Toni Lavis said- (People that are opposed to PC Compliance believe) "Women are Stupid and ... Don't Respect Them"

Answer- This is an important point- should people be respected because of "who they are" or "what they say and do". Of course everyone is biased- but given that women make up at about half of the population they should be able to get their way in a democracy if they have a good argument.

Individual said- being PC (Political Correctness) compliant equals being socially inept.

Answer- My understanding is that Individual is saying that PC is invalid. In a democracy- policy is ideally based loosely on the vote- PC has a few components- gender/ racial/ religious equality is some components- but different identities are not equally represented within the community- hypothetically if judging based on "equality" rather than a "vote"- this appears to subvert democracy. It's one thing to be polite and another to let the minority control the majority. In many cases PC allows "possibility" to be falsely compared to "probability"- for example if you can find a way to be identified as a member of a small minority and argue that this minority should have equivalent rights as the majority you can subvert the majority. This leads to Individuals point- "In a democracy PC is perhaps invalid because it ignores the rights of the majority"

Foxy,

Most of TA's attacks on Juliar were because of shameful behaviour on her part incl the carbon tax lie, the protection of Craig Thompson, and the whole Peter Slipper debacle.

Shadow Minister,

That is simply not true. There is so much material on
the web that you can Google concerning the behaviour of
Mr Abbott towards Julia Gillard during her time in office.
I could give you the
links however I don't see the point because you shall
dismiss it as "Leftist propaganda." I really find that
inter-acting with you is a complete waste of my time.

I'd like to see Gillard government investigated over the millions she paid to the Clinton Global Initiative, and how that relates to 'Pay to Play' revelations exposed by Wikileaks;
As well as her involvement with The Podesta Group and how this related to our coal industry.

Canem Malum,

One of the pre-requisites for democracy is tolerance of
dissent. A tolerance of criticism and of dissenting
opinions is fundamental to democracy. Governing parties
must resist the temptation to equate their own policies
with the national good, or they will tend to regard
opposition as disloyal or even treasonable. Similarly,
democracies must avoid the danger of the "tyranny of the
majority." In some cases, the democratic process may
work in such a way that a small minority is rendered
permanently powerless.

For groups, in this position, democracy might as well not
exist, and it is important that government should
recognise the grievances of minorities that have little
political clout. If the losers in the political process
do not accept the legitimacy of the process under which
they have lost, they may resort to more radical tactics
outside the institutional framework.

Armchair Critic,

If you're really interested in Australia's involvement with
the Clinton Foundation you should start with
2006 and Minister Alexander Downer's involvement, and
then continue on with Julie Bishop's over the years.
The Clinton Foundation has been involved with our governments
for quite a long time. I believe that it began with the
fight against HIV-AIDS in New Guinea and Asia (our region)
and continued our supporting various programs in Vietnam,
PNG and Indonesia. But hell what do I know - Miranda Devine
and Andrew Bolt can fill you in on the details I'm sure.