't think any other country has plans to unwind an emissions trading scheme. That assertion they are being discarded is incorrect,'' Mr Bhavnagri said.

''In the world's two biggest economies - and the world's two biggest emitters - we are seeing quite a deliberate move towards carbon pricing and emissions trading, not away.

paul1405: Jayb, can I take it from your above comment that you are still wavering a little when come to deciding to VOTE GREEN?

Year right! I can't vote LNP or ALP, They're only interested in lining their own pockets. I can't vote Palmer because he's only interested in getting huge concessions for his enterprises & I can't vote Green because their all mentally incompetent. It's a dilemma.

579: Remember a couple of weeks ago the Chinese said they would like the northern parts of au to be a special zone, where they could bring in their own labour for projects.

I suppose the Greens could claim sexual bias against them because they all act like little girls.

Then they would say they own that part of the World, like they claim every other part of the world. Naturally they would station part of their Army there. Just to protect their interests, of course.

I see that Shadow Minister has *STILL* been unable to address Foxy's post from many pages ago, regarding the *THIRTY* broken promises from ToneLIAR.

Come on Shadow Minister, let's see you take those *THIRTY* lies, one by one, and show us why each and every one is not an unmitigated lie and deception of the Australian voters by your Lord and Savior Tax'Em Tony. Too hard for you? Seems so.

Yep, ToneLIAR is the most lying and deceitful PM in Australian political history, by FAR.

Loudmouth,

".... But we should be silent when a woman is put under the microscope for her fertility, or for the - presumably unjustified - high position she may have attained. Or, more historically, a man compares a woman to jar of mussels.

Yes, the left will sit back and say nothing."

What do we then make of Ms Credlin "putting herself under the microscope for her fertility"... using her "high position" in order to promote her boss, Tony Abbott, for political purposes?

Should you condemn Ms Credlin also for parading her fertility issues in the media as election fodder for the Liberal Party?

(I see the great and celebrated defender of feminist principles, Loudmouth couldn't resist another opportunity to mention "mussels"...how many times now - 6 - 7?)

poirot: Should you condemn Ms Credlin also for parading her fertility issues in the media as election fodder for the Liberal Party

I agree. It was Credlin who brought up the issue of infertility looking for the , "Woe is me," vote.

Personally I don't care or think it's any of my business whether or not a person can or can not have children, or has a disability or any other impairment. That's their individual problem & they have to deal with it in their own way without looking for sympathy or favour.

Who amongst us hasn't said at some time, something like, "What are you blind" only to find that the person was blind or something of a similar nature. I for one have probably on more than one occasion. You apologize but feel so stupid for days after.

Infigen shares are down about 25 per cent since January, while shares in Silex Systems, a solar power project developer, have almost halved in five months. Geodynamics Limited, a speculative geothermal or ''hot rocks'' play, was trading above 9¢ in January but now changes hands at 5 cents.
And billions of dollars worth of renewable energy projects - $2 billion in wind projects with Infigen alone - have stalled due to the uncertainty.

Indeed, total emissions from the National Electricity Market - which serves eastern Australia - are down 17.2 million tonnes, or about 11 per cent, since the carbon tax launched in July 2012, says Hugh Saddler of energy consultancy Pitt & Sherry

Mr Obama has recently stepped up his response promising a 30 per cent reduction in coal-fired emissions by 2030 in the US and proposing to use US leadership to secure co-ordinated global action.

In direct contrast to Mr Abbott's position, Mr Obama recently said that if there was one thing he could do to curb global warming it would be to put a price on carbon and then let polluters figure out a way of minimising their costs.

Abbott is still saying Obama plan is direct action.

Jayb,

I'm inclined to surmise that Credlin's outing of her fertility issues was less of a "Woe is me" - and more of a "Tony Abbott is sensitive new age guy - not anti-woman - vote for him!"

579 wrote, "Abbott is still saying Obama plan is direct action". What else would you expect? Tax'Em Tony is a professional LIAR.

Tax'Em Tony is a professional LIAR.
Nhoj,
Be that the case or not but the lefties have been professional morons ever since the Chief moron Goaf.

Tony Abbott Who Voted for Dumbo Political Bumper Sticker - Printed
$4.00

Individual wrote, "Be that the case OR NOT" ..... ha ha ha ha, the crazy righties here are still in denial about Tax'Em Tony's lies and deceit. They can't tell fact from fiction. Gee, I hope they never serve on a jury.

Poirot,

I find your assertion that because Peta Credlin discussed her fertility issues in a interview, that any sexist attack on that basis is OK quite offensive. It is the same logic used when people imply that because women wear revealing clothes that a subsequent rape is their fault.

Similar logic would then imply that because Juliar openly used her position as the first female PM, that any sexism she suffered was entirely her own fault. You can't have it both ways. You either oppose sexism or you don't. All I see is boundless spite.

Today's news is evidence before the RC on union corruption that Juliar not only was aware of receiving corrupt union funds, but received a wad of cash. Definitely the most deceitful and apparently crooked PM Australia's ever had.

On Government(s):

You can't please all of the people all of the time;
Maybe you can't even please some of the people all of the time.

But, it may be possible to please most of the people most of the time.

Question is, how to achieve this?
Question #2 is, would such resultant government action always be the best course to follow in the national interest - and, what 'formula' may be applied to determine the 'bona fides' of any appropriate compromise?
Question #3 is, does serving the (majority) public interest also always equate to serving the national interest - or, is compromise an essential requirement for effective overall governance?

a) We need to revise our electoral system to more closely approximate 'first past the post' outcomes (whereby the most preferred is usually elected), by introducing a 'limited' preferential system.

b) We need a national 'Business Charter' determined by experts, which clearly identifies key objectives and spending priorities (as a % of GDP) covering all essential government programs and services - subject to annual review. And, similar Charters for each of the States and Territories.

c) We need Government(s) to adhere closely to the 'Charter', or to fully explain, and canvass response to, any substantial proposed deviations.

d) We need a clear and agreed 'Contract' defining the roles of all three levels of government AND the incontrovertible relationship between, and amongst, all three. As with any contract(s), such roles and relationships to be compulsory and binding in terms of their service(s) to the public and the national interest.

e) Whereas there may be no restriction on interest-groups contributing to the public debate on issues of public and/or national interest, there should be strict conditions to determine which organisations or groups may participate in the electoral process, State or Federal, through the standing of candidates for any election, for any level or house of government - but with lesser, but still specified, conditions applying to the local government electoral process.

We are over-governed, but we are also lacking specifics in what to expect, and who to blame for any 'deficiencies'.

poirot: more of a "Tony Abbott is sensitive new age guy - not anti-woman - vote for him!"

Nah. Woman think of themselves first. It was about her.

Is saying that misogynous. Stiff Chedda,. It's a truism.

SM,

As usual, you miss the point.

I was highlighting your defence of Credlin resting on your opening paragraph where you were bemoaning that "her deeply personal struggle to fall pregnant [was]dragged into the public domain to score cheap parliamentary points..."

You obviously have no problem with Peta Credlin herself using her fertility issues to score party political points - as she most overtly did in promoting Abbott in that "discussion". That was the only reason she did that interview, it's apparent - to plug Tones as a sympathetic ear to women's issues...for votes.

And who do you think you are to ponce around here defending feminine virtue - after your extended blizzard of attacks on Gillard over the years?

I submit you couldn't give a toss about Peta's position in this, except to use it as a stick to beat up on "lefties".

Disingenuous much.

It's a laugh.

I see Shadow Minister is continuing to avoid, at all costs, answering Foxy's post from several pages ago where she pointed out *THIRTY* lies from Tax'Em Tony. SM is obviously incapable of proving these 30 LIES were not lies.

Yes, by his silence Shadow Minister is openly admitting that ToneLIAR is the most deceitful and crooked PM Australia's ever had.

Nhoj,
you're not exactly denouncing your moron tag either.

I see Nhob is continuing to avoid, at all costs, answering my post from several pages ago where I pointed out many lies from Back hand Juliar. Nhob is obviously incapable of proving that Juliar is capable of telling the truth ever.

Yes, by his silence Nhob is openly admitting that Juliar is the most deceitful and crooked PM Australia's ever had.

And his crap is showing that Nhob is the most deceitful and crooked poster ever.

Parrot,

"And who do you think you are to ponce around here" a gay insult. Perhaps you should call me an ABO and add racism to your sexism and homophobia for a royal flush.

Still not giving up on "Peta spoke to someone about her problems and then is to blame for sexist comments against her" Perhaps you also believe that as a woman on the right of politics she deserves to be raped too.

P.S. Commenting on Juliar's deceit and corruption is not sexist.

SM,

"...Perhaps you also believe that as a woman on the right of politics she deserves to be raped too."

You really are apiece of work...for someone who waddles around this forum pretending to be holier than thou.

Why would any sane person make an offensive comment such as that?

This again is the interview - titled "With Tony On My Side" (as if that isn't an instant give-away as to the intent of the undertaking):

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/with-tony-on-my-side/story-e6frf7jo-1226548140341

Credlin devotes some little time to outlining her issues - then spends the majority of the article - linking her plight with the wonderful understanding of her boss, Tony Abbott, painting him as someone misunderstood on women's issues, etc. Now all is revealed and Tones is the answer to Australian women's dreams...what a caring guy.
(Vote 1 - LNP)

"I think it is important that people, especially women, hear the truth about Tony Abbott, and not just the myths," she says."

If you can't see that Credlin used her difficulties to give a plug to her boss, then you're being willfully ignorant.

And I'll ask you why you're belting "lefties" with the sexism club when it was Palmer who so stupidly made that comment relating Peta to the PPL - not Shorten et al.

Poor little Shadow Minister doesn't comprehend that I don't give a damn in hell about Gillard or Labor, whereas he utterly worships the ground that his Lord and Saviour ToneLIAR walks on.

SM has been asked about half a dozen times now, by several people, to address Foxy's post where she tells us of the *THIRTY* ToneLIAR lies. SM has repeatedly *REFUSED* because he knows those 30 lies *ARE* 30 lies. He can't man up to it, and just admit it. I think SM is scared that Pope ToneLIAR will send him to the "Lake of Fire" if he ceases his worship.

Therefore I'd like to personally thank Shadow Minister for his silence, and thus open admission that Tax'Em Tony (SM's Lord and Saviour) is the biggest LYING PM Australia has ever had.

Thanks for your admission SM.

Parrot,

I am only following your logic.

Credlin in an interview was asked about her experiences working with Abbott, and gave a few real life examples that contradicted the Left whingers' propaganda. So your rational is that it is perfectly OK for all of this can be used in a sexist attack against her?

So obviously she has forgone all her rights as a woman to be defended against sexist attacks, what else?

The left did not initiate the attack, but at other labor meeting with MPs present there has also been outrageous attacks against her, all with exactly the same result that virtually no one from the left condemned it.

Compare this to the hysteria from left whingers when Abbott looked at his watch while Juliar was ranting.

Interesting that now appears that Shorten was involved in trying to cover up Juliar's corruption.

SM,

No...my logic was to question your assertion of "... her deeply personal struggle to fall pregnant dragged into the public domain to score cheap parliamentary points..."

That was one of the mainsprings of your opening post. I was merely drawing attention to the fact that she herself had already dragged her personal struggle into the public domain in order to bolster Tony Abbott's chances of election.

Simple really.

As you admit, Labor did not initiate the clumsy comment from Palmer, and Bernard Keane mightn't have noticed too much outrage from the left, but there was plenty of it on twitter. In fact, I've noticed if Credlin is criticised on twitter in general for being Tony's puppet master, it's likely that someone along the line will protest, saying it's "sexist" merely because she's a woman!

So the upshot is that if it's okay for Credlin to use her personal struggles for political gain, why are you surprised when someone who's crass like Palmer make's a dumb comment in her direction...and why keep thumping lefties with it.

When Shorten, Albo, Plibersek et al stage a demo outside of Parliament replete with "Ditch the Witch" signs for Credlin's removal as CoS - perhaps then you'll have a good reason to critique the "Left" on this issue.

SM,

Just on the other topic you raised.

I watched most of Kernohan's testimony yesterday...which was quite interesting.

I'll add that the only time he got a little bit excited was when he spoke of his feelings when Gillard looked like she might b elected in 2010. He did seem to be restraining himself from launching into a tirade every time he mentioned her name.

However, I don't recall Gillard being mentioned as part of the machinations with the setting up of the slush fund - as Wilson was. I think Wilson is in the stand today (?)

Maybe you should start a thread?

P,

You still going to run with that Credlin deserves to be abused because she asked for it line? People revealing personal information does not give everyone a license to use it to abuse them. What if she revealed that she had cancer or lost a child, is it open season? After hysterical demands for apologies at every perceived misstep by Abbott, the silence from the left whingers is the worst form of hypocrisy.

P.S. The rally was against the carbon tax Juliar guaranteed we wouldn't have. And the one ditch the witch poster fades into insignificance compared to the thousands of Fcuk Abbott tee shirts, posters and other vile paraphernalia that the brain dead left whingers parade around.

Shadow, I have said many times I consider political name calling as being part and parcel of the ignoble "profession" of politics. If one chooses to be, or wannabe a politician, one has to (a), have a thick hide, and (b), be prepared to cop some stick. If your going to make your mark in politics be prepared to pick up a few name tags alone the way. You yourself refer to our illustrious former leader, and statesman, Bob Brown as 'Brown Eye Bob'. I have no problem with that, and I hope you have no problem with those men of dubious reputation, The Mad Monk, Tony Boloney, Tax Em' Tony, just to name a few, sorry my mistake, they are all the same bloke.

SM,

Where did I say that Credlin "deserves" abuse?

Palmer (an ex-Lib) made a crass comment linking her to Abbott's PPL.... pretty dumb as it turns out. For some unknown reason, you appear to think that it's a left issue.

I was addressing "your" line (and feigned outrage) that Palmer had dragged her personal issues into the public arena for parliamentary gain, by pointing out that she appeared to have no qualms in doing so herself.

My point being that if you are riding in on a white steed to defend Ms Credlin's personal fertility issues as private, then you've arrived a little late...because she's already outed them in tandem with a giant plug for her boss.

You say:

"...And the one ditch the witch poster fades into insignificance compared to the thousands of Fcuk Abbott tee shirts, posters and other vile paraphernalia that the brain dead left whingers parade around."

Have you a pic of any senior federal Labor pollies having their picture taken standing in front of such paraphernalia...like Abbott, Bronwyn Bishop, Sophie Mirabella. etc did?

P,

Do you have a problem with the English language? What I said does not mean that Peta Credlin's issues were not already common knowledge. What it meant is that her one very personal issue was dragged into the public sphere for the point of ridicule.

And while it is not from the left whingers, given that the left whingers' hysteria over trivial perceptions of Abbott's behaviour towards Juliar, and the moral high ground the left whingers took with regards sexism, the expectation was that if they were really protecting the interests of women, an equal outrage would have been expressed in the defense of a fellow woman.

The reality was that the feeble and tardy response highlighted that the sexism issue used so frequently over the years against Abbott had bugger all to do with protecting woman and 100% to do with attacking Abbott.

P.S. Juliar and Bill (fingers) Shorten are both looking pretty rotten in the RC. (I took your advice and started another thread.)

SM,

"Do you have a problem with the English language? What I said does not mean that Peta Credlin's issues were not already common knowledge. What it meant is that her one very personal issue was dragged into the public sphere for the point of ridicule.'

Yes?

And the dragging was done by an ex-Lib, Palmer.

Why berate the left, many of whom were taking Palmer to task for his clumsy stupid comments.

You're the one making the song and dance about it. Why don't you go and attack PUP instead of titling your thread "The Silence of the Left"?

How about "The Crassness of the Right"?

And coming from a bloke who gets his jollies from serially calling other posters and pollies silly immature names, I can't take your faux outrage seriously at all.

poirot: And the dragging was done by an ex-Lib, Palmer.

I dispute that as a matter of fairness.

He didn't know, in fact, no one, (outside of her personal circle) knew about her fertility problems. It was she, who broached the subject. Whether she was looking to pull the, "Your picking on me & I have a fertility problem & I'm delicate & my Boss has been nice to me." I don't know. Is this another, "I'm a woman & I cry if I want too." Wink, wink. I want sympathy, "boo hoo."

Somehow I think it is just that. It's only the Press that made a big thing out of it all anyway.

It seems to me that if any Politician, Senior Public Service entity, or others of that ilk get in to trouble they suddenly develop strange life threatening illnesses & can never face a Court or Inquiry. Why is that?

Jayb,

I don't believe Palmer did know of Peta's particular problems...I think he just aimed in her direction because he might have believed she'd benefit from Abbott's scheme which richly rewards ladies of her "calibre" if they have babies.

I don't agree that Credlin was playing the "poor me" part at all. I believe she co-operated with the Herald Sun article because she realised that that particular angle would greatly assist Abbott in overcoming any shortfalls in the public's perception about him and his attitude to "women's issues".

You're right that it was the media who made a meal out of Palmer's faux pas - and Shadow Minister.

P,

"I don't believe Palmer did know of Peta's particular problems."

Puleeez pull the other one, unless you assume Palmer is a complete idiot with no idea of what is going on in politics. It is just convenient for you to believe this.

Secondly as a highly paid public servant Peta Credlin already gets paid maternity leave linked to her salary which almost certainly exceeds what she would get under the PPL.

Finally, while many people immediately criticised Palmer, from the left whingers there was almost complete and stoney silence. Only a few days later when they realised what hypocrites they appeared did a handful from the left whingers say anything.

The point of the thread is that after years of claiming the moral high ground on womens' rights the left whingers have shown that they couldn't care less about womens' rights unless they can use it as a political weapon.

SM,

"Finally, while many people immediately criticised Palmer, from the left whingers there was almost complete and stoney silence..."

Absolute BS...you make it up to suit your narrative.

Palmer regularly shoots off at the mouth....and I don't think he's an idiot. I think he doesn't give a particular toss who he offends.

So, Mr SM, "Defender of feminine virtue" (unless it happens to be a Labor leader)...what's yer next move on "The Credlin Saga"?

[Deleted for abuse.]

P,

If you think this is BS, then perhaps you could list the criticisms by Labor or Greens MPs of Palmer within the 24hrs of his comments. You will find virtually none. From what I saw on twitter, the majority of left whingers could not see the problem.

Whether I am a defender of women's rights is not the issue here. What is clear is that neither labor nor the greens can claim to be either.

SM: Whether I am a defender of women's rights

I don't see this as a "Women's Rights" issue. It's just an "Issue" that's all. Would the same kerfuffle had happened if it had been a bloke & he'd been on Hormone treatment to up his sperm count?. I don't think so.

The whole thing was a Media beat up to sell papers. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. Neither side bothered about it until the Press pushed the matter. Then the angry Politics on both sides thought it might be a good point scoring ploy.

I really wouldn't give a dam if she had three tits & an upside down t#0t.

Well, there's a first!

>>(deleted for being highly intelligent)
Posted by Nhoj, Sunday, 15 June 2014 7:22:11 PM<<

Wonders will never cease. I've seen Nhoj's posts referred to in many fine terms - but 'highly intelligent'? That really takes the cake.
Bless the Moderator for superb diplomacy.

On Topic: Peta Credlin seems certainly to have been taking opportunity to shed light on Tony Abbott's credentials as a family man with a nicely female wife and three nicely female daughters.
I see nothing wrong with that, and if some wish to view this as political 'point-scoring' so be it, but I see no point in making a big thing out of it at all.

As for Big Clive putting his foot in it - well, what's new?

ALP and Greens being rather quiet on the matter - small potatoes; who really cares? It wasn't as if the matter really deserved too much attention.

I wonder if SM suspects that the ALP and Greens were keeping 'mum' essentially to keep on the good side of good old Clive?
Still, probably better to 'let sleeping dogs lie', as it were.

Tony's a real champ, and there's no mistaking that; and Peta is shaping up to be a real asset (bless her little heart).

I doubt that. It's the first thing you've said that has made any sense. ;-)

OLD SALT
SALTY PETER
mate..are you not seeing creativity..of backwards john
not grayham...backwards john has fooled the salty peter

User Details : Nhoj

The Forum > User Index > Nhoj
Most Recent 10 Posts
» 15/06/2014 7:37:57 PM (deleted, you must not disagree with rehctub).....
» 15/06/2014 7:36:16 PM (deleted for abuse of Tony Abbott).....
» 15/06/2014 7:33:52 PM (deleted, not allowed to make fun of Hasbeen).....
» 15/06/2014 7:31:45 PM (deleted for criticising Hasbeen).....
» 15/06/2014 7:30:04 PM (deleted, greenies not allowed).....
» 15/06/2014 7:28:34 PM (deleted for being too left wing).....
» 15/06/2014 7:27:21 PM (deleted for non conformity).....
» 15/06/2014 7:26:06 PM (deleted for being too politically correct).....
» 15/06/2014 7:22:11 PM (deleted for being highly intelligent).....
» 13/06/2014 1:24:02 PM [Deleted for abuse.].....

» View complete Comment History for Nhoj

he posted fast and furious..333 posts last time i checked

so TILL I SEE gRAYHAM SIGN HIS WORK..I SEE THE WORKINGS OF A BACKWARDS JONNY COME LATELY..dammcaps..liKe a candle making wind

At last in the SMH

"This was wrong and offensive on several levels. First, PPL is not Credlin’s personal policy, but one Abbott touted before he worked with her. Second, Credlin is already eligible for benefits offered to public servants – the point of the PPL scheme aims to extend this to others.

Third, it is misleading to suggest PPL would benefit only a tiny group of high-earning women, instead of all working women, most of whom would be on better packages. This is not greed.

Fourth, and worst, it was particularly disgraceful because the respected Peta Credlin has been through several unsuccessful rounds of IVF – always a difficult and painful process. Yes, Credlin had revealed her battle with IVF to a reporter in the past, but flinging the most intimate struggles of a staffer into the public sphere to prove a political point is a shameful thing to do."

SM,

I was raised on the Sydney Morning Herald, so I'm proud that it has finally come out in general support of the defence of women's rights, after what ? three weeks ? What other news medium has done that - apart from The Australian of course ?

Thank you,

Joe

<<unless you assume Palmer is a complete idiot with no idea of what is going on in politics.>>

Shadow from a political perspective, and judging by Big Clive's antics thus far, Palmer is a complete idiot with no idea of what is going on in politics.

As for <<criticisms by Labor or Greens MPs of Palmer>> Palmer's comments didn't win him any friends. I can't speak for Labor but Palmer got no support for his comments from The Greens

Paul1405: I can't speak for Labor but Palmer got no support for his comments from The Greens

Well that would have to be a Bonus wouldn't it.

SM and Loudmouth,

While you're touting the moral integrity of the Murdoch press on matters feminine, perhaps you'd care to comment on Tim Blair's little piece in the Telegraph?

http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/comments/crown_our_crazy_queen/

Of course, I'm not suggesting he's taking a pot-shot at these people simply because they're women (perish the thought).

I look forward to both of you defending this right-wing bilge...while simultaneously fuming with outrage at the way certain women are treated in the present political environment.

Hi Poirot,

Sorry, I've checked out that URL and it seems a very balanced summary. My only criticism is that he let out some promising contenders. I don't know everything each one of them has been passionate about, but perhaps you could let me know if any of them have raised issues to do with Malala Yusifzai, honor killings, genital mutilation, that poor woman bashed to death with bricks in Pakistan, those two poor girls raped and hanged in India, or that poor woman sentenced to be hanged when her baby turns two, in about 23 months' time.

Yes, I know they have probably all condemned Abbott for looking at his watch, or wearing a blue tie, or having a wife and daughters, or saying “Canadia” [Yuk ! Yuk !]. Such heinous crimes may take up their time, but I just wonder if they ever turn their attention to real feminist issues such as the above. Yes, yes, I know, those countries are a long way away, we need to know little about them, and the concerns of women there are not really ours. But I was just wondering if, in their idle moments, they ever think of such inconsequential things ?

Joe

Poirot,

You do realise that Tim Blair is a blogger on a website set up by the telegraph. He represents the views of Newscorp as much as you represent the views of Graham Young on OLO.

Though I must admit the term "frightbat" has a certain je ne sais quoi.

SM and Loudmouth,

Just as I thought...neither of you are interested in defending the integrity of women.

Both of you employ your faux feminism merely as a club with which to batter lefties.

Loudmouth,

"...Yes, yes, I know, those countries are a long way away, we need to know little about them, and the concerns of women there are not really ours..."

I haven't noticed you pleading the case for Muslim women "imprisoned" on Nauru, Christmas Island etc. who are humiliated daily having to ask for "women's products" and supplies for their children....anything to say on that subject, because those women aren't a long way away - and they "are" our responsibility.

Anything to say about the Muslim women and kiddies that Morrison's minions have stuffed into orange pods and towed out to sea.

He's a wonderful "rightie" isn't he.

SM,

Blair is a nobody who blogs under the Telegraph banner.

Nothing to say about his impugning of all those women?

Thought not...

P,

Other than pointing out that they are unhinged left whingers and that they are women, I don't see a directly sexist comment that I am meant to defend them against.

Being a woman does not automatically grant you immunity against criticism, only criticism for being a woman.

Juliar was not criticised for being a woman, only for being a supremely incompetent and lying PM.