Both the cheering of certain politicians and the heckling of others is another nail in the coffin of the rapidly diminishing (and so often trashed by political progressives) Australian culture that always valued and respected civility.

Frankly, while I had a lot of respect for Gough Whitlam as someone who even though flawed in his some of his keynote policies nonetheless had the good of Australia at heart, it was his own vanity bordering on arrogance and his obstinate refusal to move on from the past that encouraged the uncooth incivilility witnessed today. It has become so common as to be impossible for police to control, and is the potential precursor to more problematic anti-social behaviour, 'justified' by perceived 'unfairness'.

Commentators and their editorial staff who should know better, may very soon rue the disconnect they encourage and foster in misled, resentful youth who come to believe that what they say doesn't matter and that there is no way they can influence policy outside of taking the law into their own hands.

Remember the Hilton Hotel bombing by that dangerous fool Evan Pederick, a young highly intelligent fellow who despite all of the benefits of his permanent Public Service emnployment and the free expensive education that led to it (thanks Gough!) came to believe that HIS way was the right way and the death of innocent men ('lesser' men?) was merely collateral damage.

The ball is set firmly in the court of federal parliamentarians to model better judgement, morals, ethics and fairness. For starters, the Leftist 'Progressives' should accept that they lost the last election (it wasn't 'stolen' form them) and no, the electorate should never, ever, be trashed as 'punters' who get it wrong in the elections that are the fundamental basis of democracy.

It is simply awful that there are some here who would seek to justify boorish partisan behaviour at a State funeral.

otb

'It is simply awful that there are some here who would seek to justify boorish partisan behaviour at a State funeral. '

the fact that Abbott and Howard showed up the totally failed policies of Whitlam/Rudd/Gillard was what upset the luvvies so much. I would be disgusted to get praise from followers of such failures.

'morning Foxy,

You ask which of my comments are you talking about?

All of them sweetie , all of them!

Foxy,

Take note of spindoc's spiel...

"All of them sweetie , all of them!"

"Sweetie" - no less!

I'm sure he often refers to his male peers around here in the same manner - or maybe not.

It often features on OLO as a term of endearment reserved for females with whom some "blokes" find themselves in disagreement. It's a subtle sexist putdown not so well disguised as a subtle sexist putdown.

Still, he could have referred to you as "toots".

Dear Spindoc,

I've told you this in the past - if you find
my statements so abhorrent you are not under any
obligation to either read or respond to them,
you can simply scroll past. The fact that you
do read and respond to them shows that you're
not being quite honest here. And I also
take your calling me "sweetie," as an indication
that underneath it all and despite of what you
say - your feelings are not totally negative.
Go ahead - admit it. I won't tell anyone.

Dear Poirot,

I think Spindoc secretly has a crush on me.
I've suspected that for a while now.
And he doesn't know how to show it. ;-)

Foxy,

Actually men around here usually only deploy "sweetie" as a patronising term in order to frame their female target as an air-headed girlie who deserves to be talked down to.

I don't think they possess an equivalent term for men on OLO who require "putting in their place"...but "sweetie" sure comes in handy for the likes of Loudmouth and spindoc when they run out of reasoned debate.