Steele, I'm not sure which one is in line to become führer, but if it happens I'm sure he'll sort the other one out in a 'night of the long knives'.

This thread has awakened me once more as to how extreme some posters on OLO really are. If they are not party members of some far right extremist group, then their talents are being wasted. I don't known how well they would go at banging the rostrum at a public meeting, but if they could it would be an asset to the party, the cause and a step in the far right direction.

There is a preponderance of right wing posters on the forum, but the majority of the longer term regulars are simply crusty old conservative men who would pose a bigger threat to their neighbours cat than to the social order.

Although the two potential führer's are full of crap, but its the simplistic believable crap that many are willing to swallow. If they can articulate the crap in a reasonable manner when required then they go a long way towards convincing others.

They should take a leaf out of the 'H' mans book, he was an unbelievably fantastic public orator, he knew when to play the enraged fanatic, but as equally important he knew when to present the image of a calm, even charming, reasonable man, a real life Jekyll and Hyde. I'm not saying these bods are in the same class as the 'H' man, but you never know they could have the potential.

It is leftist ideology that is the cause of the mess yet leftist fanatics such OLO's prime
insipid blame far right extremists.
None are more blind than those who can see & none are more insipid than those wha had education wasted on them.

"Therefore I certainly don't
object the government giving A portion of MY TAXES for this
purpose [ foreign aid]. "

Foreign aid is about poor people in rich countries giving money to rich people in poor countries.

//and always have a legitimate basis for why I hold a certain opinion.//

Dingo's kidneys. You've got a dartboard with a selection of the weirdest conspiracy theories the internet has to offer, at which you fling darts whilst blindfolded to decide what you're going to be upset about this week.

Dear Canem Malum,

“At least you are able to admit a reduction of immigration levels to half their current value. I have found your political position somewhat interesting but generally "left"- I have to admit I was surprised you would support immigration reduction.”

You will find I have been advocating halving immigration levels for quite a while on this forum. I do so with the additional proviso that we double our refugee intake, something I'm absolutely sure you would be against.

The thing is most of the migration increases were driven by big businesses through the Howard government and people like Gina Rienhart continue to push for them. They are not the ones having to cope with congestion, unaffordable housing, and dramatically altering neighbourhoods.

As a former Australian Democrat who had always felt he was smack in the center on most issues but then saw both of the major parties swing hard to the right I suppose I am now of the Left by default.

I have seen manufacturing in this country decimated in the cause of opening up markets for our National Party members, I have seen 457 visas strip the need for apprenticeship places, I have seen the commodification of education drive up the debt of our young and open up pathways to citizenship which are in turn used to justify exorbitant prices to overseas aspirants.

We just see the problem through different eyes. I fully agree the Greens are overusing and abusing the racist mantra toward those who question our current levels. But there are ways of having mature conversations about this issue without a bloody call to arms.

Hi Steele, I agree with your post, its very much my line of thinking. Particularly on the issue of genuine refugees. Its a humanitarian rather than a economic concern, but there is only so much Australia can do, but I believe we can do more.

On immigration, my opinion is, and it is the general consensus from those Greens I have discussed immigration with. We are obviously a pro immigration/refugee party, there is no denying that, and we see no need to do so anyway. The Greens have a detailed 34 point immigration/refugee policy, worth a read, but I wont bore you with links or quotes. The biggest furphy banded about concerning immigration is that the Greens have an 'open door' policy on the matter. NOT TRUE! Like me, most support a sustainable immigration policy, where levels are adjusted to reflect the economic and social well being of the country at the time. If that means a reduction in immigration levels, then a reduction it should be.
One of the misconceptions is that migrants are some homogeneous foreign blob of people with the same aspirations, same abilities, same economic circumstances, same skills, same education level, same everything as each other. That is far from the truth, Australia takes migrants as diverse as we Australians are ourselves.
From an economic point of view we should take Bill Gates (and his money) should he choose to immigrate, but not the entire worlds population of unemployed eighty years old's with no money, should they also choose to immigrate.