Clive Palmer’s contribution to Monday’s Q&A has sent the politariat into a spin. A conga-line of pollies took to the air to voice their disapproval. “Hugely damaging”, said Joe Hockey, in an irony-laden observation on the impact of careless talk to the media. “Inappropriate”, says Barnaby Joyce, adding “you can’t just drop your bundle on national television”.

Support came from the Senator for Spunky Blokes, Jacqui Lambie, who invoked the ghost of biographer Thomas Charlton with a sterling rendering of “the price of liberty is eternal vigilance”. To make sure we are under no illusions as to the vigilance required, she went on to say "If anybody thinks that we should have a national security and defence policy, which ignores the threat of a Chinese Communist invasion – you’re delusional and got rocks in your head"

So which is it? Does Clive Palmer represent mainstream thinking on the existential threat posed by our largest trading partner? Or are his outbursts simply the defence mechanism of a businessman who has overstepped the mark with an international joint venture?

Either way, can Australia afford maintaining him in a position of power?

Pericles>> Or are his outbursts simply the defence mechanism of a businessman who has overstepped the mark with an international joint venture?<<

P, there is perhaps more “vested interest” in every syllable that Palmer utters than the rest of the parliament put together. He is truly the buffoon’s buffoon....rich or not....he would roll around in mud if the electorate took it up as a pastime. He has been belly aching for a month now over his Chinese partners and now denounces the investment he himself sold them.....Double Dissolution and start again would be best for our nation.

Pericles this bloke is a laughing stock and an embarrassment to Australian politics.
His comrade Jackie Lambie is even more of a problem, what with her Reds Under The Beds comment, and her public announcement of a preference for rich, well-hung men!

The other members of the Q&A panel were either laughing, or staring incredulously at this larger than life politician who seems to be mostly concerned with his own business interests and his over-inflated opinion of himself.
A dangerous man...

I can't understand how it can take so long for people to see through some of these politicians.

It was obvious right from the start, why Palmer was in politics, & what his motive & objectives were to me, & many others. It most certainly was never to do anything for the people.

Why has it taken so long for others to see through him. Could it be a bit of useful idiot, & enemy of my enemy involved here. It definitely looks like it, & some are still doing it.

He may have blown it now. If as the Chinese are claiming, he misused money in a company account for a particular project, to fund his party's election campaign, he might end up in prison, & out of our hair.

At least now very few should take him seriously.

Pericles,

You ask:

"So which is it? Does Clive Palmer represent mainstream thinking on the existential threat posed by our largest trading partner? Or are his outbursts simply the defence mechanism of a businessman who has overstepped the mark with an international joint venture?"

Here's what he posted on twitter shortly after the rant.

"My #qanda comments not intended to refer to Chinese people but to Chinese company which is taking Australian resources & not paying #auspol"

I'd go for the latter.....

No matter how outrageous Palmer becomes, he would be hard-pressed to be more outrageous than our current stock of pollies, when you look at them in a holistic manner.

I mean, our politicians are in bed with big business. Big bizz is driven by the profit motive. They give big donations. Pollies love big donations. Pollies give big favours for big donations. Our whole political system gets strongly geared towards the desires of the big and powerful business fraternity. We get super-high immigration and the worship of continuous never-ending growth and its utterly crazy primary indicator; GDP.

We get the most enormous mining boom, and after a couple of decades of it, when you would think the government coffers would be full and we’d have a huge surplus, we instead have critical budgetary problems.

Our politicians, of either persuasion (actually, there is only one persuasion: the bootlicking-the-big-bizz-boys persuasion) just continue to take our whole nation and economy forward in a manner that is TOTALLY at odds with a sustainable and healthy future.

And some people think that Big Clive is a little whacky!